After reading the story about a Glasgow man admitting to running up more than £250,000 in mortgage frauds via self-cert applications (Mortgage Strategy Online), I can only think there must be more to this story than meets the eye.
Self-cert mortgages were widely available at the time and obviously this meant that lenders required no proof of income apart from an accountant’s confirmation that a business existed or an Inland Revenue communication if the client was self-assessing.
Such mortgages were also widely used by the self-employed who had no accounts or accounts that showed little net profit.
In those days the net profit on accounts would usually not show true income due to tax avoidance measures which remain widespread today.
So I reckon the main portion of blame in such cases should be lain at the door of lenders that did not require proof of income – an open invitation for abuse which was obviously taken up.
Does this mean those clients of mine who went down the self-cert route are going to be investigated?