ACAMS Today Magazine (Nov-Dec 2008) Vol. 7 No. 6 | Page 23

AML CHALLENGES Foreclosure rescue scams As in 2006, foreclosure rescue scams continued to be problematic in 2007. Escalating foreclosures provide criminals with the opportunity to exploit and defraud vulnerable homeowners seeking financial guidance. The perpetrators convince homeowners that they can save their homes from foreclosure through deed transfers and the payment of up-front fees. This “foreclosure rescue” often involves a manipulated deed process that results in the preparation of forged deeds. In extreme instances, perpetrators may sell the home or secure a second loan without the homeowners’ knowledge, stripping the property’s equity for personal enrichment. Mortgage fraud has become very pervasive. The Operation Malicious Mortgage law enforcement and prosecutorial sweep resulted in 144 mortgage fraud cases in which 406 defendants were charged. As a result, 60 arrests were made in mortgage fraud-related cases in 15 districts. This operation was a joint collaborative effort of the FBI, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, IRS-CI, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Trustee Program, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Inspector General, Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of the Inspector General and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. FinCEN findings According to the FinCEN update in 2006, financial institutions filed 37,313 SARs citing suspected mortgage loan fraud, a 44% increase from the preceding year. From a sample of 1,769 depository institution SAR narratives reviewed by FinCEN to identify additional trends and patterns reported in those narratives, here is the summary: Misrepresentation of income/assets/debts 43.02% Forged/fraudulent documents 28.04% Occupancy fraud 14.41% Appraisal fraud 10.18% Straw buyers   5.65% ID theft   3.45% Flipping   2.71% Comparison of Fraud Instances Description Borrower Mortgage Broker Appraiser Fraud for profit 60.66% 62.07% 23.04% Fraud for housing 58.55% 87.06% 7.46% Misrepresentation of income/assets/debts 87.12% 64.13% 6.18% Forged/fraudulent documents 83.06% 68.15% 3.23% Occupancy fraud 70.20% 61.96% 16.47% Appraisal fraud 39.22% 48.71% 92.67% Straw buyers 69.00% 66.00% 25.00% ID fraud 95.00% 40.00% <1% ID theft 40.98% 63.93% 4.92% Flipping 58.33% 68.75% 100.00% Source: FinCEN - Rearranged: Consuelo Herrera According to the FinCEN conclusions, a consolidation of findings regarding main types of mortgage fraud is reflected in Table 2. What to do? The priority lies in identifying red flags, following them through and taking action. Because mortgage fraud invariably relates to money on the mortgagor’s side, financial institutions need procedures in place to deeply analyze applicants’ mortgage payback abilities. It can be accomplished through analysis of their tax returns and their bank statements, and in examining different relationships between the information contained in their application and the information in their tax returns. As for loan officers and decision-makers, each financial institution should have policies that clearly state what the expectations are regarding the process of approving mortgages that meet all the requirements and the consequences of overriding the rules. To be effective, they must be trained and the policies must be published. Many times brokers work in collusion with builders and appraisers to flip properties over and over for higher illegitimate profits according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The, FDIC3 provided a list of mitigating steps as follows: 13.11% ID fraud Table 2 www.ACAMS.org Mitigating steps for appraisals fraud: • Develop reports that track problem loans by loan officer, broker, appraiser, underwriter, bank officer, and so on. • Vary internal loan review scope to include a sample from all loan officers. • Research background and ownership of appraisal firms. Mitigating steps for flipping schemes: • Verify the quality of business generated )