Jailed broker banned and fined for fraudulent mortgage applications

Jailed broker banned and fined for fraudulent mortgage applications


The Financial Services Authority has fined Bromley mortgage broker, Dele MacAulay, £115,157 for knowingly submitting nine fraudulent mortgage applications for himself, his wife, and his brother.

Mr MacAulay, trading as Dele MacAulay Financial Services, has also been banned from working in regulated financial services. He is the seventh individual to receive a six figure penalty for knowing involvement in mortgage fraud.

The FSA’s investigation showed that he processed nine fraudulent mortgage applications with false income and employment information. Five were residential mortgages for himself, two were residential mortgages for his wife, and two residential mortgages for his brother.

Mr MacAulay also submitted false tax information to the FSA in his Retail Mediation Activities Return – a set of data that forms the basis of regulatory reporting to the FSA.

The regulator revealed that its investigation was conducted alongside a criminal investigation by Hertfordshire Constabulary also looking into mortgage fraud committed by the broker, and now that he has been sentenced to 21 months in prison, details of the FSA’s action can be published.

Margaret Cole, director of enforcement and financial crime at the FSA, said: “MacAulay abused his position as a mortgage broker for personal gain, but he was caught and has paid a heavy price. This fine and ban reflect the seriousness of his failings as well as the FSA’s attitude to those who abuse their approved status.  

“This case is also a good example of the benefits of a collaborative approach with the police.  Between us we have dealt with MacAulay decisively and justice has been done.”

In determining the financial penalty, the FSA said that it considered the benefit obtained by Dele MacAulay as well as the need to punish him and deter others from engaging in this type of activity in line with the FSA’s strategy of ‘credible deterrence’. As a matter of principle, his profit should be disgorged. The £115,157 penalty included disgorging £15,157 profit, and a punitive fine of £100,000.

Leave a comment