Liars will go to great lengths to deny wrongdoing. So, what do you do when someone claims innocence, yet your suspicions remain?
That's what one Freddie Mac Single-Family Fraud Risk (SFFR) investigator experienced in a case in which the denials were so convincing, the perpetrator got away with the crime. But not for long.
Discovered
After a Seller/Servicer observed suspicious behavior coming from a mortgage brokerage, they followed Freddie Mac's requirements for suspected fraud and reported their concerns to SFFR.
The initial investigation revealed CPA letters containing forged signatures and unsubstantiated information. The investigator first turned to the borrowers, but they were not aware of the information contained in the letters and had never requested that the letters be created.
So, who was responsible for these misrepresentations aimed at qualifying borrowers for loans owned by Freddie Mac?
Implicated
After further investigation, SSFR found evidence that the loan officer (LO) and loan officer assistant (LOA) at the brokerage had fabricated the letters and other business documents to fraudulently satisfy underwriting requirements.
When he admitted his guilt, the LO implicated the LOA, explaining that the LOA was not only aware of what he was doing, but participated in it.
When separately confronted by her employer, the LOA reluctantly admitted her role, adding that she did so only because she knew the LO was going to confess. However, she later changed her story, insisting that she was coerced by her employer into signing an admission of guilt.
She strongly denied any involvement and convinced the state regulator to conclude that she was innocent. They declined to move the case forward.
But Freddie Mac's SFFR investigator still had her suspicions.
Appealed
In a letter to Freddie Mac, the LOA denied everything she had previously admitted, including statements of guilt made to her employer.
The LOA vehemently insisted that she had no knowledge of anything the LO was doing. She further protested that she didn't even work at the same branch as the LO and therefore, could not have participated with him in this fraudulent activity.
Following her instincts, the investigator continued digging. She learned that the LOA did, in fact, work at the same branch as the LO – at least some of the time – and still had access to the LO's files, even after she moved to a different location.
Revealed
Based on the investigator's further digging, Freddie Mac concluded that both the LO and the LOA were culpable and placed them on the
Eventually, when presented with all the facts again, the LOA finally told the truth: She had aided in document falsification to get the loans approved. Her actions – as well as her initial denials – jeopardized her credentials and her reputation.
