Latest news with #conveyancer
Daily Mail
22-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
An anti-fraud restriction on our home is making remortgaging a nightmare
My partner and I are in the process of remortgaging. When we bought the property five years ago the solicitor we used put an anti-fraud restriction on the title. We were inexperienced first-time buyers and didn't know a lot about it, but it seemed like a good idea at the time so we agreed. As it turns out, it has made remortgaging a nightmare. We were told we just needed to get an anti-fraud certificate signed, but we visited two local solicitors and neither would do it. We have gone back to the conveyancer who we used for the purchase but they said we'd need to pay £250 to certify that we are our home's rightful owners. This all seems like a racket to me. Are we going to have this problem every time we want to remortgage? Is there even any point having an anti-fraud restriction on the title? Some friends told us that we can set up alerts on the Land Registry for free which will alert you to any applications to change ownership or register a mortgage. Should we just pay to remove the anti-fraud restriction? Ed Magnus of This is Money replies: This sounds like an utter nightmare as well as an unexpected cost to bear. This anti-fraud restriction on your property's title stops the Land Registry from registering a sale or mortgage on your home, unless a conveyancer or solicitor certifies the application was made by you. While it may be tempting to remove the anti-fraud restriction, it may be worth the hassle and keeping it in place. This is because it's possible for a criminal to steal a homeowner's identity and use it to make an application to the Land Registry. A successful fraudster could forge a transfer of ownership, take out a mortgage on the property or even sell it without your knowledge. The fact you're struggling to get anyone to certify the document shows it must be quite an effective defence mechanism, and a good deterrent to fraudsters. However, the extra hoops it requires you to jump through can be annoying. The Land Registry advises that an anti-fraud restriction on the title is likely to slow down the process of selling or remortgaging. Your friends mentioned setting up a property alert on the Land Registry, which is a different thing. It means you will be notified of certain types of activity on the register in relation to your property, which you can rapidly respond to if necessary. This service currently has more than 1.25 million active alerts protecting properties across England and Wales, and giving homeowners greater peace of mind. For expert advice we spoke to Olivia Egdell-Page, partner and head of the property department at law firm Joseph A Jones & Co, and Andrew Boast, co-founder of SAM Conveyancing. Do they need the anti-fraud restriction? Olivia Egdell-Page replies: The anti-fraud restriction is a protection to you as the homeowner. It requires a certificate in to confirm you are the true owner of the property you are purporting to sell or mortgage. Usually, this means a solicitor who is acting for you in connection with a property will be required to obtain evidence of your identity, not only to comply with their own professional and regulatory obligations, but also to be able to submit an application to the Land Registry on your behalf. I wonder, on that basis, how and why the solicitor who is acting for you in connection with the mortgage is not able to produce this certificate. That would be my expectation and is usual practice, certainly in my firm. Andrew Boast adds: The restriction requires a qualified conveyancer to provide a certificate of compliance confirming the people who are remortgaging, or updating the Land Registry, are the same as those named on the title deeds. They do this by meeting the client, seeing their ID, such as a passport or driving licence, and checking the signature on the mortgage deeds matches the ID provided by the client. The Land Registry will only accept specific wording within the certificate, and will reject any with the slightest of errors. The problem is the anti-fraud restriction offers an almost foolproof anti-fraud protection, which is a pain for you whenever you need to remortgage or sell. The issue is that it needs to be completed every time you remortgage, or when you sell the property. Is £250 too much? Andrew Boast replies: The cost of this service varies from £150 to £300 and you pay more, the more names there are on the title deeds. You can complete the service remotely from your own home or work using a solicitor who offers video calls. Olivia Edgell-Page adds: The firm who acted for you when you purchased would be required to open a file, renew their ID checks and provide the certificate, so whilst £250 seems steep, the amount of time this will take inevitably incurs a fee. How long should the process take? Andrew Boast replies: The meeting with a solicitor is very short; a maximum of five to 10 minutes. The solicitor then drafts and posts the certificate of compliance to the client or their solicitor and then they are able to complete the remortgage or sale. If a meeting was booked in today, they'd have the certificate tomorrow or the next day, post dependent. We suggest special delivery for any cases where time is really critical. What is the Property Alert service? Olivia Egdell-Page replies: If you are concerned about the impact of the restriction moving forwards, an alternative is to activate the Property Alert service, a tool which is offered by the Land Registry. This is a monitoring tool which will enable you to receive email alerts when any activity occurs in respect of any property you have registered with the service. If you receive an alert about activity which seems suspicious you would then be able to take action. Andrew Boast replies: The Land Registry offers another solution to protect against fraud called the Property Alert. You'll be informed if someone applies to change the register of your property, however, it doesn't block them from doing so. This is where an anti-fraud restriction is better. It doesn't tell you the fraud is taking place, it stops the fraud from happening. You have to weigh up the benefit of knowing no one can impersonate you to sell or remortgage your home, against the logistics of obtaining the certificate and the cost. How else can they make themselves more secure? Olivia Egdell-Page replies: In order to protect your interest in the property, it is also recommended that you inform the Land Registry if you change your address at any time. Update this on the title to the property to ensure that this remains current and therefore means that the Land Registry can contact you if they have any concerns. How to find a new mortgage Borrowers who need a mortgage because their current fixed rate deal is ending, or they are buying a home, should explore their options as soon as possible. Buy-to-let landlords should also act as soon as they can. Quick mortgage finder links with This is Money's partner L&C > Mortgage rates calculator > Find the right mortgage for you What if I need to remortgage? Borrowers should compare rates, speak to a mortgage broker and be prepared to act. Homeowners can lock in to a new deal six to nine months in advance, often with no obligation to take it. Most mortgage deals allow fees to be added to the loan and only be charged when it is taken out. This means borrowers can secure a rate without paying expensive arrangement fees. Keep in mind that by doing this and not clearing the fee on completion, interest will be paid on the fee amount over the entire term of the loan, so this may not be the best option for everyone. What if I am buying a home? Those with home purchases agreed should also aim to secure rates as soon as possible, so they know exactly what their monthly payments will be. Buyers should avoid overstretching and be aware that house prices may fall, as higher mortgage rates limit people's borrowing ability and buying power. What about buy-to-let landlords Buy-to-let landlords with interest-only mortgages will see a greater jump in monthly costs than homeowners on residential mortgages. This makes remortgaging in plenty of time essential and our partner L&C can help with buy-to-let mortgages too. How to compare mortgage costs The best way to compare mortgage costs and find the right deal for you is to speak to a broker. This is Money has a long-standing partnership with fee-free broker L&C, to provide you with fee-free expert mortgage advice. Interested in seeing today's best mortgage rates? Use This is Money and L&Cs best mortgage rates calculator to show deals matching your home value, mortgage size, term and fixed rate needs. If you're ready to find your next mortgage, why not use L&C's online Mortgage Finder. It will search 1,000's of deals from more than 90 different lenders to discover the best deal for you. > Find your best mortgage deal with This is Money and L&C Be aware that rates can change quickly, however, and so if you need a mortgage or want to compare rates, speak to L&C as soon as possible, so they can help you find the right mortgage for you.
ABC News
02-07-2025
- Business
- ABC News
After Louis lost $109k to scammers, banks are finally combatting the 'flaw' the scammers used
Louis May lost his $109,000 first home deposit to scammers in July last year. The scam began with an email, purporting to be from his conveyancer, requesting property settlement, and included account details and a fraudulent PEXA (Property Exchange Australia) form. The 24-year-old Sydney-based tradesman made two payments, but two days later received a message from the bank asking for settlement funds. "It was the morning that I was supposed to get the keys to my new apartment," he said. "It was the most horrible feeling I've ever had. "I had to be on two phones at the same time to try to sort everything out. I couldn't work out what had gone wrong and was on hold for ages trying to call the police, call the bank, call the lawyers, call anyone." He spoke to his conveyancer, discovered the scam, and immediately reported it to the bank. But the money was gone. Now, the banking sector is rolling out a system intended to combat the security flaw the scammers used to trick him. The system is called "Confirmation of Payee", and is intended to reduce scam losses by telling customers when a payment recipient's name does not match other account details. The technology is intended to combat fake invoice and payment redirection scams, similar to the kind perpetrated against Mr May, which cost Australians $152.6 million last year. Major and mid-tier banks would implement the system during July, the Australian Banking Association (ABA) said, with all other deposit-taking institutions like credit unions and building societies rolling it out by the end of the year. While acknowledging the positive step, consumer and victim advocates criticised the banking sector for lagging behind other countries, and said the way Confirmation of Payee was designed meant customers often accepted liability for scams. For Mr May, the technology came too late, and it's unclear whether it would have averted the scam. He took his case to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA). In its determination, AFCA found the bank had told Mr May it only used BSB and account number when processing the electronic payments, advising him to check these details were correct. As he prepared to send the second transfer of $100,000, he also received a warning the BSB and account number were not found in the bank's records, meaning the account could be new, or received few payments. "Scammers sometimes use new accounts to avoid detection — speak to the payee to check it's really them requesting the payment and confirm the BSB and account number," the warning stated. Mr May acknowledged he received the warning and had ticked a box stating he had read it, but said he went ahead believing the instructions had come from his conveyancer. "I was worried I could lose my deposit or stuff up buying my house if I didn't transfer the money," he said. "I have never done a bank transfer for such a large sum of money in my life before. I thought the bank would have my back." AFCA deemed the bank's warnings to be adequate, and determined the bank was not required to compensate or take further action. AFCA also noted the bank recalled the disputed transactions the day the scam was flagged, but no funds could be recovered. Banks had invested $100 million in the new Confirmation of Payee technology, the ABA said. Adrian Lovney, spokesperson for Australian Payments Plus which developed the Confirmation of Payee system, said the service was "a simple concept" but one that "adds a powerful extra layer of protection for everyday transactions". ABA chief executive Anna Bligh said while Australia was one of the only countries in the world where scam losses were reducing, investing further in scam-fighting tech was crucial. A national awareness campaign to educate customers about the new technology is set to be run under the tagline: "Check the name. Spot the scam". Financial losses reported to Scamwatch decreased by 33 per cent between 2023 and 2024, from $476.8 million to $318.8 million. However, losses were up in the first five months of this year compared to last year, climbing from $114.8 million $147.1 million, according to Scamwatch data. An ABA spokesperson said scam losses in Australia would inevitably fluctuate but the overall trend was down. The new service activates when a customer makes a first-time payment using a BSB and account number. After entering the account name and payment details, and before making a payment, a matching service checks whether the information matches the recipient's bank data. If details match, the account name will be displayed for confirmation. If there's a close match, for example John Smyth instead of John Smith, the customer will see the account name and can confirm if it's correct. Where details don't match, the customer will be shown a warning. The true account holder's name won't be shown to help protect privacy, except for some business and government accounts. Once a warning was given, it was up to the customer to decide if the payment goes ahead. Witnessing what happened to her son Louis, Alex Brooks started her own podcast where she speaks to other scam victims, and became the vice president of advocacy group Scam Victim Alliance. Confirmation of Payee may have helped her son detect the scam, but she is still critical of the approach banks have taken. She said a system that warned of a mismatch and then required the customer to decide whether the payment progressed put the onus upon the customer to detect the scam. "The banks 'name checking' services online will continue to be more of a way to make customers fully liable for transfers," she said. The rollout of Confirmation of Payee was flagged at a global anti-scam roundtable in June during which the ABA also flagged that all new bank accounts would require biometric checks from the start of July. Biometric checks usually involve some form of facial scan, but could also include fingerprint scanning, or behavioural analytics that verify customers' identities. The roundtable offered a comparison point on how Australia compared with other countries in combating scams. While Australia compared well to the US, it compared less favourably to the UK, which introduced Confirmation of Payee in 2020. The UK has also made banks liable for most scam losses up to 85,000 British pounds ($177,530) since October, with repayment split between the sending and receiving bank, unless the bank proved the customer had been negligent. UK banks were not liable for some types of transaction, including for scam payments made via cash or crypto, international transfer, or via the likes of Paypal. Speaking on the UK's progress, Robert Harris, from fraud detection company Feedzai, said since October 86 per cent of fraud losses had been reimbursed to customers. Repayment being split between the sending and receiving bank has also fostered more collaboration and information exchange to stop fraud, with 86 per cent of receiving banks being told of the scam within two hours of the customer flagging with their bank, Mr Harris said. Consumer Action Law Centre chief executive Stephanie Tonkin said compensation rates in Australia were far lower, and the country should adopt a similar model to the UK, making banks more liable. She pointed to recent Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) reports showing banks were reimbursing two to seven per cent of scam losses. "So victims are paying billion-dollar losses, which is extraordinary," she said. Ms Tonkin said scam victims could bring a case against a bank if the bank had failed to meet responsibility standards, but it was on the victim to prove the business's failures had caused the loss. An ABA spokesperson said where banks were at fault, they reimbursed customers, and that would continue. The spokesperson argued a UK-style model risked undermining Australia's "whole-of-scam-chain approach". "It also fails to incentivise other sectors such as telecommunications and social media platforms which actually deliver scams to customers … to improve or strengthen their protections," the spokesperson said. Ken Gamble, chairman of cybercrime investigation agency IFW Global, described the lack of payee verification as a "fundamental flaw" in the banking system which had incubated "a billion-dollar scam industry." "I'm just in disbelief banks haven't changed this flaw years and years ago," he said. Mr Gamble said among the most common scams exploiting lack of payee verification were term deposit scams. Victims would search online for term deposit comparisons, click on a fraudulent website, and be contacted by someone claiming to be from a bank. The victim would deposit money into an account they thought was in their name, and because there was no name verification, the victim would not be told the account was actually in another's name. Mr Gamble welcomed the inclusion of biometric checks for new bank accounts but said it would not solve "the money mule-problem" – where scammers used the accounts of real people, who were often ignorant they were involved in a crime, who allowed their accounts to be used for a small fee. An ABA spokesperson said banks now have enhanced intelligence sharing with each other to help combat mules. "We know international criminal gangs will continue to evolve their tactics and find new ways to steal money — it's therefore crucial government, banks, telcos, digital platforms as well as consumers all play an ongoing role in the fight against scammers." Confirmation of Payee was a key initiative of the sector's "Scam-Safe Accord" — a set of safeguards banks signed up to in 2023 following a sharp rise in scam losses. Most other initiatives in the accord are complete, including intelligence sharing between banks, limiting of payments to high-risk channels like crypto exchanges, and implementation of a comprehensive anti-scam strategy, the ABA says. An initiative to introduce warnings and delays for transactions to new unknown payees has been implemented for over 90 per cent of retail customers, the ABA says. For Mr May, the loss of his first home deposit has had a lasting impact. With the help of his family, he was able to settle on the home, but it left him with no money to fix up the apartment he bought, and he was unable to move in. "I had to keep taking overtime, so I worked pretty much seven days a week to try to get the strata levy together," he said. "It's on your mind all the time, until you work out you just have to put it out of your head to get away from it."
