The Industry's Leading Source For F&I, Sales And Technology

Article

Credit App Fraud Not a Victimless Crime

Falsifying any of the five key credit determinants on a credit application generates a long list of potential victims inside and outside the dealership.

May 2017, F&I and Showroom - Feature

by Gil Van Over - Also by this author

Some dealership managers falsely believe manipulating a credit application to improve the likelihood of obtaining a credit approval is a victimless crime. The reality is there are a handful of potential victims from a manager’s decision to kink a credit app, including the manager’s family when he or she is jailed for the crime.

I know of no finance source that will consent to credit app fraud. And any finance source employees who looked the other way or did not detect the fraud will likely pay the price, either through lowered performance ratings or other disciplinary actions. Their families will most likely suffer, too.

Now, if the dealership suffers a public relations nightmare because of the fraud and loses sales as a result, you can add the dealership’s employees and their families to that list of victims. And if falsifying a credit app results in a deal the customer can’t afford, the resulting repossession, deficiency balance and lower credit score makes the buyer a victim, too. And don’t forget the credit losses the finance source will suffer because of the fraud.

See, finance sources focus on five key determinants on the credit application: income, housing expense, time on the job, time at residence, and job type. Differences in any of these five key credit determinants between the source information provided by the consumer and the information submitted to the finance source can be considered a violation of your finance source agreement.

The remedy available to the finance source is to require recourse or a buyback on the transaction. Federally insured institutions are required to file a “suspicious activity report” with their regulating agency. Said report will name the dealership as potentially committing bank fraud.

Now let’s look at the five key detriments:

1. Income: A dealer is obligated to accurately present the customer’s income to the finance source, because it serves as the denominator in payment-to-income and total debt ratios. These ratios feed into the finance source’s algorithms for both credit decisioning and pricing.

2. Housing expense: A dealer manager recently told me that one of the credit app aggregation companies hosted a seminar and told dealers that splitting the rent or house payment will enhance the likelihood of obtaining an automated credit approval. That action is taken to circumvent the finance source’s underwriting guidelines, which is one of the basic definitions of bank fraud.

3 and 4. Time: Time on the job and at residence are monitored because of the stability factors that play into the credit decisioning process. That’s why many finance sources require previous address or employment if the consumer has less than two years at either. Increasing time on the job or time at residence to avoid this disclosure is another way to circumvent the finance source’s underwriting guidelines.

5. Job type: Giving buyers a promotion or listing a self-employed small business owner as the general manager of the business to avoid a stip from the finance source can be viewed as credit app fraud.

To promote credit app compliance, you must establish and monitor a policy on accepting and submitting credit apps. Here are the crucial steps:

  • Require that both the source credit app and the submitted credit app be retained. Retention of both will permit for auditing of the process and provide a potential defense against claims that the dealer provided false information to the finance source.
  • If the F&I manager uncovers additional or incorrect income during the customer interview, correct the source app with a single line through the incorrect info, write the corrected info, and obtain the customer’s initials by the change.
  • Do not combine two or more incomes as one.
  • When a customer claims to only pay a portion of the housing expense, submit what the customer is obligated to pay either through a mortgage or a rental agreement. Then put a note in the credit app aggregation system.
  • Retain all documentation used to change any of the key credit determinants.
  • Include the comparison of the five key credit determinants on the F&I and accounting checklist on every deal. Instruct the compliance clerk to bring discrepancies to a manager’s attention.
  • Include the comparison as part of the manager’s weekly or monthly deal file compliance review. Also review the credit applications in the aggregator software to confirm the printed submitted apps are consistent with all versions stored in the software.

Credit app fraud is not a victimless crime. Those who believe otherwise should do all of us a favor and find another industry to work in.

Gil Van Over is the executive director of Automotive Compliance Education (ACE) and the founder and president of gvo3 & Associates. Email him at [email protected]

Comment

  1. 1. Ron Yager [ May 16, 2017 @ 12:26PM ]

    Years ago it was commonplace to " adjust the rent or to fudge the income a bit " in order to make the app more appealing. A friend of mine who is a dealer told me--" that is federal bank fraud, and you could go to jail for the sake of getting one person approved that probably shouldn't be approved." That was it for me--if they didn't qualify, too bad.

  2. 2. Alfredo [ May 20, 2017 @ 11:15AM ]

    Issue is, some times Customer lies on Income or other info. We have repossessed a couple of cars delivered after the customer information was processed and found fraudulent (false docs, lying on time on the job and so on). Their own lawyers told customers, that if they lied in an application, dealer will keep the car and down payment, because it is fraud. I have a rule that my sales people and Sales and F&I managers complaint about, but saved me many headaches. Make the customer grab a pen and fill out the application and sign it. Do not do it for them. Even if they did it online. Yes, do the interview after that to verify the info. It is not my intent to trap the customer, but, If they lie, and we for some reason miss the lie, and deliver the car based on a bank approval on that information, it is a violation of the contract and bailment agreement. Customers are the first that need to understand lying is a crime and there are consequences. Hey, since they lawyers told them they cannot sue the dealer, or they sued the Dealer and the case was thrown out, now I have a Customer suing me PERSONALLY. I'll go through the pain of going to court.

 

Your Comment

Please note that comments may be moderated. 
Leave this field empty:
Your Name:  
Your Email:  

Blog

So Here's the Deal

Ronald J. Reahard
Trading Rate for Product

By Ronald J. Reahard
A reader wonders if a scenario exists where trading rate for product doesn’t cross that invisible legal line. The magazine’s resident F&I pro weighs in.

(Video) Discussing the Risk-Based Pricing Rule

By Ronald J. Reahard
The magazine’s resident F&I pro takes on a question about the Risk-Based Pricing Rule and its widely used exception notice.

(Video) Timing F&I

By Ronald J. Reahard

(Video) Handling Remote Deliveries

By Ronald J. Reahard

Done Deal

Gregory Arroyo
Generationally Speaking

By Gregory Arroyo
What was supposed to be a listen-and-learn assignment turns into fodder for the editor’s monthly page, and he thinks you’ll understand why.

Credit Crisis or Market Rationalization?

By Gregory Arroyo
Delinquencies are rising and auto finance sources are responding. But the editor wonders if there’s something else at play.

How to Lose a Customer

By Gregory Arroyo

Resistance Isn’t Always Futile

By Gregory Arroyo

Mad Marv

Marv Eleazer
What’s the Rush?

By Marv Eleazer
When you’re having fun, the hours go by like minutes. His Madness shares advice for improving the car-buying experience.

Debating the Chargeback

By Marv Eleazer
Everyone has an opinion on how to limit chargebacks. His Madness delves into the passionate debate over how they're applied.

Simple Is as Simple Does

By Marv Eleazer

Finding Pleasantville

By Marv Eleazer

On the Point

Jim Ziegler
The New Stooges

By Jim Ziegler
The Alpha Dawg predicts that the latest round of technology disrupters will deliver more missed opportunities than closed deals.

Is Your Quick Lube Driving Away Business?

By Jim Ziegler
‘Da Man’ goes undercover to investigate how the national oil change shops are using underhanded tactics like efficiency, training and friendliness to steal your service business.

Who Shot the Dealer?

By Jim Ziegler

Stop Flushing Those Ad Dollars

By Jim Ziegler