2. Common Findings Highlighted
• Identity Verification
• Income Documents Verification
• The procedures/ guidelines already in place
• Lacking in verification process
• Refer to the following case studies.
• Fraud could have been prevented if staff be more attentive
NPSC REVIEW
3. Case Study 1 – Identity Theft
• Office telephone no. match BUT Different employer’s name
• We called, office telephone no. belongs to individual
• Hospital Besar Rawang NOT EXIST
• Different applicants BUT same handphone no.
• Loan created on 14/10/2011 but Hirer DECEASED on 29/09/2011
Different customers BUT
same h/phone no.
4. Case Study 2 - AmWins Negative Check
• Negative Check Screen – not check
• Application - approved
Trigger points
• Office phone number match – different company
• Previous applications (different applicants) rejected –
forged documents
• Negative Check Screen – not check
• Application - approved
CAUTION LETTER HAS BEEN ISSUED TO PO
5. Case Study 3 - AmWins Negative CheckCase Study 4 – Income Document Verification
CAUTION LETTER HAS BEEN ISSUED TO PO
• PO did not address the irregularities
• Did not highlight to AA
6. Other Employment/ Incoment/ Document Verification Issues
Bank statement show cash deposit with
odd figure eg. RM3,557.82
Abnormal to deposit in CENTS since the
implementation of Rounding Mechanism
Inconsistency of basic pay for different period eg.
Part time employment
• not verified with employer
• No documentary
Different monthly EPF deduction in
Payslip and EPF statement
IMPORTANT: ALL IRREGULARITIES ARE TO BE INVESTIGATED
AND HIGHLIGHTED TO AA FOR INFORMED JUDGMENT
7. Findings Actions Taken by Auto Finance Division
1. Non-Compliance with HP Lending Guidelines
a) Section 3.1.3 (a) Photocopies of identification documents
have not confirmed original sighted.
Rectified. The original sighted copy was
kept in security packet.
b) Section 3.2 (c) Verification of applicant’s employment not
carried out in accordance with guidelines.
Reminder Letter has been issued to the
staff
c) Section 4.5 (b) Fieldwork not conducted for loan above
RM 100K
2. Shortcoming in Credit Processing
a) Supporting documents not diligently checked Reminder Letter has been issued to the
staffb) Mislead AA
3. Weak Credit Judgments
a) Aggressive borrowing within short period of time Reminder Letter has been issued to the
staff
b) Applicant with no bank borrowing Acceptable business decision and arrears
updated.
SNAPSHOT OF FINDINGS AND ACTIONS TAKEN
Lesson Learned Review March – July 2012
MARCH 2012
8. Findings Actions Taken
1. Non-Compliance with HP Lending Guidelines
a) Section 3.1.3 (a) Photocopies of identification documents
have not confirmed original sighted.
Original sighted IC were kept in security
packet.
RCD to check security packet during post
mortem review .
b) Section 3.1.1 (b) Applicant who does not possess a valid
driving, a copy of family member’s IC and DL
was not provided during loan application.
Reminder Letter has been issued to PO.
c) Section 5.1 (b) Signing of HPA and Guarantee Agreements
not witnessed by the authorised
dealer/agents or Ambank’s staff.
ICC recommend AFD to initiate recovery
action against dealer and to downgrade
the dealer’s rating.
d) Section 4.5 (b) Fieldwork not conducted for outstation HP
submission that is more than 30km radius
from the processing branch.
The approval is within guidelines.
AFD to issue a communication memo to
all staff that the request for fieldvisit
waiver to be properly documented in
AmWins.
2. Condition for loan approval has not been fulfilled Reminder Letter has been issued to
documentation staff.
3. Inconsistencies of hirer’s signature have not been detected during
processing/disbursement time
Reminder Letter has been issued to
disbursement staff.
4. Failure to ensure valid IC was obtained prior to disbursement. Reminder Letter has been issued to AA.
APRIL & MAY 2012
9. JUNE & JULY 2012
No Findings Action
Taken/Recommendation
1. Non-Compliance with HP Lending Guidelines
(a) Section 3.1.3 (a) Photocopies of identification documents
have not confirmed original sighted.
i. Original sighted IC were kept in
security packet.
ii. RCD to check security packet
during post mortem review .
(b) Section 3.1.5 (a)
Section 3.1.5 (b)
Validity and existence of applicant’s
telephone number has not been cross
checked against TM directory or Yellow
Pages web site.
i. Show Caused Letter has been
issued to the Processing Staff.
(c) Section 3.2 (d) Inadequate checking against CCRIS
supplementary credit report.
i. Show Caused Letter has been
issued to the Processing Staff.
(d) Section 3.3 (a)
Section 3.3 (d)
Applicant without fixed telephone number ,
however proceed for approval without
strong justification.
i. Show Caused Letter has been
issued to the Processing Staff.
2. Misleading Information i. Show Caused Letter has been
issued to the Processing Staff.
