You have1 free article left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.
You have 1 free article left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.

Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Goodbye job applications, hello dream career
Seize control of your career and design the future you deserve with LW career

Maurice Blackburn puts Westpac in firing line

Plaintiff law firm Maurice Blackburn Lawyers has filed the first class action against the major bank since the release of the final banking royal commission report.

user iconGrace Ormsby 22 February 2019 Big Law
Ben Slade
expand image

The Federal Court action will see Maurice Blackburn Lawyers taking on Westpac for the provision of loans in breach of responsible lending laws.

The firm has revealed that the class action has been undergoing careful preparation for months, and has secured the support of a global litigation funder, Harbour Fund IV, L.P..

It was noted that the class action was filed on behalf of people who were given unsuitable loans by Westpac in breach of responsible lending obligations after 1 January, 2011.

Maurice Blackburn’s class actions principal Ben Slade said “we have filed a class action against Westpac to stand up for those affected by this irresponsible lending and to bring some pressure to bear on a banking sector that is notoriously unrepentant for flouting the law”.

Mr Slade had noted that despite widespread criticism of its lending practices from the corporate regulator, Westpac has remained unrepentant.

“Westpac is required to comply with strict obligations which are specifically designed to protect consumers from irresponsible lending and the risk of financial hardship,” he explained.

“This case will seek to prove that Westpac failed to comply with these obligations and that this failure caused substantial losses for many consumers,” Mr Slade continued.

“Westpac’s response to Commissioner Hayne’s findings in the financial services royal commission, and to the ongoing proceedings brought by ASIC in relation to Westpac’s responsible lending obligations does not reveal any acceptance by Westpac of its obligations to compensate those who have suffered, and are suffering, at the hands of the company.”

According to the firm, Michelle and Ian Tate will be leading the class action, after having endured serious financial difficulties as a result of Westpac’s irresponsible lending practices.

Maurice Blackburn has alleged that Westpac failed to verify, as it is obligated to do, information concerning the Tate’s financial circumstances as provided to the bank by a broker.

The firm noted that Westpac lent the Tates – a family of five with one regular income – in excess of $1.8 million across five properties from 2008-2016.

According to Maurice Blackburn, the family will now lose all their properties save for a block of land and have suffered significant loss in the process.

“Dealing with Westpac has devastated us,” said Ms Tate.

“Instead of striving for financial independence, we are back living pay cheque to pay cheque, tax return to tax return,” she said.

“It is worse than being back to square one,” Ms Tate concluded.

Comments (7)
  • Avatar
    While the banks did disgraceful things with those unable to comprehend, this couple could presumably have disclosed their actual spending if they chose to? And worked out that property did stood doesn’t always work,like any other investment? Why should the bank underwrite their greed?
    0
  • Avatar
    A continuing exposition of the theory that the citizen is an "idiot" who must be protected from their own stupidity. A truly Australian belief. If you go broke during a period of extended record breaking low interest rates, whatever you were doing was just not profitable enough.
    2
  • Avatar
    Borrowers greed brought them unstuck. No sympathy.
    2
  • Avatar
    Michael wrote:
    Why isn't the cause of a family of 5 with 1 income borrowing in excess of $1.8m their overborrowing / own greed(?) rather than the "direct result of Westpac's irresponsible lending practices"? Presumably they had lots of opportunities to sell at a profit as they went down a path of constant increased borrowings over 8 years? Whilst sad for them, would they be complaining if they had sold at considerable profits? Gearing works 2 ways.
    Anon
    1
  • Avatar
    Why isn't the cause of a family of 5 with 1 income borrowing in excess of $1.8m their overborrowing / own greed(?) rather than the "direct result of Westpac's irresponsible lending practices"? Presumably they had lots of opportunities to sell at a profit as they went down a path of constant increased borrowings over 8 years? Whilst sad for them, would they be complaining if they had sold at considerable profits? Gearing works 2 ways.
    1
    • Avatar
      Yes, all the property siecukators will niebkame the banks. Unless the bank misled them, they didn’t disclose their own inability to pay. Maybe the bank should toss-claim for their deceptive and unconscionable conduct.
      0
  • Avatar
    Ahh. Good old ambulance chasers in public rights defenders’ clothing. Profiteering at its best...
    3
Avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!