‘Chaotic collection of lies’ leads to executive’s ‘wholly justified and not unfair’ dismissal
The Fair Work Commission has upheld Commonwealth Bank’s sacking of a senior home lending executive who intentionally misled the bank about his dealings with a man one customer identified as their mortgage broker. The ruling lands as regulators and police step up scrutiny of the relationships between bankers, brokers and referrers.
In a decision handed down in Sydney on Monday, Deputy President Gerard Boyce dismissed the unfair dismissal application of Shun Wang. Wang worked as a home lending executive at CBA from November 2020 until he was dismissed on 29 July 2025, and lodged his claim on 18 August 2025.
Boyce found the dismissal “wholly justified and not unfair” and ruled that Wang had intentionally given false evidence to the commission, according to the decision in Wang v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2026] FWC 4224. He found Wang’s evidence “wholly unreliable”.
Home lending executive is the most senior of CBA’s three lender levels. When he was dismissed, Wang earned a base salary of $250,000 plus allowances and superannuation, with a potential short-term bonus of up to $200,000, the decision shows.
How CBA uncovered the broker link
The case began with an anonymous report to CBA’s SpeakUp whistleblower program on 19 November 2024, which raised concerns about Wang and four other employees. A preliminary review cleared Wang, but the bank widened its investigation given the seriousness of the complaints.
The broader review covered loans Wang had refinanced from St George Bank, his previous employer. Many of the borrowers were self-employed with high-revenue businesses. They had been referred by one of two accredited referral partners, JS Sonic and Regis Lawyers, and supplied company financials prepared by the same firm, Accountants Direct. Between April 2024 and January 2025, JS Sonic referred 17 customers to Wang, resulting in 29 home loan applications, 22 of which were funded.
Under CBA’s Referral Source Program, accredited partners such as accountants, lawyers and real estate agents earn a commission on approved loans – the bigger the loan, the bigger the commission. Mortgage brokers and builders cannot take part, directly or indirectly. Lenders must not discuss customer information with referrers, because a referrer’s interests may conflict with those of the bank and the borrower.
Investigators then traced payments to a man the decision refers to as Hugo. Five customers referred by JS Sonic paid him a combined $48,595.50 at or around the time their loans were processed or approved. Between August 2023 and February 2025, JS Sonic made six payments to him totalling $81,146.44, and Regis Lawyers made six totalling $61,441.62, with descriptions including “service fee” and “referral fee”. One customer told CBA’s investigator they had used Hugo as their mortgage broker.
To CBA, this was a red flag that Hugo was channelling customers through JS Sonic and receiving payments resembling referral commissions. The decision makes no finding that kickbacks were paid. CBA removed JS Sonic and Regis Lawyers from the program in April 2025.
At his first interview on 14 May 2025, Wang told investigators he had “no idea” who Hugo was and knew no one by that name. Only when his work phone was taken for forensic analysis did he mention a contact called Hugo who might be a customer.
The phone told a different story. It held a contact for Hugo linked to Hugo’s own CBA customer profile, and messages from a customer in August 2024 thanking Wang and Hugo. At a second interview, Wang admitted he was in a WeChat group called “JS Sonic” with the referrer and Hugo. He received customer leads there and reported whether loans had been approved or settled. He said he had deleted the chat.
‘A chaotic collection of lies’
CBA brought four allegations against Wang. He admitted two of them: failing to verify all customers’ income after leaving borrowers’ PAYG (pay-as-you-go) employment income out of loan applications. At interview he said he had been “lazy to verify the PAYG income” because it was “hard to verify”. He also admitted sharing loan updates with the referrer and Hugo on WeChat, in breach of CBA’s technology policy.
Wang contested only the allegation that he intentionally misled investigators. He argued he had made a mistake and later realised Hugo was a man he knew as “Old Hu”. Boyce rejected that explanation in blunt terms.
“I find that the Applicant’s evidence at the hearing was a chaotic collection of lies, nonsense, poorly matched ideas, and manufactured responses,” Boyce said.
He found Wang knew exactly who Hugo was at his first interview “but thought he could get away with pretending otherwise”. The Old Hu narrative was “not only unbridled nonsense, but a complete fabrication”, he said.
Wang also argued the dismissal was harsh because his name had been placed on the Australian Banking Association’s Background Check Protocol list, which tells member banks about the dismissal and its reasons. Boyce gave that argument no weight.
“The consequences that flow from the Applicant’s conduct (financially and reputationally) are all on him,” he said. “Recruitment and selection is a time consuming and costly exercise, and anything that assists other employers in refining that process ought not be undermined.”
Why are broker-banker relationships under scrutiny?
The decision is the latest in a year that has put the bank-broker interface under the microscope. In late February 2026, Commonwealth Bank reported itself to authorities over $1 billion in suspected home loan fraud. MPA has since reported that the industry-wide figure grew to $3 billion.
Bank introducer programs have drawn particular fire. CBA pays third parties such as real estate agents and accountants a commission, typically around half what a broker receives, for referring clients. CBA and Westpac still run introducer programs, while ANZ and NAB closed theirs years ago. In April 2026, then FBAA chief executive Peter White called on banks to scrap referral programs altogether.
The overlap between bank insiders and brokers has also surfaced in criminal cases. In May 2026, NSW Police charged a Sydney mortgage broker and her former banker husband over the alleged Penthouse Syndicate. Police allege Huy Tin Nguyen, a former NAB and CBA employee, used his knowledge of the banks’ internal processes and fraud-detection systems to help the syndicate. His wife, Thu Huong Nguyen of HTN Finance, was charged over almost $13 million in alleged loan fraud. The allegations have not been tested in court.
“Our focus is now shifting toward professional facilitators – the bankers, brokers, lawyers and accountants who enable this type of offending,” Detective Superintendent Gordon Arbinja, commander of the NSW Police Financial Crimes Squad, said at the time.
