SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING AND REPORTING RISK ASSOCIATED WITH FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

• US 20110238566A1
• Filed: 05/23/2011
• Published: 09/29/2011
• Est. Priority Date: 02/16/2010
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Digital Risk LLC (Mphasis Corp.)
• Original Assignee: Digital Risk LLC (Mphasis Corp.)
• Inventors: Santos, Edward A.
• Application Number:
  US13/113,804
• Publication Number:
  US 20110238566A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/38
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/03 Credit; Loans; Processing thereof
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/08 Insurance

Abstract

A system and methods for detecting and reporting risk associated with financial instruments, based on financial instrument data submitted by clients such as banks and financial institutions and on additional data obtained from various third party information sources. A financial risk and (associated) fraud detection system processes the financial instrument data along with data obtained from various third party information sources in order to determine a risk assessment. The risk assessment comprises a risk score and level of risk associated with the financial instrument. Further, a type of fraud associated with the financial instrument is also reported for financial instruments that are deemed to be fraudulent. Comprehensive reports are generated and reviewed by clients in order to assist in approval or rejection of individual loans or in management of multiple loans in existing portfolios.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented financial instrument risk assessment system for determining and reporting risk associated with a financial instrument to a client, comprising:

a computer memory; and

a processor coupled to the computer memory and operative to implement;

financial instrument data processing logic, the financial instrument data processing logic operative to (a) receive financial instrument data comprising digitized image files and financial instrument origination data corresponding to an input financial instrument, (b) normalize the financial instrument data, and (c) store normalized financial instrument data corresponding to the input financial instrument in the computer memory for use by other logic;

expert underwriting logic, the expert underwriting logic operative to (a) provide a user interface to a financial instrument analyst for inspection of the normalized financial instrument data stored in the computer memory, (b) access third party information sources to obtain supplemental data for use in connection with determining a risk of the financial instrument, (c) automatically determine the existence of a discrepancy between data in the normalized financial instrument data and any supplemental information obtained from a third party information source, (d) automatically assign a predetermined fraud type to any determined discrepancy, and (e) store information corresponding to the financial instrument data, any determined discrepancies, and any assigned predetermined fraud types in the computer memory as underwritten financial instrument data;

forecast modeling logic for assigning a risk assessment score to the input financial instrument as represented by the normalized financial instrument data and the underwritten financial instrument data, the forecast modeling logic based upon a historical collection of financial instrument data, the historical collection of financial instrument data comprising data corresponding to a plurality of prior financial instruments that (i) are of a type similar to that of the input financial instrument and (ii) have been predetermined to possess at least one of the predetermined fraud types, the forecast modeling logic being operative to store the risk assessment score in the computer memory in association with data corresponding to the input financial instrument; and

export results logic for providing the risk assessment score corresponding to the input financial instrument stored in the computer memory to the client via a client user interface.

2. The system of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument is a mortgage loan.

3. The system of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument is a portfolio of mortgage loans.

4. The system of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument origination data comprises data related to the origination of the financial instrument that includes but is not limited to amount, date of transaction, location and type of collateral, and/or entity associated with the financial instrument.

5. The system of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument data processing logic is also operative to receive financial instrument entity data that includes but is not limited to name, date of birth, address, social security number, previous mortgages, payment history, interest rate, and/or payments made on previous mortgages.

6. The system of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument data processing logic is further operative to process the digitized image files to extract data with optical character recognition (OCR) and store extracted data in the computer memory for use in connection with normalizing.

7. The system of claim 1, wherein a set of client business rules is provided for each one of a plurality of clients that utilize the system, each set of client business rules corresponding to specific policies of qualifying mortgage loan data for a particular client.

8. The system of claim 1, wherein the operation of normalizing the financial instrument data by the financial instrument data processing logic comprises a mapping of data items in received financial instrument data to corresponding data items in database that stores normalized financial instrument data for a plurality of similar financial instruments, the database comprising a part of the computer memory.

9. The system of claim 8, wherein the database of normalized financial instrument data comprises a mortgage fraud detection system (MFDS) database.

10. The system of claim 8, further comprising a proprietary template containing information for mapping information between data items (column) in financial instrument data provided by a particular client of the system to corresponding data items in the database, and wherein the financial instrument data processing logic is further operative to utilize the proprietary template of the particular client in the normalization operation.

11. The system of claim 1, wherein the third party information sources are selected from the group comprising:

credit bureau agencies, bankruptcy courts, government agencies, commercial information databases (e.g. Lexis/Nexis), mortgage electronic registration system (MERS).

12. The system of claim 1, wherein a discrepancy between data in the normalized financial instrument data and any supplemental information obtained from a third party information source comprises an indication of a difference between a data item contained in the information provided in the normalized financial instrument data and a corresponding data item obtained from a third party information source, where the information between the two data items is expected to be identical.

13. The system of claim 1, wherein the predetermined fraud types are selected from the group comprising:

appraisal fraud, compliance fraud, liabilities fraud, misrepresentation fraud, occupancy fraud.

14. The system of claim 1, wherein the expert underwriting logic is further operative to:

display information relating to any determined discrepancy and any automatically assigned predetermined fraud type to an analyst via the analyst user interface;

receive input from the analyst corresponding to the determined discrepancy; and

store any received input from the analyst corresponding to the determined discrepancy as part of the underwritten financial instrument data.

16. The system of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument data processing logic is further operative to receive client business rules from a particular client of the system for use in processing an input financial instrument, and

wherein the expert underwriting logic is further operative to apply said client business rules to the financial instrument data to determine the existence of a discrepancy between the normalized financial instrument data and the requirements of said client business rules.

17. The system of claim 1, wherein the forecast modeling logic comprises a statistical model of weight assignments associated with selected data fields in the normalized financial instrument data and the underwritten financial instrument data, said weight assignments derived from reference to said historical collection of financial instrument data.

18. The system of claim 17, wherein the statistical model determines weight assignments for public data fields in the normalized financial instrument data that indicate the likelihood that the financial instrument possesses fraud or misrepresentation.

19. The system of claim 18, wherein the public data fields are selected from the group comprising:

mortgage loan amount, property type, unemployment rate, year of mortgage origination, occupation, wages.

20. The system of claim 17, wherein the statistical model determines weight assignments for public data fields and non-public data fields in the normalized financial instrument data that indicate the likelihood that the financial instrument possesses fraud or misrepresentation.

21. The system of claim 20, wherein the non-public data fields are selected from the group comprising:

previous bankruptcies of a loan applicant, difference between property appraisal type and sales price, social security number match, loans of the applicant prior to the current loan application.

23. The method of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument is a mortgage loan.

24. The method of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument is a portfolio of mortgage loans.

25. The method of claim 1, wherein the financial instrument origination data comprises data related to the origination of the financial instrument that includes but is not limited to amount, date of transaction, location and type of collateral, and/or entity associated with the financial instrument.

26. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of receiving financial instrument data includes receiving entity data corresponding to the financial instrument comprising name, date of birth, address, social security number, previous mortgages, payment history, interest rate, and/or payments made on previous mortgages.

27. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of processing the digitized image files to extract data with optical character recognition (OCR) and storing extracted data in the computer memory for use in connection with the normalizing step.

28. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of receiving a set of client business rules for each one of a plurality of clients, each set of client business rules corresponding to specific policies of qualifying mortgage loan data for a particular client.

29. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of normalizing the financial instrument data comprises a mapping of data items in the received financial instrument data to corresponding data items in database that stores normalized financial instrument data for a plurality of similar financial instruments, the database comprising a part of the computer memory.

30. The method of claim 29, wherein the database of normalized financial instrument data comprises a mortgage fraud detection system (MFDS) database.

31. The method of claim 29, further comprising the step of utilizing a proprietary template containing information for mapping information between data items (column) in financial instrument data provided by a particular client of the system to corresponding data items in the database, the proprietary template of the particular client utilized in the normalization operation.

32. The method of claim 1, wherein the third party information sources are selected from the group comprising:

credit bureau agencies, bankruptcy courts, government agencies, commercial information databases (e.g. Lexis/Nexis), mortgage electronic registration system (MERS).

33. The method of claim 1, wherein a discrepancy between data in the normalized financial instrument data and any supplemental information obtained from a third party information source comprises an indication of a difference between a data item contained in the information provided in the normalized financial instrument data and a corresponding data item obtained from a third party information source, where the information between the two data items is expected to be identical.

34. The method of claim 1, wherein the predetermined fraud types are selected from the group comprising:

appraisal fraud, compliance fraud, liabilities fraud, misrepresentation fraud, occupancy fraud.

35. The method of claim 1, wherein the expert underwriting process is further operative to:

display information relating to any determined discrepancy and any automatically assigned predetermined fraud type to an analyst via the analyst user interface;

receive input from the analyst via the analyst user interface corresponding to the determined discrepancy; and

store any received input from the analyst corresponding to the determined discrepancy as part of the underwritten financial instrument data.

36. The method of claim 35, wherein the expert underwriting process is further operative to:

receive input from the analyst via the analyst user interface that identifies a new determined discrepancy in data corresponding to the input financial instrument, and

store any received input from the analyst corresponding to the new determined discrepancy as part of the underwritten financial instrument data.

37. The method of claim 1, further comprising the steps of:

receiving client business rules from a particular client for use in processing an input financial instrument, and

applying said client business rules to the financial instrument data to determine the existence of a discrepancy between the normalized financial instrument data and the requirements of said client business rules.

38. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of assigning a risk assessment score to the input financial instrument comprises utilizing a statistical model of weight assignments associated with selected data fields in the normalized financial instrument data and the underwritten financial instrument data, said weight assignments derived from reference to said historical collection of financial instrument data.

39. The method of claim 38, wherein the statistical model determines weight assignments for public data fields in the normalized financial instrument data that indicate the likelihood that the financial instrument possesses fraud or misrepresentation.

40. The method of claim 39, wherein the public data fields are selected from the group comprising:

mortgage loan amount, property type, unemployment rate, year of mortgage origination, occupation, wages.

41. The method of claim 38, wherein the statistical model determines weight assignments for public data fields and non-public data fields in the normalized financial instrument data that indicate the likelihood that the financial instrument possesses fraud or misrepresentation.

42. The method of claim 41, wherein the non-public data fields are selected from the group comprising:

previous bankruptcies of a loan applicant, difference between property appraisal type and sales price, social security number match, loans of the applicant prior to the current loan application.

15. The system of claim J14, wherein the expert underwriting logic is further operative to:

receive input from the analyst that identifies a new determined discrepancy in data corresponding to the input financial instrument, and

store any received input from the analyst corresponding to the new determined discrepancy as part of the underwritten financial instrument data.

22. A computer-implemented method for determining and reporting risk associated with a financial instrument to a client, comprising the steps of:

receiving financial instrument data input to a computer system having a computer memory and a processor coupled to the computer memory, the financial instrument data comprising digitized image files and financial instrument origination data corresponding to an input financial instrument for which risk is to be determined and reported to a client;

normalizing the financial instrument data with the computer system;

storing normalized financial instrument data corresponding to the input financial instrument in the computer memory for use in other processing steps;

executing an expert underwriting process in the computer system, the expert underwriting process operative to (a) provide a user interface to a financial instrument analyst for inspection of the normalized financial instrument data stored in the computer memory, (b) access third party information sources to obtain supplemental data for use in connection with determining a risk of the financial instrument, (c) automatically determine the existence of a discrepancy between data in the normalized financial instrument data and any supplemental information obtained from a third party information source, (d) automatically assign a predetermined fraud type to any determined discrepancy, and (e) store information corresponding to the financial instrument data, any determined discrepancies, and any assigned predetermined fraud types in the computer memory as underwritten financial instrument data;

assigning a risk assessment score to the input financial instrument as represented by the normalized financial instrument data and the underwritten financial instrument data, the risk assessment scored calculated by the computer system based upon a historical collection of financial instrument data, the historical collection of financial instrument data comprising data corresponding to a plurality of prior financial instruments that (i) are of a type similar to that of the input financial instrument and (ii) have been predetermined to possess at least one of the predetermined fraud types;

storing the risk assessment score in the computer memory in association with data corresponding to the input financial instrument; and

outputting the risk assessment score corresponding to the input financial instrument stored in the computer memory to the client via a client user interface.