Michael Kizana fronts court over falsely obtaining $2.5m in loans

A Melbourne man submitted false documents over five years to steal $2.5m described as “detailed dishonesties over a period of years”.

Michael Kizana has gone to jail for obtaining $2.5m in loans from four financial institutions using false documents.

A Melbourne man who conned financial institutions, including three banks, pocketing $2.5m in loans by submitting false documents has been jailed.

Michael Kizana, 32, of Gladstone Park, offended over a five-year period starting in October 2017 when he lodged 11 fraudulent documents, including those purported to be from the ATO, to obtain the loans.

He pleaded guilty to five charges of using a false document and was sentenced in the County Court on Tuesday to six months’ imprisonment and community corrections order for two years.

In his loan applications, Kizana inflated his salary, made false claims of working for certain companies and altered his bank statements.

The court heard that the National Australia Bank, Commonwealth, AMP Bank and AFSH Nominees suffered no financial loss as he had been meeting his repayments.

Michael Kizana submitted false documents to obtain $2.5m in loans from mostly banks in Melbourne.

However, Judge Fiona Todd said Kizana used false documents with the intention of convincing the lending institutions to accept them as genuine.

She said Kizana’s offending was “very sustained, detailed and persistent”, it took place over five years and that he sought help from others including a restaurant owner.

In a loan application, Kizana alleged that he was employed by the restaurant and submitted two pay slips.

Text messages revealed Kizana had arranged to give the restaurant owner $1000 a week which he would then deposit into Kizana’s bank account disguised as income.

“The loans would not have been granted without the false documents. You knew this. The use of the false documents and the way you used them undermines the integrity of the lending transactions,” Judge Todd said.

“This was not impulsive or rash decision making but considered conduct. These were not mistakes. These were a series of thoughtful, detailed dishonesties over a period of years.”