Employment law update: Fair Work Ombudsman Secures Nearly $100,000 in Penalties Against Mortgage Broking Business and Manager
The Fair Work Ombudsman has secured $99,900.00 in penalties in Federal Circuit and Family Court proceedings against Ansa Finance Pty Ltd and its manager, Joshua Fuoco1.
Ansa Finance was found to have failed to comply with Compliance Notices which required the back-payment of five employees who were employed as finance brokers for various periods between February 2020 and November 2021. The Compliance Notices also related to the failure to issue pay slips to one of the employees. The company had penalties of $83,250.00 imposed. In addition to the penalties, Ansa Finance has been ordered to comply with the Compliance Notices, including by rectifying an estimated total of $17,000.00 in underpayments (plus interest and superannuation).
Mr Fuoco was found to have been involved in the contraventions by Ansa Finance under section 550 of the Fair Work Act. He had penalties of $16,650.00 imposed against him.
In making his decision, Judge Forbes found that the failure to comply “not only exhibits a lack of contrition but … that it has been deliberate”.2 This was taken into account, along with a need for future deterrence, in determining the penalties imposed.
This article is a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Argument for expanding contingency fee arrangements beyond class actions to all civil litigation in Victoria, examining the benefits for clients and proper regulatory frameworks needed for implementation.
Critical information about new 28-day time limits for VCAT appeals under the Building Legislation Amendment (Buyer Protection) Act for rectification orders and first resort insurance decisions effective July 2026.
Guidance on maintaining proper boundaries between clients and expert witnesses in building, property and insurance litigation to protect legal privilege, independence and case success.
Comparison of building law duty of care obligations between Victoria and NSW, examining how subsequent homeowners' rights to sue building professionals differ dramatically between Melbourne and Sydney.