Most of the submissions to the new Senate committee inquiry into the performance of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission deal with the mis-selling of investment loans before the financial crisis. Many read like re-cast versions of submissions made to last year's Senate inquiry into the banking sector.This has people at ASIC and the committee scratching their heads, because the current inquiry was set up in response to concerns about the way ASIC dealt with complaints about inappropriate investment advice offered by financial planners working in a division of the Commonwealth Bank.About 90 per cent of the submissions to the Senate Standing Committee on Economics complain that ASIC, along with the Financial Ombudsman Service and other bodies, has done nothing to help often elderly borrowers who used the equity in their homes to take out investment loans during the investment boom of the mid-2000s.According to the submissions, these loans were often for terms that went well beyond the life expectancy of the borrowers, were structured as low-doc loans to avoid full documentation requirements, and involved irregularities or fraud in the loan application process.Apart from not being all that relevant to the new inquiry's terms of reference the submissions are curious because allegations of a so-called "low-doc loan scandal" and loan application fraud were dealt with in detail last November, when the committee handed down its report on the banking sector.In its report, "The Post-GFC Banking Sector", the committee said: "Some unease about the direction in which certain aspects of consumer lending in Australia was headed pre-crisis were expressed, although it was noted that recent changes to consumer credit legislation may address some of the identified issues."The Banking and Finance Consumers Support Association, headed by Denise Brailey, alleged that there is the potential for a significant amount of loan application fraud and lending mal-administration for low-doc loans. "Of serious concern to the committee were Ms Brailey's alarming allegations of widespread fraud related to loan applications."The committee found that responsible lending obligations included in the National Consumer Credit Protection Act, which commenced in July 2010, were having an effect. Evidence for this was a big reduction in low-doc lending - down from around 10 per cent of outstanding mortgages in 2007 to just one or two per cent of loan approvals today.It said: "The committee notes allegations regarding a number of possible cases of fraud that occurred pre-crisis. As a result of this inquiry, ASIC has publicly called for detailed evidence regarding these claims to be provided to it. "Evidence of fraudulent lending practices can also be dealt with by the police. Borrowers may have legal recourse available to them as the allegations, if proven correct, would raise questions about the ability of a bank to rely on the loan application documents."ASIC representatives met with Denise Brailey in February but were not satisfied that the documents she showed them were evidence of loan application fraud. ASIC's current position is that Brailey has not given it any material which has evidentiary value, and