New Mortgage Broker Guide

MSE_Martin · 16 June 2008 at 1:34PM

I've recently reresearched and rewritten the site guide to getting mortgage advice and information.

As I know many users of this board are VERY keen eyed on whats said and... how shall I put it... opinionated

.

As promised, I thought it'd be useful to give you a sneak preview and I know many of you have requested it. I've read some good suggestions on these boards and through PMs and have tried to incorporate some of them.

Where this guide will go

On Tue afternoon the new version will replace the current version and it will be going in the email on Wed.

Your suggestions

I promise I'll read them (though pls no long essays... short and crisp would help a lot) and will consider making changes as I think necessary... though I can't promise to do so.

I know lots of mortgage brokers will probably comment; and I will look at what's said, but its important to remember this is a forum for consumer not brokers. Still I hope brokers will welcome some of the changes, which have been made after reading comments about the old version.

Having said that, this needs to be done asap to get any changes done in time (we've worked hard to get this ready to do it today, so you could see it - sorry its short time).

The new guide...

The draft is here.... do note, we need to format, proof, add links, spell check and make some text changes (some of these may happen during the day).... so just look for general content.

The current guide that it will replace is here

Martin

To feedback click reply

payless · 16 June 2008 at 2:07PM

Just quick thoughts as they come..

Fees - perhaps should be 3 sections

Commission ( always considered good)
Fee ontop of commission ( devils offspring)
Fee based advice with commission (if any) being used to offset. ( perhaps the way thinhgs are really moving)

( contray to the original article can actually be cheaper than commisson only)

payless · 16 June 2008 at 2:15PM

I know you state knowing if "all deals " are included is not- enforceable, but maybe a warning that whilst many brokers still advertise "all deals" they actually mean "all broker deals only "

However a growing number will actually do the full research ( direct , and broker) , but that a fee is often charged - in these cases consumers should ask for proof of the inclusion of direct deals ( especially if a non direct deal is recommended)

Former_MSE_Dan · 16 June 2008 at 2:17PM

Hi payless,

Thanks for the suggestions so far.

On your third type of fee - fee based advice offset by commission - are there any current deals that you know of where this could work out even cheaper for the borrower than fees-free (i.e. they make a profit).

Dan

payless · 16 June 2008 at 2:18PM

Maybe obvious but a comment that the cashback deals can only pay cashback as the deals are commisison paysing ( so don't include direct products)

payless · 16 June 2008 at 2:24PM

MSE_Dan wrote: »

Hi payless,

Thanks for the suggestions so far.

On your third type of fee - fee based advice offset by commission - are there any current deals that you know of where this could work out even cheaper for the borrower than fees-free (i.e. they make a profit).

Dan

Yeah - but its not deals, it brokers.. some brokers will charge a fee based solely or partly on a fixed basis .. ie instead of 0.3% they might charge 0.2% or a flat £500 ... so on the slightly larger cases the commission ( often 0.35% - but sometimes higher espc offset ) would cover the fee ( for advice / processing) and still leave the consumer "in profit"

( i've worked a lot in this way, and clients have come out better than if using a cashback site- but get the extra benefit of my reserach/advice)

A soley fee based service also gets around the direct deals , as if a broker is being paid regardless he can say.. best commision deal deal is and whether with rebate would be better or not on a direct deal

payless · 16 June 2008 at 2:31PM

No sure why 4 national brokers are mentioned when in fact 2 don't get any extra comment (don't seem to offer anything over the local small broker .. other than perhaps charge a fee- what does national coverage mean - many are closing branches, and small guys will travel) .. that said why mention the 4 at all.. why not just comment that they are small local brokers and larger chains of brokers.. ( perhaps list them if you must ..but therefore any inclusion is clearly a recommendation from you - and of course there's other very big players missing.. do you know that there are 2 ChaseDV's ? ...

mention the smaller guys can be found at places like findapro.co.uk ( mtg brokers only- listed more often here than on unbiased )-- likely better than relying on " phone book" ... big ad generally means fees , and are often taken by " nationals anyway"

Dan_Collins_2 · 16 June 2008 at 5:24PM

This will go on all day.

I must admit I am not sure why some companies get mentioned and others do not. I am a very good broker, I can show an email just today saying I am great so why am I not being mentioned?? Oh yeah I pay Martin nothing!

Anyway, we will never be happy as brokers as it sides with the consumer saving money that can include not using us.

As a consumer guide its good, a little long winded I got bored, but its better.

minimike2 · 16 June 2008 at 6:07PM

1. In relation to the link to "Propety Price Advice" website. I have commented on another thread before that I believe this link should be removed as that site constantly comes back with HUGE over-valuations. It is a dangerous site IMO.

2. Good point about approaching your existing lender to find out retention deals available first. This actually helps us brokers and can potentially save us time in the long run. Good call putting it so early in the article.

3. Best buy tables section. I would say to add moneyfacts, as this is the only one I find to be any good. I would also say that in that table, a third row should be made to show that the companies there are actually brokers, and not comparison services. I think that part could be a bit misleading and an effort to direct business to the brokers listed there.

4.Not so sure about mentioning Charcoal either. Sorry to any brokers that work for them, but they are going down the pan and reports on thier service of late had been dreadful.

5.Good call about adverse specialist brokers and max % fee....although I would say 1% would be the most anyone should charge. I know it is allowed to be more, but 1% is a fair fee for most adverse cases.

6.Good caveat for the cashback section. I think its very important that anyone doing a cashback deal really knows thier stuff. Most people that use them end up paying in the long run.

7.Grumble about the protection - Obviosuly. lol. I actually am very good at finding B&C cheaper than most of my clients have found themselves using comparison sites and the like and even sometimes life insurance - but I appreciate the "money saving" aspect of the article. I would add to it though that the client needs to know exaclty what policy they need and what it does as they will be buying non-advised, so lose the consumer protection element of the transaction.

Overall its ten times better than the old article.

dunstonh · 16 June 2008 at 6:11PM

I must admit I am not sure why some companies get mentioned and others do not. I am a very good broker, I can show an email just today saying I am great so why am I not being mentioned?? Oh yeah I pay Martin nothing!

Thats harsh but I do understand the sentiment behind it. Take the pensions article, it promotes using Cavendish or similar. Yet in the example given an IFA earning £2500 commission on the cheapest option can come in with lower charges than the best commission free option given out by Cavendish. Mainly as Cavendish dont offer whole of market products and dont offer the best options available.

So, why is it that providers of execution only pensions products dont have to be the cheapest and dont have to be whole of market (or best) to be promoted in Martin's pension article but with mortgages they do?

The problem is Dan, is that whilst the majority do a good job and are fair there are some that are not and there are also a lot of different charging models and you cannot cover these in an article without people getting bored and giving up. I think Martin does a good job on the whole for mortgage advisers. I would like to see a bit more promotion of IFAs in our areas in the same way.

MSE_Martin · 16 June 2008 at 7:29PM

This will go on all day.

I must admit I am not sure why some companies get mentioned and others do not. I am a very good broker, I can show an email just today saying I am great so why am I not being mentioned?? Oh yeah I pay Martin nothing!

Anyway, we will never be happy as brokers as it sides with the consumer saving money that can include not using us.

As a consumer guide its good, a little long winded I got bored, but its better.

Firstly there's no one in because they pay. We don't and never have worked that way on this or any article.

In mortgages L&C sponsor the printed mortgage guides not the onsite ones. Even then it only allows it to add its documentation in - not impact the guide's editorial. As you'll see in the guide (and the new version coming soon) that includes other brokers... and how to pick something you won't see in the newspaper sponsored guides.

I have always believed in fees free brokerages - and still do - this is a MoneySaving site and that's my agenda - don't pay unles syou have to.

As for why those brokers... why not you - you're a good broker? You wouldn't want to be in the article. We have 5m users a month and I believe in advice not web services - to put any non-large scale brokers in wouldn't work as the capacity needed to be included by my articles is enormous. Having said that I deliberately start by explainign about local brokers and finding them... it then very clearly in the article explains why I dont go through broker by broker!

I do find comments like this really frustrating. I've deliberately given a feedback route before the article goes up, knowing especially the brokers on here would wlecome it. I have no need to do that.

I find the accusatory tone very unfair... a constructive criticism like paylesses to add a search link is much more appropriate.
_________________________________
Drawing a line under that...

Can I thank some of the points above - its already given me food for some changes tomorrow... to answer some notes that i WONT be changing (the ones I will I dont need to comment on here)

1. Adding in moneyfacts - I won't 'cost its already there - as noted we just have added all the hyperlinks in this version it will be in the real one.
2. Which property price advice website - i dont remember one in the article?
3. I put 1.5% on adverse as I didnt want to knock some good brokers charging a little more - I'd welcome other views on 1%
4. Protection - it is deliberately phrased to say "some brokers are good" but of course some do sell overexpensive policies - and people should do independent work on that... (though I udnerstand brokers would prefer not

)

Martin

PS Dunstonh... There is no affil link and never has been between MSE and Cavendish - no commercial relationship. The pernsion articles I admit are due an update; though as they're very poorly read - they're low down on the list.

New Mortgage Broker Guide

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free