Mortgage advice

MortgageMamma

I whole heartedly agree with EVERYTHING Andrew has said and feel very much the same. Perhaps Martin Lewis could be challenged to take the CeMap qualification, learn more about FSA regulatory and compliance requirements, and actually try and do the job of a mortgage broker successfully. The problem is with this society is that everyone wants everything for free, with no regard to the exhange of goods or services that has taken place. Good quality advice can only come from a professional. Martin, jack of all trades, master of none, you need to spend some more time analysing the industry mate, and you might just find Independent Mortgage Advisors are not all thieving pointless middlemen, like you insinuate.

MSE_Martin

I find much of this quite laughable....

Which bit of "go to a mortgage broker never to your bank" is anti-broker spin!!!!!!!

OK so let's knock this on the head... my replies to andrew's polemic are in Caps
___________________________________________

I am tired of all the Anti-Broker spin on this site. The site would have you believe that 'whole of market' = every lender, which it does not.

HAVE YOU READ THE ARTICLE. I WOULD POINT YOU TO THE BIT THAT IN STEP 3 TITLED "brokers dont cover every lender"

It would also have you believe that brokers will try to "flog you uncompetitive insurance and ancillary products". Again not true. What basis is this statement made upon?

SIMPLE THOUSANDS OF COMPARISONS OF BROKER RECOMMENDATIONS COMPARED TO THE RESULT OF USING THE ARTICLES ON THIS SITE ON THE SAME PRODUCTS

This is where I, as a professional, become very annoyed. We have a duty of care to our clients to give full and rounded advice regarding their situation. Even limited to mortgage advice we have an obligation to highlight any protection shortfalls or discuss anything else with the client that could potentially leave that client exposed to financial loss in the future. This is called "DOING OUR JOB PROPERLY" not trying to flog uncompetitive ancillary products.

If when arranging a mortgage for a client it was established that there was, for example, a deficit of life cover or income replacement cover in relation to the new mortgage, we as advisors have an obligation to make the client aware that there is not sufficient life cover or anything else for that matter. If we ignored this and said nothing about it, the client subsequently gets made redundant for example and has insufficient monthly income to pay his mortgage. If the client file does not show that a recommendation to protect the clients income against such an event was made, the client has every right to submit a claim for damages against the advisor and/or his firm.

Also the FSA and the advisor's compliance department would be all over him like a rash.

So you see we are NOT trying to flog uncompetitive ancillary products we are giving what is known as 'good service'.

If you take a car in to be serviced and the garage discovers that your brake pipes are about to fail, but does not tell you. You drive the car home and 2 days later the brakes fail and you crash the car.

What do you do? You certainly wouldnt say "It's ok, the garage was trying to flog us uncometitive ancillary products". You would sue that garage and take them to the cleaners.

It's about time that people in general accept that true financial professionals have studied and qualified to do this job.

If you want advice on Plumbing, ask a plumber. On building ask a builder. On financial advice people seem to accept advice from everyone and everywhere except those true qualified professionals, the majority of whom have traceable compliance and satisfaction records which are excellent.

The consequesnses these days for improper advice given to a client (as long as the client carrys the business out through the advisor) are so severe that it is never in the interests of the professional advisor to try to do anything else but give excellent quality advice that is suitable for that client. The client is fully insured and indemnified against advice given by an advisor.

If the client however takes it upon themselves to arrange their own financial matters then they have absolutely no comeback at all.

I have decided that I will no longer be giving my time for free on this site. I have been giving good honest help to questions raised by posters for no personal gain to me. It is sad that, even though there are brokers and advisors on this site doing the same, we are still seen as untrustworthy and constantly questioned regarding the accuracy of our comments.

This will be my last post on this site.

SORRY THAT YOU FEEL THAT WAY, BUT I DISAGREE FUNDAMENTALLY. BROKERS ARE GOOD FOR MORTGAGES, BUT FOR MOST PEOPLE UNNECESSARY FOR ANCILLARY PRODUCTS WHERE THE NON-COMMISSION ROUTE OF DOING IT YOURSELF RESULTS IN MUCH BETTER PRODUCTS. I WISH YOU ALL THE BEST.

MARTIN

AndrewSmith

Whilst I disagree with a lot of your statements, I do respect it as another person's point of view and I would never be so rude as to call your opinion "Laughable" or refer to another's post on a site that invites discussion as Polemic, inferring that I wish to provoke argument.

My opinion and statements come from working within a regulated enviroment and state the processes to which we must adhere to constitute 'best advice' to the client whilst remaining compliant to the FSA regulations. As I am sure you are aware the FSA dictate that full advice on things such as mortgage protection must be given unless the client specifically states that they do not wish to discuss the issue. If this is what you see as Laughable then I'm afraid it is a regulatory issue that no-one can change.

With regard to the comment I make about 'anti broker spin' , I was not referring directly to the amended version of your article (which I have read) but to the way in general the opinions on this site seem to be heading. Not blaming anyone in particular.

As I said at the beginning of this post, maybe I do not agree with your opinion on some matters, howver I fully respect it as your opinion and would never be so rude as to call it 'Laughable'. You refer to my post as 'Polemic', a statement such as your opening one is likely to provoke argument more, as it is a direct attack on my own opinion.

Ian_W

I'm afraid I find it difficult to side with the Brokers on this one. I have enjoyed and found very useful some of the "non-advice" given by the brokers who frequent the mortgage and sometimes housebuying section of the site. I'm sure some threads will be worse for them not contributing, by the same token I'm sure some have gained business from their participation. That said, I do find Andrew's assertion, not for the first time, that he "will no longer be giving my time for free on this site" both pretentious and self-important. For God sake it's a chat forum man, not charitable do-gooding, you joined of your own free will and can leave in the same way, why should you consider giving your time freely to be more important than anyone else doing it!!

This site is owned by Martin Lewis and, the clue's in the title really, it's about advising joe public, like me, how to save money. It's not here to promote brokers, neither is it to condem them unless doing saves the readers money.

I've just re-read the offending article and it seems to me that's its whole aim. Yes, in step 3 it does point towards execution only services but before that clearly says, " Most people should stop at Step 2." and it seems to me that Martin is providing me with information, and a health warning, which I can act on or not as I see fit. Sorry guys we're in the information age, other professions have had to get past the "we know best" attitude and I'm afraid that Mortgage Brokers will have to do the same and promote the fact they "add value" rather than simply add to the cost.

Andrew makes the assertion about "whole of market" which Martin's answered, but how many brokers would tell me as a client, like the article does, that Britannia, YBS, HSBC don't use brokers so are not available through them? Very few, if any, I suspect though with the greatest of respect to Payless, he did comment favourably on an HSBC offering someone was asking about.

Andrew's other main complaint, "I am tired of all the Anti-Broker spin on this site" igores the article completely!! How can, "There are many great local, small, fees-free, whole-of-market brokers in the UK." or "Brokers are the mortgage good guys" be accurately so described? Perhaps because the latter is linked to the sale of insurance products which offence is then taken at because regulators would expect brokers to point out a clients needs in this regard. Fair enough, you do need to flag it up but, as Martin says, if the same product can be obtained cheaper elsewhere than I, as a reader, expect him to point that out to me.

And Andrew your anology with the garage is totally unreal. A closer one would buying an electrical product from Dixon's and whether I should go for their extended warranty or source my own.

Finally, MortgageMamma, you've only been on the site 5 mins but wasn't it you who's original signature was something like "PM me if you want a mortgage"? "Good quality advice can only come from a professional" may be your opinion but it flies in the face of most peoples experience where very poor quality advice has come from many a so called "professional" across many walks of life including financial services. So if you consider the article or site, typifies mortgage brokers as "thieving pointless middlemen, like you insinuate" why visit? BTW, your words not mine, but if the cap fits do feel free to wear it!! :rotfl:

knuckledragger

Any more of this and I'm going to start selling tickets. Everyone loves a good fight and I might just make a bit on the side... <cough> "I'll get my coat"

fubar_2

Let me give you my experience of dealing with a "Broker"

I was looking to re-mortgage my property early last year, I went for some free advice from a broker, to listen to what they had to offer. It all sounded very good and the examples given looked very promising indeed then after asking numerous times as to what its going to cost me (they kept trying to change the subject) then finally told me that their services would be £3500 this is to arrange a re-mortgage of £30,000 but not to worry about their fee as it will be added to the £30,000 so I would now need a mortgage of £33,500 plus costs of the solicitor and the mortgage companies set-up fees.

I told them I would need to think about it, then for the next 3 weeks I got inundated with phone calls pressurising me to sign up for their services (even going so far once to ring me to say he was outside my house and after telling him I was at Tesco's he drove to bloody Tesco's to badger me there) then adding the icing to the cake they said that once I had signed up for their services they would then show me how I can save even more at no extra costs to myself, I asked for an example and they said they could not give an example of these savings until I signed on the dotted line and the mortgage was finalised, they were offering insurance cover for basically everything, most were more expensive than what I had already sourced from the net, but of course they had reasons as to why their offerings were better even though they were more expensive, then admitting that they were tied to offering certain products from certain companies, and the mortgage would be subject to taking these services.

I finally said enough was enough and told them not to contact me again and sourced my own re-mortgage, maybe I did not get the best deal there was but it saved me an instant £3,500 plus interest, and Peace of mind that the decision I came to was of my own free will and not because of a pushy broker service.

I understand that not all brokers maybe act like this one did, but its sure put me off from ever considering using one again.

herbiesjp

@ Fubar

Thanks for taking the time to post your experience - and what a bad time you had indeed.

I can only talk for myself, but can guarantee that the majority of my business comes from repart busines with existing clients or by referrals from those clients.

There are many brokers that will charge lower fees or no fees at all.

As for badgering you at home and at Tesco well that is just not on - you should have told him point blank at the first opportunity that you were not interested and that he should not continue to call you - a warning about contacting the FSA should have seen him off.

Yes i agree, that whilst you will get a bad apple in any profession, i do believe the vast majority of brokers are above these sorts of tactics.


I also believe that the other brokers on this board (that again spend their free time helping people on the board and pointing people in the right direction or to be asking the right questions of their current brokers) are 100% professional in their business outlook and their want to help people out.

As Andrew was stating to Martin - the market is so heavily regulated that if we advise on things we are criticsed by the public, and if we do not we are criticised by the FSA.

I would much rather someone think bad of me for having offered them protection products, than think bad of me for NOT having offered them the products.

As for product choice from the broker - that should all be disclosed in the Initial Disclosure Document.

stanmoresaver

fubar wrote:

Let me give you my experience of dealing with a "Broker"

.

Don't you think that the his conduct gave away that he was the wrong sort of person to deal with- but don't tar all the other brokers with the same brush!

:mad:

Ian_W wrote:

I'm afraid I find it difficult to side with the Brokers on this one. I have enjoyed and found very useful some of the "non-advice" given by the brokers who frequent the mortgage and sometimes housebuying section of the site. I'm sure some threads will be worse for them not contributing,

I am afraid you will find out that the threads will be worse for them not contributing- AndrewSmith had posted nearly 300 times in 3 months and over a third of his posts were thanked! Payless, who by his own admission,has decided to lower his own profile, and a few others ( myself included )that have been notiable posting less- or is that because the mad fools out there in the real world are keeping them busy??

MSE_Martin wrote:

I find much of this quite laughable....
OK so let's knock this on the head... my replies to andrew's polemic are in Caps
MARTIN

Martin, your site is excellent, and for a year i have learnt much and saved plenty as a consumer, and for this reason i have previously wanted to put back into the "MSE Community". But i find this comment rude, especially, if it just refers to Andrews post as it seems to have been taken- if it is the whole thread then i respectfully suggest you make that clear.

BTW- I stand firm on thanking you for the ammendments made to the previous article, it was very anti broker whatever you say and not relevant to today's highly regulated world, and had been on this site for some time- allbeit in varying stages of predominance. Maybe you might like to post a link on this thread so that others can see the original article if they can't remember it- however although the original article annoyed me, it was the attitude of some posters that has been the final straw for me. BTW-I don't, as you might expect, agree on the worth of our "ancilliary" products (says he on the way out to see a client who has just recieved a chq paying off his mortgage following cancer "down below"!)

The spirit and success of MSE, especially within the forums, is the community that helps each other from within. I hope and am sure it will thrive, but the mortgage boards will be worse of for the reduced free advice given to it by some of the professionals. Hopefully other boards will not go the same way- let the lesson be learnt that you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

SS

Ian_W

herbiesjp wrote: As Andrew was stating to Martin - the market is so heavily regulated that if we advise on things we are criticsed by the public, and if we do not we are criticised by the FSA.

But as a consumer, I didn't read that as a criticism of brokers for offering various insurances, where a client who needs life or critical illness cover doesn't have them for example. I read it as a pointer to the consumer that the same products can often be found cheaper elsewhere. As a broker you may not like that being said, but if it's true I'm afraid you shouldn't be offended by someone who writes money-saving articles pointing it out.

Whilst we're on the subject, am I wrong in thinking that a broker may well be whole of market in respect of mortgages, thus being able to give the client BEST VALUE - but tied to a particular company in respect of insurance products? A very good reason if I am right why you should shop around for insurance products that may be related to a mortgage, surely?

Stan, I'm very sorry that your client has needed to claim for cancer, hope he is soon well but that example is rather misleading the debate. The article doesn't say, don't have those insurances, it says you may well be able to get them cheaper elsewhere if you shop around. The whole point of this sites existence, IMO.

MSE_Martin

OK Stansmoresaver a reasoned point I think.


1. Changing article. I've just realised where the confusion is, when you say amending previous artocle article you are talking about the old article. For me what i've just written isn't a 'amendment' its a 'new article' When i read your commend i'd made some minor cosmetic changes on the day in question which i thought you are discussing, i now realise you mean the 'reincarnated article' is better for you than the old one. To be honest i dont think the stance is very different at all, but yes there is a difference.


2. Laughable

However I'm afraid i must stand by my comment about laughable. I find that to call the piece 'anti-broker' is absolutely laughable. For the last four years on this site, on tv and on radio and in newspapers i have trumpted "never go to your bank or building society for a mortgage, go to a broker" and then discussed how. I've been told by numerous brokers of peopel coming to them after hearing. Through the links and click stats we see over 100,000 people have taken the broker route due to this site alone - so to call me anti-broker is laughable. Though i dont believe that makes brokers unquestionable, in fact like all they should be questionable.

It's important also to point out what this thread is it is the "This thread is specifically to discuss Mortgage Brokers, relating to the Sneakily get top mortgage advice for free article." In other words is a discussion relating to the article not to the boards, so all comments are taken that way. You must remember this is the article people come to after reading my article, and criticism of it is seen as criticism of me and the article, not the boards in general.... hence i think laughable is appropriate.