Mortgage advice

fubar_2

stanmoresaver wrote:

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:

Try reading a little further and you would have seen this

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

Don't be so touchy, or people might start thinking that those that feel they need to jump to the defence are trying to smudge over the problems that some people have experienced, yes this brokers conduct was unacceptable but it left a lasting impression that I will keep recalling should I think about re-mortgage again in the future.

This type of broker is harming your type of industry and I can probably guarantee that some brokers know of some other broker service that they would not recommend because of the way they operate, but they wont take any steps in helping to close this type of broker down, even though they know the broker is not operating within the guidelines that have been imposed by the FSA.

So although there may be some very good brokers in the industry (like the guys who frequent these forums offering free advice) there are still the rotten apples in the barrel that wont be picked out and discarded by the others, yet people like me can unfortunately find that rotten apple and I'm afraid it leaves a very sour taste afterwards.

AndrewSmith

To Martin,

I apologise for the length of this post but I feel it is necessary:

Firstly the comment 'anti broker spin' is not directed at you personally. Why would I make such a comment when in the past I have arranged mortgage finance for people who know you personally? I accept and admit that it may have been seen as an attack on your article however let me assure you that it was not. It was as a result of numerous posts in the forum contradicting advice given by myself and my Qualified Broker friends on the site. If it was taken another way, which re-reading it may well have been I would like to formally apologise without prejudice to you personally.

Secondly, If you read the posts on the original thread you will see that I actually thank you personally for the article and for such a good debate.

Thirdly, whilst I accept that it is sometimes possible for customers to arrange less expensive Protection using the Non-Advice route it does need to be pointed out that in doing this they have none of the protection offered against mis-sale that they automatically get via a broker. On the non-advice route, no fact find is completed therefore the company providing the product cannot be help accountable as to the suitability of it to the customer's circumstances. Let me give you an example of this:

A client came to me about a year ago, I arranged his mortgage and, as per guidelines laid down by the compliance company I emply, I discussed protecting the mortgage with him. I suggested that, amongst other things, he should effect a Term assurance policy on a guaranteed premium basis for the amount of the new mortgage less his existing cover. I also recommended that he take critical illness cover for some or all of the mortgage amount also. This client subsequently opted to approach the same life company I had recommended but to go himself using the non-advice route. He simply asked for the cheapest Term Assurance they had and was interested in discussing anything else. What he actually ended up with was a Term assurance policy with 'Reviewable' premiums which initially was of course cheaper than the one I had recommended. What he did not realise though until his wife was going through the papers following the client suffering a stroke last autumn was that his premiums are likely to increase every 5 years. His wife tried to complain to the company concerned as a mis-sale, and tried to claim against them for not recommending critical illness cover. The company had no case to answer. They had a recorded telephone call from the client in which he clearly stated that he was only interested in effecting the cheapes policy right now, and that his opinion was critical illness cover was a waste of time.
The client's wife subsequently also complained to my company stating that I should have provided critical illness cover to her husband. I provided a copy of the Suitability Letter and file notes clearly showing that I had recommended it, and it had been declined as I had a signed declaration from the client that he wished to effect none of my recommendations. Had I not recommended critical Illness the client may have had a valid claim against me (accoring to the compliance company I use , and the FSA employee I spoke to about the case to ensure I had acted correctly).

Freedom of choice is something that I support wholeheartedly. It is the job of the advisor to make the client aware of any shortcomings and any protection deficientcies. Whether the client accepts this or not is their choice. However this should not be referred to as 'Trying to flog un-necessary ancillary products'. As a professional Advisor with over 12 years untarnished history in the industry I find this personally insulting. However it is your opinion and I respect it as an opinion. It does not, however, mean that it is automatically right.

The general public called long and hard for regulation of mortgage, mortgage advisors and general non-investment insurance product sales. Since 1/11/04 mortgage business one since January 2005 non-investment insurance contracts are now regulated by the FSA. As you know Martin this has resulted in a far greater workload for the Advisor however by most it has been welcomed. Part of that process though is that we have an obligation to recommend appropriate protection. The client has the choice what they do as a result of the recommendation.

I think more emphasis must be put on that when taking the non-advice route you are giving up some of the regulatory protection offered with the advice route.

As previously said. I respect your opinion and, on the whole, support your money saving strategies.

I feel that a public forum such as this is not the place to express such rudeness as to dismiss my opinion as 'laughable'. It is certainly not the sort of reaction one would expect from a prefessional individual such as yourself. Nor do I accept my post being referred to as a polemic. However again, if that is you opinion, I do not agree with it (and you can't be right all the time), however I respect your opinion.

I also do not feel that a public apology is necessary from me, however as a professional I offer it.

Ian W

It is not always that case that a Broker will be tied to one insurance company. I have access the every mortgage lender (except obviously the likes of HSBC etc) and also have a range of insurers, at the last count it was 11, who I can use for non-investment insurance contracts. You may find that, as I am, a broker may have only 1 company for such things as buildings and contents insurance. I actually suggest that people call Direct Line and get a quote as I have found them very reasonable in the past.

I hope this does explain my position more clearly and, as I previously stated Martin, If my post was taken in the wrong way accept my apology.

Thank you

Andy

MSE_Martin

Andrew I understand the note above and thanks for it. I think this perhaps comes from the fact that this is a specific discussion of the article not the forum.

i think again i'm going to split this discussion off to be honest. The aim of this is to get feedback on individual brokers, not this wider debate

martin

dunstonh

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

Dont ever get ill and see a bad doctor then. You will be in the s*** then.

So although there may be some very good brokers in the industry (like the guys who frequent these forums offering free advice) there are still the rotten apples in the barrel that wont be picked out and discarded by the others, yet people like me can unfortunately find that rotten apple and I'm afraid it leaves a very sour taste afterwards.

Tell me an industry or profession that doesnt. However, it seems, at least on this forum at times, that one bad apple is an excuse to blame all.

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??

I have to admit that on the mortgage side, I have cut right back now and at times it is fustrating to post comments and information only for that to be ignored and the same mis-information from a few individuals gets spouted out again and again, ignoring the previous facts. It is seen more as a game of catch the advisor out or make the advisor look stupid rather than help the forum member.

Former_MSE_Dan

Hi folks,

I've split off discussion from the mortgage broker article discussion thread which doesn't relate specifically to the article. If you could try to keep discussion of this kind to this thread and leave the official article chat thread for questions from people new to the subject that would be a great help

Cheers,

Dan

AndrewSmith

Think Ive said enough already

:beer:

stanmoresaver

AndrewSmith wrote:

Think Ive said enough already

:beer:

Me toooooo!

stanmoresaver

Ian_W wrote:

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.

Thanks for the sentiments Ian, he is ok and free to concentrate on getting better without having to worry about the bills! Sorry i didn't respond earlier to your kind thoughts.

With regard to the second part of your paragraph- It is my firm opinion that very very few people consiously go out and buy Life/ CI. Now that is not to advocate buying at any price, however, i would guess, (but stand to be corrected) the majority of whole of market mortgage brokers also operate in a whole of market or at worst, multi-tie basis for the protection products they arrange so should be there or thereabouts.

Let me give you an example of something that the vast majority of people know is something they should have, but the significant majority do not. Something that, like life assurance or CI cover has to be bought consiously, and if not put in front of someone who will arrange it for them, the average consumer will not get around to arranging-it's a will. I wonder how many people on this board haven't, yet. And it is my heartfelt view that the unsolicited purchase of Life Assurance and CI is probably less likely that the unsolicited purchase of a will!

seanko

Innovate,

The problem is the information given by Martin these pages about Financial & Mortage Advice is misleading.

IFAs are hard working professionals, you would not mess your doctor, lawyer or accountant around in the same way by trying to get their services for free.

Sean

paulengland

best things to do is to learn it all yourself .. don't trust anyone with your finance.

IT is all PLAIN English on the doc or on the leaflet only things is becuase it is small print or it is LONG people getting lazy to read all about it .

Anyway it is only some of my advise and please don't take it personally .