Is this normal for brokers?

HelpWhereIcan

feisty1 wrote: »

You have played right into my hands with some of your comments.

Damn, outwitted by fesity ... can't wait to find out how. You just missed out the mwahhaaaahaha

feisty1 wrote: »

No doubt I will be "excommunicated" after posting, however don't say goodbye!!

Normally excommunication would require you to have been a willing member of this church - as it stands I doubt you were ever even baptised into the Moneysavingexpert cult.

feisty1 wrote: »

The Treasury Committee meet on Wednesday 4 February re The Banking Crisis to discuss such topics as whether journalists have sufficient expertise in financial issues etc so maybe you will have to start generating your own business other than lurking round here........however you never know who you're going to meet when lurking!

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Talk about falling for all the bull that is spouted on certain broker sites!!!! :rotfl: :rotfl:

Do you honestly not know that they are there to discuss whether or not the likes of Robert Peston had too much of a part to play in the collapse of confidence in the banking system and whether 'lack of expertise' in not understanding the wider picture meant some financial journalists were reporting the banking c risis in a sensationalist manner causing alarm amongst those that did not understand the technical issues either.

eg Peston's style when first reporting the Northern Rock story and again his releasing of information in October about the banks that would have been deemed "closed" under FSMA 2000.

or outlets allowing staff reporters to report on technical issues such as securitisation etc etc

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090121/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_britain_financial_crisis_media

They will not be looking at whether fesity is upset that Martin Lewis writes a guide to remortgaging that includes checking direct only deals. :rotfl: :rotfl:

All I need now is Conrad to yell 'in'it" at someone while waiving a copy of the Daily Star in their faces.

silvercar

feisty1 wrote:

..........So many of you are taking such risks, (in the hope of picking up business here I guess) I can't think of any other reason than chasing business, otherwise why bother posting you are a adviser

and that is your problem. You cannot understand why anyone would be helpful on these boards if not for personal gain.

Can you not understand that people do things without expecting £££ signs attached?

feisty1

I predicted the altruistic card would be played!!

feisty1

Beecher Afraid yr attempt at psychoanalysis isn't accurate, I fail to see how this site would satisfy any attention seeking problem I may have........HOWEVER let's turn it to you.........The other day I said tongue in cheek are u stalking me.........as no matter where I post you're behind me........I have just posted on this board the first time since Friday..and lo and behold who is along behind me BEECHER

beecher

Oh dear. You're right though - it would take someone with a degree in psychiatry to work you out.

HelpWhereIcan

feisty1 wrote: »

I predicted the altruistic card would be played!!

OK then, I'll bite.

Let's look at this from a 'risk to consumers' angle - which you are obviously concerned about as you have stated a number of times that people who are not qualified/authorised are holding themselves out to be so and that most advisers on here are 'touting for business' as they don't have the skills to get business elsewhere (but you still can't understand why the signature is needed).

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=263323&highlight=signature (pity your much vaunted IT skills don't stretch to be able to search a forum)

Is the consumer most at risk from:

1. Someone (whether currently authorised or not) who provides accurate generic information (or even information on a sepcific lender's criteria) and then asks them to seek advice having been given the basics in order to understand what they should be looking for.

or

2. Someone who just says "get advice from a broker" without giving them guidance as to the general issues meaning that when they go onto Moneysupermarket, Cherryfind or some other marketing site they are not in possession of the information to know whether they are being fed a line or not.

Which user is most likely to be touting

1. The user who is here every now and then, posts a direct answer to a direct question but dedicates most of their working day to their fee earning clients who provide the user's income meaning they are secure enough to be able to give the odd bit of info without thinking that it is 'costing them money'.

2. The user who posts all day every day (even when they should be dedictaing time to those paying them). Who sees everything as a closely guarded secret that should not be given away lest that random poster just happens to be someone who might live in their area who would have to call them if they were kept in the dark. (Or worse may be susceptible to a friendly sounding pm).

What about the user who constantly tries to distinguish themselves from others by slagging others off as unaware of the real issues meaning they are better placed to give information than those who do but don't because they need paying for their time/expertise and don't want to take the risk?

dwsjarcmcd

feisty1 wrote: »

Many clients do not understand what is deemed as advice........ but for you advisers this is a different matter. So you would give "advice" on receipt of a phone call, what happened to your compliance procedures & "knowing your customer"........someone you had dealt with months previous and you'd just launch into discussion re a product you hadn't recommended!!!!

Clearly neither do you, or you didn't read the post, where he said the question was a technical one, not specific to him or his circumstances.

b0rker

From:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=325378

• Advisers shouldn’t reply with ‘seek advice’ as a standalone answer. To prevent accusations of touting, mortgage advisers should not simply reply to with short answers followed by a plug for ‘you need to seek advice’. If brokers aren’t attempting to genuinely help the user with a specific answer and can’t offer an answer the question directly then it’s best not to answer at all. There are enough links to where to get info and advice on the forum and the site to enable people to seek advice if they need to.

feisty1

dwsjarcmcd wrote: »

Clearly neither do you, or you didn't read the post, where he said the question was a technical one, not specific to him or his circumstances.

The fact remains it was regarding a product they had secured by another route and had not been arranged by that advisor, what is a client's meaning of technical!

feisty1

b0rker wrote: »

Advisers shouldn’t reply with ‘seek advice’ as a standalone answer. To prevent accusations of touting, mortgage advisers should not simply reply to with short answers followed by a plug for ‘you need to seek advice’. If brokers aren’t attempting to genuinely help the user with a specific answer and can’t offer an answer the question directly then it’s best not to answer at all. There are enough links to where to get info and advice on the forum and the site to enable people to seek advice if they need to.

You will find many posts on here that cannot be answered as they are not generic questions. Therefore, to seek advice is the best advice. Ufortunately, one size does not fit all............