Martins View On Using Mortgage Brokers...

julie8314dave

Thankyou very much for your help, sorry very new to this, still trying to find my way around.
Kindest Regards.
Julie x
p s i do not know how the signiture works please help.
confused.

payless

signature is by choice .....
( sorry if my one lead to confusion)
you use usercp panel near top of screen

rossbenn

EdInvestor wrote:

Here's where the confusion seems to lie:

Stanmore says:




This fee is in addition to the commission.However this fee is not the same fee that I was referring to, and which dunstonh refers to here:



where the fee is instead of the commission.

However just to confuse the issue completely,



There is a different rule between advisors dealing with different products.

This is called "depolarisation" and if it's any consolation, hardly anyone else understands it either.

Thank you for clearing that up edinvestor

clrphilip

I am tearing my hair out at the descriptions of brokers on this site!!

Once and for all here they are:

tied - one provider only

Whole of market - this means that they operate from a panel, but have one or two lenders for each type of mortgage, e.g first time buyer, re-mortgage, BTL etc etc. their panel is representative of the whole of the market;

Independent - no panel and can get access to any lender, barring those like Egg who don't deal with brokers.

Yes it is true that to call yourself independent means like an IFA you have to offer a fee only option and offer to refund the commission from the lender. However it is NOT the only difference.

A better question to ask is "do you operate from a panel or can you get access to every lender?

Fees are relative to what service you want. A reasonable fee for a good service and all the stress taken away is surely worth it, as in the phrase

"pay peanuts, get monkeys??

Conrad

clrphilip wrote:

"pay peanuts, get monkeys??

My stance entirely. So called fees free brokers need to sell insurance to make doing business worthwhile, whereas some of the fee charging brokers concentrate solely on mortgages as they can afford to so do.

Anyone selling insurance will claim they adhere to rigourous regulatory standards which means they must spend the requisite time on arranging, advising and knowledge development. Something has to give somewhere, or are fee free mortgage brokers superhuman???

If you want a dedicated specialist you gotta pay for it. Anyone reliant on commision only in my long experience reacts to a different set of imperatives, often without realising it (rememebr endowment misselling - nothings changed folks, I promise)

clrphilip

Thnaks Conrad, shame my other thread got shut down by Martin.

I am only trying to encourage healthy debate here, not simply target Martin.

I just think a lot of people will take his advice, as he writes in the press, here and is often on TV. Saving money on utlities is one thing and I am not being remotely critical of that, but I think there is a vast amount of difference between that and a complicated and critical financial transaction like a mortgage.

Every time I mention it to him, as I have done before ( I am not a brand new user, I just haven't posted in a year or so), he avoids the question neatly by berating me instead.

Sad really, just wish he would address the issues I raise. C'est la Vie.

MSE_Martin

clrphilip

I struggle how you can say 'every time i try and get it addressed' you have 2 posts (and 1 more I deleted).

I am yet to find you raising a valid issue.

Lenders add-on insurance and some brokers insurance is more expensive than necessary. Fact

I suggest peopel use a whole of market fees free broker and justify why. Fact

Whilst I support mortgage brokers, the complete one sided rent-seeking lobbying by brokers on this board is getting very close to making me think carefully about who I allow to post and why.

This is a consumer forum. It is not here for industry lobbyists of any variety to make their point.

Over the years there've been some wonderfully helpful brokers on here; and have been highly valued. Yet now all I seem to read is people who want to push their cause rather than help. That isn't what this forum is about.

Your petty disparaging remarks about "utilities are one thing" yet effectively "leave mortgages to the people who know" is offensive. Frankly I half wish I'd never supported brokers in the way I have due to all this carping.

Martin

Martin

whiteflag_3

MSE_Martin wrote:

clrphilip

I struggle how you can say 'every time i try and get it addressed' you have 2 posts (and 1 more I deleted).

This is a consumer forum. It is not here for industry lobbyists of any variety to make their point.

Over the years there've been some wonderfully helpful brokers on here; and have been highly valued. Yet now all I seem to read is people who want to push their cause rather than help. That isn't what this forum is about.

Frankly I half wish I'd never supported brokers in the way I have due to all this carping.

Martin

Martin

Pity you couldnt have said this on the other thread instead of closing it. Whether of not you could deliver what people wanted you certainly could have been a bit more sensitive. I believe there were alot of people championing your cause that you have slapped in the face.

I think you could have dealt with the whole broker situation when you raised the issues of signatures. I actually asked the question on that thread about brokers motives for posting. A massive thread you started seems to have been ignored.

MSE_Martin

Whiteflag it wasn't my intention to slap anyone in the face.

The signature issue, as I said in the other thread is one I need to address - sadly I have other more pressing matters at the moment.

One of the problems is that there is too much naval gazing talking about inter-mortgage broker issues and not enough mortgage MoneySaving; and this gets a bit grating.

Frankly with the volume of posts there has to be an extent of self-regulating and acceptance that some people will have radically different views. Yet we get so many complaints from brokers that "he or she says brokers are bad" - when that's not what the abuse policy is about - that the genuine complaints can get lost in the middle of it.

While I accept some of the fault with regards to the signature issue (and i hope to revisit it in the new year); the over protectionism of brokers is another issue that is contributing to this. We all need to take a step back.

This site is overwhelmingly pro-broker; but some of the complaints I've seen virtually want to make it a crime on here to say anything negative about brokers. That doesn't help me, the site, and the cause of decent brokers.

Martin

dunstonh

You have a some experienced and some less experienced advisers posting on the forums. A trend seems to be that they/we all take our roles responsibly and with a pride in our work.

When you answer questions to help people only to get responses back which accuse you of bias or someone totally slagging you off for what you do and who you are then it can get to you. Those that have a pride in their work are going to take it harder than those that dont.

You have some quality advisers here giving some excellent information and to a high standard. Thats been the case for the years I have posted. Every now and then you get the odd poster that tries to push it and create problems. It doesnt happen often but that has been the case recently. That has caused some of the brokers/advisers to become quite defensive.

I am sure Martin that you have pride in what you have done with your profile and how you have helped consumers. If you were being accused daily of only doing it to enhance your career and selling out for more money, and not having consumer interests in mind at all, I am sure you would react negatively towards those that accused you of it.

If you push people into a corner, they will come out fighting to protect that corner.

That is what is happening here.