Explaining the difference.....

MortgageMamma

AndrewSmith wrote:

Ah,

I would advise against using their in house mortgage brokers as they are limited to a panel of approx 15 lenders, however are still allowed to call themselves 'whole of market'.

Andy

I am sick to death of having to explain the difference to my clients of a TRULY whole or market broker, and a panelled broker, who claims to be whole of market?! It furiates me that they are permitted to call themselves whole of market this under FSA guidelines.

It shouldn't be allowed, we all waffle on about consumer protection but this is blatant consumer deception!! :mad: :eek:

Some clients just don't understand this when you explain this to them, and often look blankly and say "so you are whole of market, and the other guys documents say he is whole of market, so you must be the same right?"

No, not right, Mr Client, what you actually have to say is, "could you, at this very moment, source and recommend a mortgage to me from ANY provider on the UK Marketplace?" If you don't ask this you will never know.

Its not fair that a client should have to go through so much hassle to determine whether their potential advisor is truly whole of market or not.

This is winding me up big time! Do any other brokers know of any groups or organisations, currently lobbying the selectively deaf Financial Services Authority to get this changed? :mad:

stanmoresaver

Have to say that spookily enough- this has been really driving me mad today- Over the last three days- i've had a number of potential clients ask me the difference, and agree with me that the rules that are supposedly there to protect them are just downright confusing. One meeting yesterday afternoon was very drawn due to this debate!

I'd also like to ask both the consumers and brokers on here what there feelings are and, if it's possible-At what point do you think it is fair to call a Whole of Market broker- truly whole of market?????

:huh:

SS

silvercar

At what point do you think it is fair to call a Whole of Market broker- truely whole of market?????

When you can access over 95% of the mortgage providers around?

Maybe you should have a figure in brackets after "whole of market" to show the percentage or number you can access.

I guess you want to say to people that you can access X providers that they could acces directly plus Y broker only deals less Z deals that are not available through brokers.

AndrewSmith

I think the only acceptable definition of a whole of market broker is one who has unlimited or unrestricted access the every mortgage lender in the market place who accepts business from mortgage brokers / intermediaries.

It is however currently the choice of the FSA to allow firms with limited access to the market to be called 'whole of market'. I simply state to clients that I have no limitations on the lenders I can use with the exception of those who do not accept business from intermediaries.

Andy

MortgageMamma

A good whole of market broker (mainly those that charge fee's, but also those with a conscience) can and will recommend ANY lender to a client whether paid for it or not, and will only advise specifically what is in the clients best interests, so technically for the truly whole of market, there are no deals not available to a broker.

homer_j_3

I agree with MM in terms of that really you sould only be allowed to be called WOM if you can source from any provider in the UK market place.

Yet it should also be made clear that there are some lenders that will only take direct business and not through the advised sale process.

The issue does definitely need discussion but in the current state, it seems as though we are trying to put a jigsaw together using pieces that do not really fit together, if you see what I mean?

Clearly there was a great example of this confusion on Martin's sticky about this subject.

MortgageMamma

Mike,

Sorry you will have to be more specific, I don't understand what you are trying to say and don't want to reply as I might misconstrue!

dunstonh

Clearly there was a great example of this confusion on Martin's sticky about this subject.

Oh please do not mention that thread. I get the shakes just thinking about it

herbiesjp

It should be more straight forward for all concerned.

Whole of market = every lender
Panel = limited lenders - list of which automatically given/included on IDD
Tied = branch adviser/ only sell one product

Ian_W

Hi broker chums :wave: ,
Joe punter here with my spanner in the works for you :mad: . "Whole of market" should mean what it says on the tin - but that being the case no broker can legitimately claim the crown because there are lenders like YBS, Britannia, others[?] who don't deal with applications through brokers.
So Andy's explanation,
one who has unlimited or unrestricted access the every mortgage lender in the market place who accepts business from mortgage brokers / intermediaries
is totally accurate but it still isn't "whole of market" so it is still misleading to catagorise it as such. It's a bit like being pregnant [not that I ever have been ] you either are or you're not, you can't be 98% pregnant or 98% "whole of market"!! At least not if you're claiming one group is misleading the public and you're not! :rolleyes:
So my suggestion to you is that the moral highground would be best captured by putting forward 3 levels:

1. Tied to a lender.
2. Restricted to a panel of x number of lenders.
3. Unlimited access to all lenders who accept business from mortgage brokers.

How's that sound - exits stage right donning steel helmet!!

EDIT: Just as I'm about to post I notice herbies' got the same suggestion, steel helmet removed.

herbiesjp

Ian_W wrote:

Hi broker chums :wave: ,
Joe punter here with my spanner in the works for you :mad: . "Whole of market" should mean what it says on the tin - but that being the case no broker can legitimately claim the crown because there are lenders like YBS, Britannia, others[?] who don't deal with applications through brokers.
So Andy's explanation,
one who has unlimited or unrestricted access the every mortgage lender in the market place who accepts business from mortgage brokers / intermediaries
is totally accurate but it still isn't "whole of market" so it is still misleading to catagorise it as such. It's a bit like being pregnant [not that I ever have been ] you either are or you're not, you can't be 98% pregnant or 98% "whole of market"!! At least not if you're claiming one group is misleading the public and you're not! :rolleyes:
So my suggestion to you is that the moral highground would be best captured by putting forward 3 levels:

1. Tied to a lender.
2. Restricted to a panel of x number of lenders.
3. Unlimited access to all lenders who accept business from mortgage brokers.

How's that sound - exits stage right donning steel helmet!!

EDIT: Just as I'm about to post I notice herbies' got the same suggestion, steel helmet removed.

Hi Ian

Great idea why didnt I think of that :j

The lenders you mention will accept applications, only they do not pay any fees to the adviser.

So to cover our time etc, most advisers would charge a fee to cover any business that would go to these lenders