Manchester/Trafford IFA any recomendations?

MortgageMamma

kenshaz wrote:

But we should treat each poster equally regardless,irrespective of tribal connections.

!!!!!! is that supposed to mean? you are by far the worst offender on these boards, the above only proves it, you deliberately goad until someone bites.

Leon_W

Sorry Mamma but I would have to agree with Andrew, Payless, kenshaz and dunstonh on this one.

I don't think it is the roll of a broker to recommend another broker however innocent it is. It just brings up this constant cloud of suspicion. If a non broker has had a good experience of a particular company then that is a different matter and they should be allowed to name names.

I just think it's an area that we should stay well clear of.

Regards

MortgageMamma

We will have to agree to disagree then!

kenshaz

How does the poster know that we do not have a reciprocal intorducer agreement with the firm being recommended?

Distance would not be important in a reciprocal agreement.

kenshaz

Another broker who has taken on board the spirit of the code,Leon you have my respect for what it is worth.

kenshaz

The forum has policed itself,perhaps the thread should remain as an example ,but I would like the personal comments removed please.

whiteflag_3

kenshaz wrote:

Another broker who has taken on board the spirit of the code,Leon you have my respect for what it is worth.

Sorry have I missed something? I thought the CODE was still very much up for debate.

kenshaz

Leon_W wrote:

Sorry Mamma but I would have to agree with Andrew, Payless, kenshaz and dunstonh on this one.

I don't think it is the roll of a broker to recommend another broker however innocent it is. It just brings up this constant cloud of suspicion. If a non broker has had a good experience of a particular company then that is a different matter and they should be allowed to name names.

I just think it's an area that we should stay well clear of.

Regards

LeonW. yes you do speak how it is,and that is refreshing .I now feel much happier,that is why each broker should be taken at face value ,as some would not want to be tarred with the same brush as others.Perhaps a lesson has been learned ,the forum is being constantly monitored.

payless

dunstonh wrote:

Payless did answer with some examples in another thread and it got deleted.

those were really to make a " statement " which in fairness was the start of getting certain issues aired & sorted , so did their job

payless

whiteflag wrote:

Sorry have I missed something? I thought the CODE was still very much up for debate.

debate , but I think the spirit is underlying.

I have a close friend who runs a very large national brokerage , and I know they would pay me if I wanted to make referrals, I would not think it would be right to offer his firm's services here