Has my F.A sold me a bum deal?

UK007BullDog

A&L did not have the best deals in November for trackers or fixed.

Top offers fixed in November was Nationwide and Halifax, followed by Woolwich. Absolute top was Northern Rock, however their fees were/are ridiculous.

Is your friend tied to a panel, i.e. not whole of market?

Rick62

Alliance & Leicester had some great rates around then, such as 2 year Tracker at 4.39%.

I don't know how you can say it wasn't the best deal at the time. I placed several clients with A&L around this time (both Fixed & Tracker) and I can assure you I would not have done had they not been the best for the clients needs.

UK007BullDog

See, so we are back to the "what is best for the client". For my clients at that time the Nationwide and Woolwich deals were the best.

So it all depends on the clients, their situations, their requirements and their future plans.

It also depends on the sourcing system. I used 3 different one and each spewed out different results.

I am going by memory here but for MY clients the lenders I quoted above were the best offers. I cannot go into the exact rates as I dont have them right now in front of me, but A&L did not feature near the top.

But I am sure going purely by rate A&L were not the best (fees etc.). But do not have the documentation to prove it.

chrispyphillips

Easy fellas, lets not start a ruckus! I just had the place fixed after the last time. Now go out back and see Carla, she'll calm you all down

dunstonh wrote:

So, if you decided that the tracker was the best route (the yellow sweet ) then he will research and recommend what he believes is the best tracker. if you want the fixed route (red sweet!) and he's done a tracker, thats when you start calling the recommendation into question. If you didnt know what the different flavours meant, then he should have covered that off.... enough with the sweets analagy

Cheers Dunston, 'sweet' advice mate

UK007BullDog wrote:

You trusted your friend and thought that as he is in the trade is giving you best advice. He might have at the time depending on the responses you gave him. Did you do a full fact find with him? Did he know about your financial commitments? Did he ever mention that a fixed would be better for you? Did he give you a Key Facts to read?

BD, we did a full fact find, he knew all my commitments, gave me a key facts to read, but never said a fixed would be better for me, and when I asked him about it after the last increase, he said the mortgage I'm on is still the best for my situation ('he would say that though' - I thought!) I was just concerned with all the impending charges etc that I might have been on the wrong mortgage for someone in my position, but it would have taken fortune telling on the part of the FA to predict it i suppose. Most Q's have been answered now thanks guys. Like I said, lets not all fall out! I want you all to do the happy dance :dance:

UK007BullDog

Your FA did not sell something to you because it made him a large profit. A&L's comissions are run of the mill average.

But you should get out the offer letter and read ALL of it. So that you know 100% exactly what you got. It always amazes me that so many people have no idea what they have bought.

Maybe it was a capped tracker you got from him? Then you might be protected of further rate rises depending when the cap kicks in.

As long as you are not struggling to repay you should be OK hopefully.

jamesd

toonfish wrote:

In the interest of "treating the customer fairly" perhaps you should declare your status, and your apparent contempt for fee free advisers?

As a Consumer, not bound by the advisers code of conduct, Conrad is entirely at liberty to express that view.

If Conrad is bound by the mortgage advisers code of conduct, Conrad is not using a signature and hence is prohibited from saying that Conrad is a broker by the "Mortgage Advisers who choose not to use the signature should not indicate they are brokers in any other way within their posts" clause.

I suggest that you grin and bear it, rather than attempting to undermine the code of conduct that you're required to follow.

Rick62

The point is Conrad is a broker, he charges fees (which I have no problem with) but he justifies charging fees by claiming the fees free brokers are rubbish. That is unsubstantiated nonsense and that is what I, and other brokers have a problem with.

If he was any good he would be happy to be judged on his merits rather than slagging off other brokers.

jamesd

I don't see any reason to disadvantage one alleged broker compared to others who are newly joining and have that freedom to criticise the models of competitors while appearing to be or even claiming to be consumers.

We have what we have (the site not attempting the impractical task of trying to prove someone is a broker if they don't want to claim they are), this is one of the inevitable consequences of it, so best get used to it.

Dealing with the "not" or "I accuse you" claims is far more work and difficult than confirming that someone who claims to be a broker is one and even that has been judged to be too much work. That's not an unreasonable decision, either. The work isn't insignificant and there is a need to avoid looking like a place that's endorsing or providing a sales venue for brokers.

toonfish

jamesd wrote:

I don't see any reason to disadvantage one alleged broker compared to others who are newly joining and have that freedom to criticise the models of competitors while appearing to be or even claiming to be consumers.

We have what we have (the site not attempting the impractical task of trying to prove someone is a broker if they don't want to claim they are), this is one of the inevitable consequences of it, so best get used to it.

Dealing with the "not" or "I accuse you" claims is far more work and difficult than confirming that someone who claims to be a broker is one and even that has been judged to be too much work. That's not an unreasonable decision, either. The work isn't insignificant and there is a need to avoid looking like a place that's endorsing or providing a sales venue for brokers.

you need to climb down off your high horse fella. My opinion as a broker is equally as valid as anyone elses, whether they are a member of the general public, another broker, or a broker pretending to be a member of the general public.

Conrad is alledging a mis-selling offence without knowing any background to the case and worse than that, claiming that only a fee free broker would recommend a tracker mortgage!

How exactly am I "undermining the code of conduct", by having an opinion of my own?

jamesd

toonfish, with no signature, Conrad was prohibited from saying that Conrad is a mortgage broker. You were asking for something that wasn't permitted.

I agree with your comments about the mortgage. I also disagree with both Conrad's comments about fees-free brokers and the degree of appropriateness of fixed rate mortgages for first time buyers.