Tied,multi-tied,whole of market,IFA and a non-regulated(call themselves independent)

kenshaz

Let’s also look at how the consumer is disadvantaged by the current climate of tied, multi-tied, whole of market, IFA and a non-regulated (who call themselves independent) broker. Faced with a mass of confusion the only winner is the unscrupulous salesman who can take advantage of the confusion and purport to be anything other than the salesman.

homer_j_3

I completely agree with you kenshaz - this has been debated in one of the stickies at the top of the forum.

The amount of people I see that say - I have seen an independent broker and when questioned they believe independent to mean they are not tied to one lender or that they are not tied to a bank or estate agency. This is not the correct meaning.

Sole product providers is the ronseal mortgage adviser - no confusion here

Multi - tied are whole of market and panelled advisers.

You are completely correct and I would be very much happy for the FSA to change these catogaries or force advisers to provide a written interpretation of each type of adviser.

kenshaz

Perhaps we could start a campaign ,originating from this site.

kenshaz

homer_j wrote: »

I completely agree with you kenshaz - this has been debated in one of the stickies at the top of the forum.

The amount of people I see that say - I have seen an independent broker and when questioned they believe independent to mean they are not tied to one lender or that they are not tied to a bank or estate agency. This is not the correct meaning.

Sole product providers is the ronseal mortgage adviser - no confusion here

Multi - tied are whole of market and panelled advisers.

You are completely correct and I would be very much happy for the FSA to change these catogaries or force advisers to provide a written interpretation of each type of adviser.

Definitely a bad choice of terminology,extremely mis-leading ,leading you down the wrong path,a total contradiction of the original intent.

homer_j_3

with the Initial Disclosure Document (Key Facts Document) being ditched formally by the FSA in November this year due to EU law (or something like that - It was a while ago when I read this) I am waiting to see what replaces it, if anything!

dunstonh

Last year there was a survey of consumers that bought a product through a tied agent. Over two thirds thought the adviser they bought from was a tied agent.

The easy answer to this is see an IFA and get written evidence they are independent. The key facts about our services has it on there in the very first box.

Unfortunately, the FSA proposals for change on this front are a little weird.

1 - There will be two types of adviser going forward. A simple level with lower standards than current (advice requirement will be product must be "better than doing nothing") and a higher level than current (which is a good thing and where most IFAs will end up).
2 - If you are single tied, you will be able to call yourself independent if the person pays a fee for the advice.

Now how crazy is that!!!

You can be tied to one provider but call yourself independent. The majority advice channel will have lower standards and a lesser quality product range. Whilst the top end will be improved, there will be less of us as many of the older advisers wont want to sit another 5-9 exams (90 hours coursework each and about £250 a go) when they perhaps only have 5-10 years to go.

homer_j_3

thats not yet been agreed in the mortgage industry yet has it?

I anticipate a lot of the IFA's becoming pure MA's if thety are already doing mortgage business.

dunstonh

thats not yet been agreed in the mortgage industry yet has it?

Still in consultation until the end of the year. In 2008 the announcement made with it probably coming into effect in 2009 with 3-5 years transitional period with a transitional level adviser called "general" which is where 90% of current advisers sit. This will give them a chance to up the qualifications, decide what they are going to do, plan retirement or merge their business or become mortgage advisers. I cannot see many IFAs wanting to downgrade to the basic level. There wont be the money there either as they are talking about this level only having a stakeholder simplified range. That level is for banks really where low pay is the norm.

I anticipate a lot of the IFA's becoming pure MA's if thety are already doing mortgage business.

Moneymarketing ran that stat a while back saying that around 70% of IFAs would be financially better off being just mortgage advisers due to the low amount of investment business they do and the much higher costs and liability that exist with investment class compared to mortgage and GI.