Mortgage success

ACG

When purchasing a property, I think most people would prefer to pay a slightly higher rate (within reason, maybe .1-.5%?) and have a simple straight forward application. Dont forget lowest rates usually means longer waits (I may trademark that) as everyone is applying to those lenders.

Remortgaging is a different kettle of fish and you are under no pressure from vendors, agents etc and you can afford to be a little fussier.

kingstreet

In a post-MMR world, is there any place for speculative applications where the broker isn't 100% confident the applicant meets the lender's criteria in every way, prior to submitting an application?

csgohan4

Landofwood wrote: »

Maybe I should start another thread on this, but I am interested in what people's expectations of their mortgage advisors are.

I think some people are looking for an advisor to get them the best possible rate, and I think others are looking for an advisor to select a lender that gives them the best chance of being approved. These are not the same thing.

For example, there could be a lender offering 2% and you have a 10% chance of being accepted, and there could be a different lender offering 2.5% and you have a 90% chance of being accepted.

I would expect my mortgage advisor to go for the 2% lender and to use his reputation and influence with the lender, and to package my application in such a way to maximise my chances of being approved.

I suspect that many would prefer to take the slightly higher rate with the better success-rate.

A good broker should lay it on the table for the client and saying which one is likely to accept.


In addition you also have to take into account a client's details and whether they need to complete quick to get an offer accepted or they can wait as in a chain.


The percentage of acceptance is an arbitrary figure and in reality is boils down to likely and unlikely. For example adverse credit would you apply for HSBC good rates at the moment and risk having a credit search on file or go for a high rate but more likely to approve. ?


Again Mortgage advisors are just that, advisors. We have to make the decision, we are guided by them.


There are so many variables, you can't possibly compare one broker from the next, client's are individuals and my financial circumstances are different from everyone elses on here.


I think it's important to realise as long as you get a whole of the market broker who informs you of whats out there and what is likely to be approved, you make an informed choice. Don't forget mortgage terms and how many years fixed rate deals e,t.c.


Obviously if there's commission from the product you want to know about to factor in bias as well.

Landofwood

kingstreet wrote: »

In a post-MMR world, is there any place for speculative applications where the broker isn't 100% confident the applicant meets the lender's criteria in every way, prior to submitting an application?

Yes, there are always other lenders if the first attempt fails.

Then, there is always Aldermore.

PixelPound

Landofwood wrote: »

Maybe I should start another thread on this, but I am interested in what people's expectations of their mortgage advisors are.

I think some people are looking for an advisor to get them the best possible rate, and I think others are looking for an advisor to select a lender that gives them the best chance of being approved. These are not the same thing.

For example, there could be a lender offering 2% and you have a 10% chance of being accepted, and there could be a different lender offering 2.5% and you have a 90% chance of being accepted.

I would expect my mortgage advisor to go for the 2% lender and to use his reputation and influence with the lender, and to package my application in such a way to maximise my chances of being approved.

I suspect that many would prefer to take the slightly higher rate with the better success-rate.

Of course it depends if you use an advisor at all, or if your personal circumstances mean higher chances of success via an advisor.

If you were someone hoping for the 2% then that would be assuming the fees charged would be less than the 0.5% differential over the life of the fix. After all an option would be to apply direct for the 2.5% knowing you've a high chance of getting it. You also have to factor in how much of an increase on the 10% an advisor would get and the chance that you could end up having to have a second application for the 2.5% and have paid out the fee when you could have gone direct.

Do you really think people go to advisers mainly for the best possible rate, there are comparison sites etc. Do you go to an advisor for car or house insurance? Maybe they do want the best rate, but a lot who do go for both to utilise their expertise and avoid MMR.

I think a lot go, for like I did, to match lender to applicant, tailor the application process an manage the whole thing on behalf of the client to ensure the client doesn't accidentally sabotage or delay the application by introducing extra factors.

Landofwood

nic_c wrote: »

Of course it depends if you use an advisor at all, or if your personal circumstances mean higher chances of success via an advisor.

If you were someone hoping for the 2% then that would be assuming the fees charged would be less than the 0.5% differential over the life of the fix. After all an option would be to apply direct for the 2.5% knowing you've a high chance of getting it. You also have to factor in how much of an increase on the 10% an advisor would get and the chance that you could end up having to have a second application for the 2.5% and have paid out the fee when you could have gone direct.

Do you really think people go to advisers mainly for the best possible rate, there are comparison sites etc. Do you go to an advisor for car or house insurance? Maybe they do want the best rate, but a lot who do go for both to utilise their expertise and avoid MMR.

I think a lot go, for like I did, to match lender to applicant, tailor the application process an manage the whole thing on behalf of the client to ensure the client doesn't accidentally sabotage or delay the application by introducing extra factors.

You seem to be responding to something that I didn't say or imply.

I totally agree that brokers add value outside of "the best rate", but that is neither here nor there as my comments were not designed to stir up the debate of 'broker vs direct'.

Yes brokers add lots of value, it's been discussed before.

GMS

Landofwood wrote: »

Yes, there are always other lenders if the first attempt fails.

The days of brokers slinging mud in the hope some sticks are thankfully long gone.

We need to ensure criteria is met prior to submitting applications. Speculative applications will lead to brokers risking their jobs.

I've just done an application to a lender for a client looking to build an extension. Builders due to start in 6 weeks. Discussed the case with the best rate lender who would have taken an age to get round a couple of points. Recommended a lender £8 per month dearer but had an offer at close of play yesterday having submitted client docs yesterday lunch time. I refused to 'take a punt' with the chepest lender as my reputation would be on the line. Made client fully aware and offered to help them go direct to the lender should they prefer.

They chose to follow my advice and were astonished to have an offer to finish Friday off with having only returned the post to me the same day.

Client decided that £8 per month was a price worth paying to secure the mortgage. Potential issues with the case were covered and agreed prior to submission by utilising the BDM and referring to underwriters.

Brokers do plenty of work behind the scenes which our clients never see. Not all about rate.

Landofwood

GMS wrote: »

The days of brokers slinging mud in the hope some sticks are thankfully long gone.

We need to ensure criteria is met prior to submitting applications. Speculative applications will lead to brokers risking their jobs.

I've just done an application to a lender for a client looking to build an extension. Builders due to start in 6 weeks. Discussed the case with the best rate lender who would have taken an age to get round a couple of points. Recommended a lender £8 per month dearer but had an offer at close of play yesterday having submitted client docs yesterday lunch time. I refused to 'take a punt' with the chepest lender as my reputation would be on the line. Made client fully aware and offered to help them go direct to the lender should they prefer.

They chose to follow my advice and were astonished to have an offer to finish Friday off with having only returned the post to me the same day.

Client decided that £8 per month was a price worth paying to secure the mortgage. Potential issues with the case were covered and agreed prior to submission by utilising the BDM and referring to underwriters.

Brokers do plenty of work behind the scenes which our clients never see. Not all about rate.

So, again, before this turns into a debate about the value that brokers bring, I am fully aware that it's not all about rate. But my question was about rate.

You may find at acceptable to suggest a higher rate to "retain your reputation", but if I were your customer I wouldn't give a damn about your reputation. My hypothetical scenario was purely about rate, of course in the real world there are other considerations such as timescales.

kingstreet

If I can build on GMS's point about reputation, it's probably fair to say brokers could see themselves under increased regulatory scrutiny and face possible disciplinary action from lenders if their metrics indicate they are not fully ensuring an application meets a lender's criteria prior to submission.

Number of applications not achieving mortgage offer is now being used by lenders and by networks in assessing broker business quality and compliance.

To answer my own question from earlier, no, there is no place for speculative applications in a post-MMR world as these would indicate an incomplete approach to matching applicant to lender criteria.

Having to re-place a case with a new lender indicates the lack of a robust research and analysis section of the sales process, IMHO.

GMS

Landofwood wrote: »

You may find at acceptable to suggest a higher rate to "retain your reputation", but if I were your customer I wouldn't give a damn about your reputation. My hypothetical scenario was purely about rate, of course in the real world there are other considerations such as timescales.

I am not prepared to go in to detail other than to say I was not happy to apply to a lender who MAY have been able to get round an isssue. Client fully aware and given full information on all options. Had they chosen to walk away from the recommended product then that't their choice.