estate agents cant do this can they

dunstonh

Ok, lets see if we can clear this up.

The mortgage was arranged by a broker but not the estate agent one. Mortgage was agreed but now someone has gazumped the OP and the estate agent wants proof that a higher offer from the OP is likely to be accepted by the lender and is asking their own in house adviser if its likely rather than using the mortgage broker.

Therefore it sounds like the estate agent is deciding which offer to accept. The one from the OP or the one that gazumped.

I think thats it but to be honest, I'm still not sure

Dan_Collins_2

!!!!!!!!!

This is BS! Connells have to buy law put your offer the/a vendor. They are cannot and have no right to to do what they are doing. They are trying to control sales as they are not making much money. I bet if you use them it will be put forward and the offer will be accepted.

Halifax will probably have a better deal direct and I bet you they did not mention that! Also they have a panel of lenders.

Fishy if you asked me. I worked for sequence, connells sister company and one of the reasons I left to go self employed was that the connells way of working was coming across to sequence. Its all about sales and targets and packaging up insurances! I would honestly go to another broker and avoid connells!

Obv that was all opinion and I have no facts or anything before the legal lot start!

Gloster_Advise

Dan,

Hooooooray. Someone telling how it is. Total BS. I was at Coun***wide for a period of time, and yes if the sale goes through the branch and the mortgage does also that is how they want to work it. They can then manipulate the vendor to pur off the other interested party if they went through an independant.

Qualification of funding is standard practice to purchase, but force people to see the adviser to get a "target" and potentially a sale. Crap. Quite right to Dan, panel of lenders as well.

fn, not all companioes work this way but having experienced it I know how much I do now HATE that side of this market.

regards
Si

Dan_Collins_2

Gloster_Advise wrote: »

Dan,

Hooooooray. Someone telling how it is. Total BS. I was at Coun***wide for a period of time, and yes if the sale goes through the branch and the mortgage does also that is how they want to work it. They can then manipulate the vendor to pur off the other interested party if they went through an independant.

Qualification of funding is standard practice to purchase, but force people to see the adviser to get a "target" and potentially a sale. Crap. Quite right to Dan, panel of lenders as well.

fn, not all companioes work this way but having experienced it I know how much I do now HATE that side of this market.

regards
Si

Cheers Si

I am fed up with companies like that giving brokers a bad name.No point messing.

BS has got this industry in this mess.

I would love to sit in front of my old MD and really take his sales process to bits!

Wig wearing [EMAIL="t@t"]t@t[/EMAIL] if I remember!!

Gloster_Advise

Wig wearing, are you not sure wie had the same area sales manager!!!!!!

How many you getting in today? Failed MA'a.........ooooh makes me heave!!! Poor sods currently doing it in those branches at the moment.

lesley1960

My son and daughter had the same issues with Connells , a case of if you want to view one of our properties then you need to see our mortgage advisor .
I have read the OP as they have been agreed a mortgage by Halifax but the house they want to buy is with Connells

Conrad

Jackie - you highlight an issue that many consumers are'nt aware of;

If you use a broker such as Connels, thier own compliance team will have a say so as to whether your mortgage should be accepted or not.

If you use a small broker that is'nt part of a larger group, NOR PART OF A NETWORK, then that broker alone decides if your case is acceptable so there is no outside interfernece by a separate compliance team.

If you go to Halifax direct, they will then become fully responsible for deciding whether the advice to proceed with a mortgage is sound or not, so you may well find they too could end up declining you..

We live in a sueing culture - everyone is scared you may come back and say you were mis sold a mortgage, just like the many posters on this very forum do.

HelpWhereIcan

The way I read things, this is a classic case of corporate Estate Agent !!!!!!!! and inhouse Mortgage Adviser conflict of interest.

I believe the Connells Mortgage Adviser has let the sales negs know that the OP can borrow 220k which has given the sales negs the idea to invent a competing, higher offer to try and 'encourage' the OP to increase their offer 'to secure the property'.

They may well have passed the OP's offer to the vendor but will have said something like "sit tight, they can afford more".

Can't wait to see if the higher offer goes through or if (due to the magical second chance fair) pulls out leaving the way clear for the OP to make a slightly improved offer to secure exclusivity.

Conrad wrote: »

If you use a small broker that is'nt part of a larger group, NOR PART OF A NETWORK, then that broker alone decides if your case is acceptable so there is no outside interfernece by a separate compliance team.

I love you sooo much Conrad.

I am a network member and have yet to have them tell me I can't do a case!! They only look at a selection of my cases every year - even then they are after it has completed and normally when they are of a vertain type - eg self cert,interest only etc etc

They make me justify why I do certain things in the case file, but that's all about protecting me from the compensation culture we all complain about so much.

No case is worth any amount of fee or commission to be worth having to pay compensation and more in the future.

jackie_neave

hi heard from connells yesterday, we have been a agreed morgage, the house we were after has had a high offer put through, she said that we can afford to go higher if we want now she know what funds we have, but its up to us we said no, in the next breath she told us the house will be reduced in price this week,
the house is a relocation, to be purchased from a company.so what about the higher offer someone else put through,or was that a lie. we are just gonna wait and see now, so now we do have a morgage all agreed by halifax and connells and now looking for another house in the next few weeks, waiting for prices to go down even more we are not going to be drawn in to a bidding war
keep you posted

AndrewSmith

Conrad wrote: »

If you use a broker such as Connels, thier own compliance team will have a say so as to whether your mortgage should be accepted or not.

I used to work as a Financial Services Manager for the Connels group. It is not down to the compliance team to decide which mortgage is best for a client. Compliance monitoring is retrospective thus happens after the case has happened. It is true that the adviser has to justify his advice for compliance purposes however why would this be a bad thing?

Conrad wrote: »

If you use a small broker that is'nt part of a larger group, NOR PART OF A NETWORK, then that broker alone decides if your case is acceptable so there is no outside interfernece by a separate compliance team.

Compliance is not an interference, it is there to provide protection for the client and to ensure that the adviser is giving the best and most suitable advice. Being part of a network or group of advisers does not hamper or reduce the quality of the advice being given. There are countless numbers of small independent broker firms who are directly authorised however still employ the services of a network or complaince firm to manage their compliance, TCF and T&C framework. This should be seen by the consumer as a positive thing offering them protection and a level of accountability for the advice given. As a consumer I would steer clear of a small firm who choses to treat compliance as an obstacle and an inteference as this must surely throw up questions over their working practices and suitability of the advice being given?

Conrad wrote: »

We live in a sueing culture - everyone is scared you may come back and say you were mis sold a mortgage, just like the many posters on this very forum do

Which is exactly why consumers and brokers alike should welcome that fact that there is a compliance structure to follow to ensure quality and suitability of advice especially in difficult cases. There are complaints looming on the horizon regarding self certify mortgages and the fact that the borrowers will no longer be able to switch products without evidence of income. The borrower will insist that the impact of self cert was not explained. If the adviser cannot show due dilligence and adherence to a compliance approved advisory framework then I would not like to be that adviser. Even better would be if, as with a number of compliance firms and network compliance teams, the compliance team audited every self cert mortgage case file thus allowing the adviser to be assured that the client file shows clear evidence and justification for his/her advice, and that the client has no grounds for complaint / compensation. It is laughable to suggest that it is better to use a broker firm who does not employ the services of compliance specialists on the basis that the advice will be better quality without these control systems in place.