Ken March 3, 2009

Ask him why the arrogance?

Nick Driver March 3, 2009

Mr Melos Sulicich. If banks say they are supporting brokers, then realistically review remuneration. Brokers have rising costs and reducing income therefore eventually most will starve. Long term - this will not be a good situation for the banks when volumes again become important. Nick

Chris March 3, 2009

Typical bank arrogance.

JOHN March 3, 2009

Banks, like any other corporate are looking at the shortterm, in other words, they will do whatever they can to increase margins (since our costs are the most visible)given we are in reality an “ologopoly” and demand is greater than supply. Unless there is competition (which nbrought about the broker market to begin with) then unfortunately this will be end of the business model for mortgage brokers.

Grant March 3, 2009

Don’t you think your headline is a little misleading? Your article indicates that, contrary to the headline, Westpac DID NOT respond to disillusioned broker.

Typical Bank quote. Say something that means nothing.

I would like you to ask Mr Sulicich if he has taken a 30% pay cut recently.

Troy March 3, 2009

The actions of Westpac should be enough for brokers to determine if they are “committed to the broker channel”. Words are meaningless unless backed up by action that reflects the words. In this case, the comments are empty rhetoric and the usual BS the banks feed to brokers, customers and shareholders.

There are two ways for brokers to beat the banks at their game:

1. Aggregators unite and present a united front to lenders, demanding minimum expectations (turnaound times, consistency of decisioning, appropriate commissions and commission policy, etc), otherwise the lender will be removed from the broker panel.

This will of course not happen, for two reasons:

(a) Many brokers cannot sell anything but a mainstream product, and cannot afford to walk away from a loan as their incomes are not strong enough

(b) Some aggregators also have their hands out to the same lenders for contributions towards things like “annual conferences” and “training expenses” - dollars that are tipped into the aggregators pockets but the broker never sees. Of course the aggregators care about themselves first, and their broker members second, so why would they rock the boat here? If you are a broker, and your aggregator is participating in these practices - leave them immediately. I know one aggregator who skites about the fact that their annual conference is their number one revenue activity for the year! Outrageous.

2. An industry body be established that become compulsory for all practicing brokers to join, and then that industry body represent the interests of all brokers. This body would set minimum expectations with lenders, and if the expectations are not met, the lender is off the lender panel.

The MFAA are a toothless tiger, and not the body for this. The FBAA are closer, but not quite…

The problem is - nobody has the courage to do this. The broker industry needs our own “Martin North”. Maybe Lisa Montgomery, who seems to enjoy a high profile presence in the media should be approached to represent the interests of brokers…

Take Control Mate March 3, 2009

Mr Sulicich, Don’t Come Monday, you’re off.

Bob March 3, 2009

Although it is hard to believe Bank statements, I can probably accept that Westpac do not intend to drop commissions further; they already pay the equivalent of the lowest in the market place and then provide poor service and back ups….is it any wonder they deserve the business levels they are currently no getting!

leon March 3, 2009

lies lies and more lies,i would love to see him take a 5% cut in his salary let alone 30-40%. he like the rest is a coward and has as much pull as i have in determining the cash rate, lets face it they are full of it and know nothing. don’t give these clowns credit, go out on a limb and say you won’t decrease commissions, those statements are absolute rubbish. I hope you dont have a family melos as i would hate to see them starve because of your lies and cowardice.

Michael March 3, 2009

No doubt that brokers are being squeezed from all angles by the banks.
Commission cuts to dirve out paqrt time and smaller brokers. Now service levels are so bad that brokers are looking a poor avenue for loans. The quality of service and efficiency of process is abysmal so that brokers are seen as a poor choice if you want timely service., I recently had one lender where I sent back the last 3 clients loan docs as incorrect. These bank errors are caqusing me to spend most of my time on the telephone, sometimes waiting 47 minutes, to get corrections. And we are the ones being marked down for service and quality. The banks are obviously trying to protect their own channels because their overheads are fixed, so how else do you drive customers into the branches. Lest take CBA, well behind, BDM’s don’t return phone calls or emails, can never get any one to answer, takes forever to process applications, and yet I just came form a branch with a big sign sayin g first ever loan application under 60 minutes with loan documents. Here with CB saying will not accept bsuiness from brokers if haven’;t lodged an application in 6 months. What’ has that got to do with qulaity of work and understanding of products.

Is there a drive to weed out small players thus leaving room for the top brokers to pick up more business so further commission cuts can be actioned

Paul March 3, 2009

Question for Westpac if the gutless swines ever face up:

Is Westpac’s horrific service to brokers because of incompetence/bad management or is it a tactical ploy to disadvantage brokers?

My suspicion is a combination of both but I’d like to hear Westpac’s answer. We all know Westpac branches aren’t waiting 3 weeks plus to get a formal approval through. I think under ordinary conditions a smart 21st century, progressive lender would have files picked up within a few hours of lodgement. In extraordinary times maybe 3 or 4 days. For months on end I have been receiving service level updates from Westpac that are beyond belief. Thank goodness I rarely if ever use them.

I understand that banks want to cut costs and keep staffing numbers to a minimum but lenders would all be best off over employing in credit than running a tight rope act. Lenders should have the staffing and systems in place to deal with surges in business. How many billions of $ worth of business are Westpac missing because their credit department is a joke/shambles. Pathetic, small minded, short sighted, Westpac managers are too busy bean counting to understand the money they are loosing due to a drastic, long term, credit under-staffing crisis. Add to this, Westpac is operating with outdated mid 20th century technologies and mindsets.

The question I have for the broking comunity is, why are you giving Westpac so much of your business? Surely Westpac, given how they have treated brokers (& customers), should be regarded as a second tier lender.

RS March 3, 2009

Stop Using Westpac ! If you don’t like the terms, don’t use the lender - Vote with your feet - the product is hardly sensational - Look elsewhere for your customers - work harder at being a “broker” instead of a ‘loan writer’.

Richard Hicks March 3, 2009

Look, as brokers, our ‘retail’ shops still have a whole lot less products on the shelves from what we had 18 months ago. Fact.

Our lending panels are selected for their credit requirements, pricing and client readiness to choose. Historically, the larger the lending panel the greater the value proposition the broker offers, hence the reluctance for brokers themselves to self restrict product.

But by pulling a lender or product off a panel, which may be the most suitabe product for any particular client, then that is unconscionable conduct in my opinion.

Yes, banks have got us over a barrel. Yes, we need not only a stronger voice in the industry that represents the retail brokers concerns, but one that has ‘teeth’ as well.

No, aggregators (or commission clearing houses) are not the answer as we know they have other vested interests. Clearly the MFAA & FBAA or any other ‘pay your subs’ organisation isn’t the key either. If it were, they would have done more by now.

But be careful what you ask for, as you might just get it. Lenders are brokers now and to represent ‘all’ retail brokers is to represent product manufacturers interests as well. Not for me I’m afraid.

Why, because product manufacturers have sought and have largely obtained ‘end to end’ control of the mortgage business through aggressive acquistion of regional lenders, aggregators & their accompanying retailers (brokers)

The big four are ranked in the worlds top 12 banks by share price and are looking to further consolidate revenues by controlling every level of the business. It’s called vertical integration.

What many individual brokers thought was the road to satisfying well paid self employment and self determination is now a type of defacto indentured slavery to a product manufacturer scenario.

In my opinion, what we need is a collegiate group of individuals who wish to create a think tank of sorts; to identify optimal strategies i.e. co-ops to position likeminded brokers in the upcoming post licencing world.

To be honest, I don’t see my issues being identical to that of a franchised aggregator or lender owned broker business. If someone wants to pay $30,000 to become a broker for a brand brokerage…well that fine….but don’t start complaining when your lender / aggregator boss tightens the screws again & again.

If anybody wishes to contact me to discuss an ‘independants’ think tank or co-op group nationally, I’d be happy to co-ordinate the feedback generated. No money involved. Just a commitment to discuss the issues and seek individuals who have the drive & willingness to to address broker issues in a meaningful and proactive way.

I can be contacted at my website (by email) by clicking my name on this thread.

JB March 3, 2009

Westpac has some good people. None of whom have been asked to take a 35% pay cut. Brokers were singled out for a haircut. Why? Because they thought they could get away with it and create a new set of rules for the branches to win a bit more share and get back a bit of margin. The main party we can blame for this is not Westpac but Martin North. From what I understand, the reason banks are so busy is bcz you the broker community are still supporting them!!! Spread your business around to more lenders and leave CBA and Westpac alone for a few months. Don’t just talk about it, do it! Clients don’t want such sloppy service so give them some better options.

leon March 3, 2009

paul good point, its obvious the majority of branch managers dont have the ability to source work themselves so not only do they use us, they disadvantage us, which business model other than finance does this actually happen. We feed you,and you want us to starve. i was brought up respecting people, you don’t know the word, i’d have more respect for most bankies if you just came out and said what you want to say. As far as the aggregators, you’re next you will suffer and pay for your dishonesty. the talk out there amongst brokers is pretty direct get ready for some aggregators to feel the wrath very soon. as for using big four , they will suffer very soon as well i think.

Mel March 3, 2009

Of course we tell our clients that if they go with this lender, they will have to wait 3 weeks for an initial assessment. At various times over the past couple of months, all the majors have been in this situation so where do you go? I’ve also found I’m getting no service with a couple of the smaller players, despite being a longstanding supporter. It’s getting to the point where there are only a few smaller lenders, primarily building societies and mortgage managers, that can offer anything like acceptable service levels.

My biggest gripe, though, is that these major lenders, and Westpac in particular, do not advise brokers when their turnaround times blow out. I still haven’t received any notification from CBA that they’re behind. If you call and ask, they’ll tell you 2-3 weeks for someone to pick up the file. I no longer use Westpac if I can help it so that’s not a concern. I no longer use Homeside at all.

Most brokers have great relationships with their clients and we have to protect those by managing their expectations. How do we do this if we aren’t kept up to date? Suncorp tried using their traffic light on the broker website but it’s often at odds with the updates we receive and the service we experience.

It will only take one lender with good processes and reasonable pricing to stand up and they could expect to receive a lot of business. Who’s game?

Peter Bellingham March 3, 2009

How on gods earth is this a response?
“Westpac remains committed to the broker channel and has no plans to cut broker commissions.”
why didnt he finish it with “today” that way when Westpac cut rates further he could say I only said today and that would be truthful.

Or why not say “I am committed to broker chanel and not to cut broker commissions……… but dave who is head of credit…… well he wants you all dead, but not me. and its really daves call. I should be committed

GIve me a break commited!!! what commitment

A commitment to 5 weeks turn around time
A commitment to cut you out of the market
A commitment to lose files and documents with astounding regularity.
A commitment to increase their own profits at the expense of the brokers who they don’t retain anyway.

Please. if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck …… its a duck.
if the statement is so carefully crafted to not say anything, then its a nothing statement ,,,,,, response HA

“responds to disgruntled brokers my arse.
to even publish that response is a major suck up to the bank by the LC team.

Gail,,, Gail wheres Gail?
get yourself over here Gail and respond
you write so many broad emails to staff one more wont hurt.

jase March 3, 2009

the “statement” by Mr Sulicich left out two very important words at the end “any further” I don’t use Westpac because 5 years ago I was warned of the branch managers upstamping or refinancing broker introduced westpac clients onto their own book.Thus eliminating trail. As far as I’m concerned,Gavin you had a fair point and fair gripe and it’s time to move on.Brokers represent 40% of new business to all funders and this is steadily growing. The general public doesn’t buy the feel good advertising crap that the banks peddle and this is why they turn to us. At the end of the day we should only support those who support us

bobbi March 3, 2009

Westpac was the first to drop commissions. Their products aren’t that great so why are brokers still supporting them? Secondly you get a piss poor response from their Head of Third Party Distribution, doesnt this sound like they dont want to support us? Well then, lets not support them. There are many other lenders out there.

Kyle March 3, 2009

What did you think we were going to get? Has any of our lenders said it will guarantee our commissions???? I use Westpac and get great service and support from my BDM. It is all about relationships, I suggest we work harder on that….We seam to forget who takes the risks here? When a loan goes bad do we lose any money?

Bo March 3, 2009

This time a year ago, GE said the same thing.

Maria Rigoni March 3, 2009

Wake up, listen to yourselves. Support the Australian Institute of Professional Brokers. The AIPB has listened. Are you prepared to support an organisation that has the finance broker’s interest at heart and are taking your concerns seriously. The finance broker has the control only if they are prepared to recognize and support the vehicle that can produce the outcome they dictate. We appreciate the many that have come on board so far and welcome any one else that is serious about bringing positive change to the finance broker profession.

Peter Bellingham March 4, 2009

Hi Maria.
I saw a similar comment on the original thread and people had a go at Jase and accused him of highjacking the thread.

I assume from your commment that you work for the Australian Institute of Professional Brokers.
Name the directors if you dont mind. and your real name as well

what is so special about this new group that will take money and do nothing like the others.

Bobby well said although through the infuriation of dealing with them piss poor is a very mild comment.

Robyn March 4, 2009

Kyle, CONGRATULATION! You have a relationship with your BDM. Personally, I find it difficult to build a relationship with someone who will not return calls. I have never even set eyes on my BDM. Thats why I will not use Westpac again. Why bother when there are others out there who put in the effort to help. And just in case you are wondering, no I am not a new broker, over 5 years in the business. But, I dont think my BDM will be able to say the same.

Peter Bellingham March 4, 2009

You have a BDM? Bloody Luxury

I cant find out who my BDM is. they give me names but they dont return calls or have just quit the bank, the ones that I have contact details for dont return calls anyway.

Grant March 4, 2009

Thanks for the response, LC. It’s a frustrating time in this industry and this is as good a place to vent as anywhere.

To those MFAA members in WA, I suggest you get yourselves down to the Members Forum and have your say. I will be there, and I’ll be very interested in what they have to say, as I am one of the many who thinks this organisation is a waste of my money every year. It’s time the MFAA justified their existence and worked for it’s members, not just it’s sponsors.

Questions for Westpac? If they do ever agree to an interview, which is unlikely, how about “What evidence do you have to support your assertion that you are committed to the Broker Channel?”.

jase March 4, 2009

LC team

I think the real topic that needs to be addressed here is not the banks but our industry bodies. We currently have two bodies being the MFAA and FBAA and now there is a third coming into play. What do the new guys expect to achieve? We pay our fees and for what? Making sure we are spending more money to be more compliant? Isn’t that what our aggregators are supposed to be doing? I get more from my aggregator when it comes to compliance training and industry updates than I have ever received from my industry body.If the industry bodies are to be of any use then I believe they need to amalgamate and form a united front.Maybe this “united body” work with the aggregators to remove the restrictive handcuff performance based commission structures the banks are now putting into place. When I started broking the reason for joining an aggregator was so we didn’t have to meet monthly loan targets with any particular lender. We could choose what was best for the client. Now we are in a position that says if you don’t settle more than X loans per month then we suspend your accrediatation or your deals do not recieve priority. Isn’t that was why we joined aggregators in the first place to avoid this? My final question to the LC team is this.
Ask the industry bodies the following WHAT ARE THEY DOING ABOUT THIS SITUATION? WHAT ARE THEIR PLANS FOR THE FUTURE REGARDING OUR INDUSTRY AND HOW WILL THEY ASSIST IN PROTECTING OUR INTERESTS?

Maybe this could be a new topic as I don’t believe we will get any answers from the banks anytime soon.

Paul March 4, 2009

Can you believe the gall of Westpac. They send out an email this morning bragging that they have got their service level down to 5 days to pick up a file (lifting their competency to just above Australopithecine level).

Oh and by the way, we (westpac or cockpac as I prefer) are running a refinance blitz to attract more business. Watch the service level blow out from an appalling 5 days (australopithecine level) to 15 days (single cell organism level) as stupid brokers fall over themselves to give Westpac more business.

richard March 4, 2009

Why am I not surprised by Mr Sulicich’s reticence.

I saw it all when I worked for the ATO as a senior invesigation officer in the seventies and eighties. I was privy to sensitive information about banks (and multinationals) which I will take to my grave because of the Income Tax Assessment Act’s secrecy provisions. Suffice to say, the big Bank’s were, and still are, the last cards in the deck. I cringe when I read about the arrogance of banks and the clubishness of the senior management.

Peter Bellingham March 4, 2009

Doesnt it bother anyone that the General Managers response wasnt a response at all. and a third industry. WHY?
Answer me one question: what is so special about you guys?