Bill Zenko March 24, 2009

The squeeze is on. Just another whack against mortgage brokers, we should be getting used to it. Where is the leverage from being an MFAA member regarding this latest slam against mortgage brokers?

Marcus March 24, 2009

Another BankWest of June 2008 type move by RAMS cutting Brokers out of a popular protocol in a very hot First Home Buyer market whilst still offering it through their own channel. Where’s the level playing field here??? Appears Brokers are just a convenient resource to be used as & when the Lenders wish.

Jason March 24, 2009

It’s nice to see how some lenders value the broker channel - they actually punish us for bringing them too much work!!

Mick March 24, 2009

Where are the aggregators? When are they going to stand together and speak up for their members?

All we seem to get is rollover and take.

KeyChange March 24, 2009

We are seeing clear lender policy to split the level of service and product offered to brokers - last week I had a client go to a CBA branch and get an approval in 3 days when we can’t get an application looked at in 10 days. Isn’t this anti-competitive behaviour? Aren’t the banks using their current market power and“ refusing to deal” fairly with brokers and isn’t it time that aggregators, the MFAA and/or the FBAA rallied brokers to make a formal complaint to the ACCC

Steve Mc March 24, 2009

Agree entirely with previous comments. It just tells us that RAMS don’t have the skills to either handle or assess legitimate work from professionals. To the staff that initiate and/or allow these changes, don’t complain when they move your jobs offshore to non skilled workers as Westpac sucks you up and spits you out. RAMS no longer has a point of difference, let alone a reason to exist. Me? I’ll continue.

Steve Mc March 24, 2009

KeyChange, you’ll even notice on the CBA website, prominently displayed is the “60 minute home loan approval” from the Commonwwealth Bank - through a branch of course. They refuse to take it down, so that tells you where their resources are focussed.

Jay Mac March 24, 2009

gee, what a pity party it is in here! its about time clients needed to demonstrate they have the ability to save for something instead of just expecting to have lending on tap. Yeah, its made our job a bit harder, but its not going to change, suggest we all just deal with it.

Peter G March 24, 2009

What is the point of belonging to MFAA/FBAA/agregators as it seems they cant do anything but bow down to the banks. I always thought this anti-competitive behaviour was against the law (at least that is what we are taught) and that ACCC would step in and stop it, but it seems only the little people get booked and sent to jail leaving the banks to do as they please. Looks like going back to the bad ‘ol days, before brokers made a difference and banks charged what they liked.

KeyChange March 24, 2009

Jay Mac - it’s not a pity party and this isn’t just the 100% issue, - there has been what appears to be a concerted campaign by the major lenders to introduce one level of service to brokers and another to branches and maybe a select few brokers. If new regulation states that brokers have a responsibility towards their clients best interest (as has been suggested) then we will be virtually legally bound to tell first home buyers that they must apply through branch because we know that we can’t get approval in the required cooling off period…… the outcome, even for select brokers will be oblivion and the majors couldn’t have planned it better.

Comment March 24, 2009

The edict of “don’t complain” and preaching to borrowers were among reasons that brokers exist - making it easier for them to tap into finance. I’d say that if you can’t argue for your profession or client, then you don’t deserve to have either.

KeyChange March 24, 2009

Gee Comment which one of the majors are you with?

Comment March 24, 2009

Read it again, I’m sticking up for you and your right to argue for your profession and clients. Only just started my 20th year continuous broking.

KeyChange March 24, 2009

Comment - sorry I thought you were condemning rather than supporting. Our problem is there is no voice through which we can complain - where are they. I raised this by email a week ago with FBAA and didn’t even receive a reply. They, the associations and aggregators, are deafening in their silence.

BBB March 24, 2009

Is This move restrictive trade allowing group a distinct advantage over another , whu is the FBAA not speaking to ASIC??

MMA March 24, 2009

It’s a common misconception that industry bodies exist to serve the needs of individuals, in times of conflict with large organisations. The misconception is fueled by the “representative bodies” themselves, keen to rake in membership fees. Lenders mostly refuse to accredit loan writers who haven’t paid an MFAA or FBAA membership fee. Lenders are also the major sponsors of most MFAA and FBAA events. Whose side do you really think these bodies are going to take? Trust me, they know what makes their cash register ring.

If this weren’t true, FBAA and MFAA would not accept sponsorships from lenders, as such would be an obvious conflict of interest. Industry bodies always have been, and always will be, revenue-raising toothless tigers first, and aggressive defenders of their individual members’ best interests…..well, never.

They just say that they exist to assist “all industry participants”. Translated, this means all industry participants with mega-deep pockets who ensure the “representaive bodies” are cash-rich.

Damien March 24, 2009

Rams, thank you for sending me the email at 5.32pm yesterday, announcing that is was effective from 5.30pm yesterday. How pathetic you are, now thatI read that you still offer this product through your franchises, just confirms how pathetic you really are.

On another topic of service levels, yep couldn’t agree more re the 60 minute approval via the CBA branches.

What is the actaul point of the MFAA & FBAA or the ACCC for that matter,
and who is going to stand up for the Broker Industry, so the banks stop treating us like absolute shit.

I cannot recall the service levels being as poor as they are at the moment over the past 8 years, are the majors even interested in the level of service to Brokers , I would think not, they should be ashamed of themselves, but sadly they have no shame!

BBB March 24, 2009

MNA is correct and his hit the nail on the head , i am wonerding at the next round of conferences for the aggregators if all the banks are not allowed to attend OR any sponsorships they want to contribute to the running of the conferences are rejected.

Will PLAN or AFG and all the other aggregators only accept sponsorships from the genuine non bank lenders who are really want to support the broking industry . Answer will be not a chance. all the menbers of the various aggregation should be writinh in and saying to the aggregators , shut out the banks, will you as a broker do that? Give it some real thought.

Stop supporting the big banks and their subsudaries like RAMS, Bankwest, St George ect all who have aggorance problems and policies that shut us out, and vote with you feet , give them as little as possible and support the lenders who support you. For the record I am a broker who uses an agregator. !!!

MMA March 24, 2009

As for RAMS, take a look at the agreement that Westpac signed with the franchise holders, when they picked up “old RAMS” at the end of 2007. All Westpac wanted was the franchise business, and had to be persuaded that the broker channel was worth taking too. The service levels that Westpac have agreed to in writing with the current RAMS franchise holders always guaranteed that resources would be committed to franchises first and brokers second, in the event that things became stretched. It would appear fairly evident that it was never Westpac’s intention to aggressively maintain the RAMS broker channel. Following Westpac’s withdrawal of their own 100% LVR, thus increasing the flow of business to RAMS, it was only a matter of time before the franchise owners started bleating and Westpac/RAMS shafted brokers in order to honour their promises to those franchise owners re SLA’s. Those of us with 20 years invested in this industry have seen it all before. There’ll be posturing and a couple of emails sent around spouting on about “commitment to brokers, and working together”, but ultimately nothing will be done on any level, by any one. All you can do is move on.

KeyChange March 24, 2009

I have just posted a suggestion to SBS Insight (Jenny Brockie) that they run a forum on the topic - there could be a lot of interest. I suggest that if you can think of any forum where we can get this topic running give them a try. We need to draw some attention to this urgently, particularly to the regulators who may well do the banks bidding and drive the last nail into our coffins without realising what they doing.

Interesting March 25, 2009

MMA, you seem to have an extensive knowledge of the agreement between Westpac and RAMS, how so? Ladies and Gents we are in unprecedented times and if you didn’t expect the big 4 to use their muscle to manipulate clients in via branch and other proprietary channels then you are kidding yourselves. I expect the next bug thing to change wll be commissions and I have a sneaking suspicion that trails will go. As you know no there is no other country in teh world where brokers get paid a trail commission so its just a matter of time before the squeeze gets tighter. I agree with some of the comments regarding teh MFAA & FBAA being useless. What are they there for???? I guess just to clip the ticket of your membership fee so that you can access the lenders that are turning the tables on our industry. This is just the start of things to come.

Catherine March 25, 2009

I contact Rams yesterday morning at 10.30. I had a deal ready to submit at 100%, and advised nolonger doning 100% lends. The deadling had not even been reached, and they would not let me submit deal. They will loose my buisness with that attitude.

Bradford March 25, 2009

There is always an answer for Borkers. Tell your clients that you do not deal with Rams, as they cannot make up their minds if they want to deal with Brokers. Encourage them to consider a building Society or one of the other non lenders.
Yes you have the power, discourage them in seeking a 100% loan, their is enough evidence in the press to back up your side of the argument.
The other thing always point out that those who choose to go outside the big four, have a much better Banking experience then those who stick to Credit Unions and Building Societies and other specialist lenders.
You have the power use it, don’t be afraid.
If Rams did not get one loan from the Broker channel, what would that say, and also you could then say to customers “Yes Rams is/was on our Panel but their is liitle interest for their product, must be somehting wrong. The Power is yours, so don’t whinge.

KeyChange March 25, 2009

Bradford -you must have different panel to me. Apart from Heritage I can’t find any other credit unions or BS that are offering a competitive product - I would be very interested to hear from any.

Louis March 25, 2009

They are all the same. I had a loan pre approved with St George and two weeks later resubmitted for full approval. The client had a 5 day cooling off period. St George took their time and client panicked. They went into a St George branch, had the loan approved the same day and received mortgage documents the following day. We lost the deal.

Concerned March 25, 2009

Louis, I would have to state in this current climate, despite a pre approval in place it would be unfair to exepct a full approval within 5 days. Valuations still need to be carried out etc so the client should still be expecting this will take time. Dare say the valuation was back, and in the file with credit for full approva;, yet no expectation was set and hence the customer panicked.

RAMS who? March 25, 2009

It was only a matter of time. We are going back to the future.

Let me look in my crystal ball.

“Big Banks claim back ownership of lending in Australia, home and commercial lending controlled by the big four… or five depending on who is talking”…….
“If you want any independant loan advice go to a broker, they dont deal with the big banks, they do charge a broker fee though. That is so they get paid to seek out loans and help you make an application. They also keep an eye on the industry so you continue to be offered better alternatives and renegiate better rates and deals.”

“Instead of paying massive salaries to useless arrogant bank managers, brokers get paid a commission by the more progressive lenders to do their work for them. That way the brokers also ensure the lenders outside the big banks remain competitive and efficient.”

I could have written this back in the 90’s. I think this was how we all worked back then. I recall I was one of those brokers who were dragged kicking and screaming to become accredited with the big four. Incidently I never became accredited with 4 of the big five, now I wonder what all the fuss is about.

Louis March 25, 2009

Hi Concerned

The client panicked because the agent threatened to sell the property to someone else. I understand valuations need to be done etc etc. However, this was an 80% LVR and the St George branch unconditionally approved it wihout the valuation as it was not required. My point is that we brokers are being discriminated with service levels.

KeyChange March 25, 2009

Hows this for service CBA are holding up a settlement for missing information the notice is headed with the clients name in full and the missing information request is for….. your guessed it - the clients name in full.

Earlier today NAB held up disharge despite being sent two completed standard NAB discharge forms weeks ago…. they want the discharge request on ANZ letterhead!

KeyChange March 25, 2009

Has anyone noticed RAMS have removed 100% from their web site!!!