John December 10, 2009

Until, there is a competative product, apart from the Banks, we the broker are going to be pushed around buy the major lenders.

We can talk and jump up and down all we like, but the fact is, that the Fed Gov have a lot to answer too. If Mr Crudd did not open his mouth re only looking after the majors, and our aggragators would show more grunt, we would not be all the way down the shitter. We are doing more work, putting up with garbage service, and getting paid less.

So please, if anyone has a solution, I would love to hear it.

I AM SICK OF READING HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS, OR DO THAT, LETS GET ON WITH IT AND DO IT.

We are the land of the long weekend, and the land of the lets have a meetings, but no action.

Broker for 12 years

Mark December 10, 2009

Well at last the industry might finally have a voice that has the concern of the brokers at heart unlike the current industry bodies. I am not a member of the AIPB, but if they continue to work with the brokers and assist us in getting fairer outcomes I will most certainly cancel my MFAA membership and join.

I wish the AIPB all the best and look forward to seeing positive outcomes and hopefully other brokers that have had enough of the MFAA and there groveling to the lenders will think the same.

Brad December 10, 2009

They should focus their attention on Swan and Rudd, to fix this situation that they the Governemnt have created. They do the Guarantee for the Lenders so they should call the shots. The Federal Government is big on spin put does not use the boot enough.
Talking to the Banks will do little to help the Brokers.

steve fenton December 10, 2009

Finally, this is what brokers really want. Bring on the tidal wave!

Xerxes December 10, 2009

Go AIPB.

Keep speaking up for brokers. At some point your message will start gaining traction & brokers will sign up.

BRIAN TAYLOR December 10, 2009

Good luck with everything you are trying to achieve. You have got to have a go even though the banks will say one thing to your face and do something completely different behind your back. What the banks don’t seem to get is that the public have lost confidence in them and feel that they cannot be trusted. We may see silly adverts involving basket ball, puppets and pet dogs and even “new bank managers” but these won’t win any customers. Honesty and truthfullness or is this asking too much?

Jeff Mazzini December 10, 2009

Common sense must prevail in this ever changing world as more and more businesses will diversify and become mutli-skilled to ensure they meet all their clients needs. This means the days of a person only providing one product or service has changed and hence suppliers have to also adapt to the new world and understand that placing volume targets on writers does not fit what the market is seeking.

With the rollout of the new credit regualtions it will require other professionals to also have a credit licence and or be an authorised representative of a credit licence holder and naturaly their business model or focus may not be totally credit but they need that as part of their service offerings.

Derek Miles December 10, 2009

I applaud this group for seeing the issues and taking some action. I note that some comments try to sheet home blame to someone and invariably this becomes the government. The government didn’t cause the GFC unless we go back to the last 12 years and blame that governmnet for not preparing the country for the GFC. So, lets stop blaming the government for everything and focus on those areas that are affecting our business - Major lenders and Aggregators and ourselves.

We need the industry to be cohesive to tackle the problems. Lenders are able to divide and conquer. We need to have more control over commercial agreements that are signed. These agreements are for the benefit of the Lender firstly and the Aggregator secondly. We need to get behind the industry bodies more and stop whinging about what they are doing. For them we know it is a balancing act. If we don’t want them to accept sponsorships to run their organisations, then we need to pay more in membership fees. You get what you pay for.

Re the letter. A couple of issues I would like to add are:-

The deliberate (or the fence sitting) strategy by the majors of propogating this myth that borrowers get a faster or better service by going direct to the branch. And I have evidence that borrowers do in fact get faster approvals and relaxation of policy by going direct to the branch.

The unfair and destructive policy of claw backs and particularly where the clawback occurs through branches refinancing broker introduced business. There is no business model that survives where money is taken back months after a lot of work and advice is provided to supply the customers in the first place.

Brokers are not receiving their income for months after they have done the work to introduce a customer. By the time the broker who does the work gets paid, it is often months from time of work completed. This is effectively trading terms of 120+ days. No other business can survive trading terms under these conditions. Both the lender and aggregator are to blame for this.

Lenders who cyclically under perform on approval times (except for the branches who are unaffected or course). We not only have to know product and policy but also which lender is going to miss finance dates. Makes us look stupid with the borrower when we have to tell them this lender will approve on time and this won’t - to hell with what loan is the best. So lending is done purely on what lender can approve in time - not on what product suits.

And I can go on.

BRIAN TAYLOR December 10, 2009

In support of Derek Miles comments - I currently have a trail issue with CBA where trail should be paid 12 months following settlement.

LOAN SETTLED - 12/11/2008

TRAIL TO BE PAID 02.2010.

CBA continuously make the rules and then change them!

brizbroker December 10, 2009

Guys- there are lenders RIGHT NOW without clawback, without minimum volume requirements, without channel conflict and still paying 0.7/0.25%. The products and rates on par or better than anything the majors offer, so your complaints are absolute BS. You are the people who refuse to support the competition. No one else failed- just you, the broker community. You have failed miserably to back the lenders we all owe our livelihoods to. No one else’s fault but yours; not the Government, not the MFAA or your aggregators- just YOU. Its amazing that you in the finest tradition of a whinger you guys always find someone else to blame but it’s hard to find any sympathy for your predicament when you refuse to use the very real, very available, very good alternatives. The tier 2’s and the non banks have now got less than 3% market share between them, and they have brokers to thank for losing 20 years worth of hard won market share in 20 months! You are making them irrelevant at best, and possibly extinct at worse, and with that will follow the mortgage broking industry. It’s pathetic, hopeless, amazingly irresponsible, yellow bellied and inept. You have no excuses other than apathy and laziness. Every other excuse is weak, leaks water and makes no business sense. I’ve been saying the same thing for over a year on these forums. You’re either too stubborn or too stupid to change your habits, so expect absolutely nothing to change. Expect the banks to screw your customers and you again in 2010 and not only will they get away with it, you’ll keep sending them more and more business. It’s truly astoundingly stupid. Just to review 2009 in case you have forgotten -it was only this year that an industry wide forum with aggregators and banks took place. There ws much fanfare, much fist waving and many promises made. End result- it achieved zero. And in case you have forgotten, here is whats changed for you in the past 18 months. Commissions cut by approx 30%. Trail cut by approx 40%. Service levels abysmal. Double standards in service delivery because of channel conflict. Volume requirements. Re-accreditation fees. Rate reductions withheld from RBA cuts. Rate increases over RBA. I fail to understand why you are all making the same mistakes over and over again. You’ll all be the first to complain when the next bank screws you, too.

BRIAN TAYLOR December 10, 2009

Totally agree with Brizbroker but it is fear of the unknown that is stopping us from leaving the big four. Briz please send me your email address to taylorbd@bigpond.com as I would like to make headway in this direction.

Xerxes December 11, 2009

Briz,

“You are the people who refuse to support the competition”. - Talk about friendly fire. You don’t know who I am (or presumably the other posters) or who I put my business through. You need to put a scope on your riffle.

I understand your sentiment but you need to target your abuse a little better. I to am frustrated that the wider broker community seems oblivious to the dangers of putting CBA/Westpac/NAB at the top of most of their customer recommendations. I never recommend these 3 monsters. They don’t even get a mention. Unless a customer brings up one of their names and I then engage in bank slandering – which most customers enjoy and join in on.

Derek Miles December 11, 2009

I don’t believe it is professional or ethical to engage in bank slandering when talking to clients about their options. Whether we like it or not, we are not doing our job if we exclude major’s products from our recommendations. If the client then chooses a major, then we have no option but to write the business. Often, majors are the only lenders who will set certain deals.

I beleive the answer lays in achieving a healthy partnership with the majors and all lenders. Slander and other practices is just lowering yourself to the same level, the level that us professionals are seeking to avoid.

And there is no magic pudding out there that allows us to leave the majors out of our offering. There is absolutely no lender who will take every customer - this is a commercial reality. So those brokers who think that there is a magic lender who will do everything and you can totally ignore the major lenders is living in a land of dreams.

peter December 11, 2009

Would some one detail a list of tier 2 / non bank lenders who provide a strong servicing calculator and sensible credit policy. So many of my attempts to avoid the majors have cost me the deal.

Xerxes December 11, 2009

Hi Derek,

If you push the big banks you are part of the problem (hopefully you don’t).

They do discriminate/differentiate on price, service & policy between branch and broker world, as you outlined accurately in your first post above. Not to mention the wider channel conflict issues or the issues of power centralisation (CBA/Westpac controlling the lending market). Why would any business person voluntarily choose to partner with such businesses when there are other choices?

I realise there are some deals that due to policy reasons Westpac/CBA are the only choice. But these instances are rare. Yet stats suggest, many brokers use these 2 lenders as their first recommendation for most customers. I understand if brokers occasionally lodge a Westpac deal (2 or so / year) due to policy issues. But CBA demanding you give them 8 / year. Sorry I wouldn’t sucker 8 of my customers just to keep CBA accreditation. In the rare instance where CBA is the only choice for your customers it isn’t the end of the world to miss the business. If you can’t bring yourself to missing the business you could always sign the customer up and lodge via a CBA accredited broker.

I tell those few customers who ask about CBA/Westpac/NAB why I choose not to deal with them. I used the term bank slander because I am not a fan of the term ‘bank bashing’ (it victimises the banks). But I get your point, slander has even worse connotations. Let’s say I inform my customers of the good reasons why I don’t wish to burden them with a big bank association. Almost every customer agrees and my customers & I avoid the channel conflict.

If you need to use one of the majors in my opinion, ANZ is the most broker friendly. ING & Suncorp should be on the radar plus any number of mortgage managers (firstmac, AFM, Homeloans Ltd, etc etc). I also notice with interest that AMP & Citibank are gradually coming back into contention with market competitive rates.

BRIAN TAYLOR December 11, 2009

I totally agree with Peter in that I would prefer to use tier 2 but need to have the confidence that they will deliver. Any tier 2 lenders reading this please feel free to contact me on taylorbd@bigpond.com