ARs are now favouring the smaller networks

CHRIS TANNER, BROKERS WANT MORE
Appointed representatives are shunning larger networks in favour of smaller ones following the high profile collapse of several major networks.
Which Network’s latest network league table, based on the Financial Services Authority register, reveals an emerging trend for ARs joining smaller networks over the last year.
Bigger networks such as Sesame and Openwork still dominate the top of the leader board with 1,502 firms and 1,069 firms respectively as at the end of last December.
But smaller networks appear to have made inroads in the distribution market during 2009.
HomeLoan Partnership saw the number of its AR firms go from 155 on September 30 to 170 on December 31 2009.
For the whole of 2009, the network recorded a net gain brokers want moreof 63 ARs, representing a 54% increase in the number of members it had in 2008.
Chris Tanner, managing director of HomeLoan Partnership, says that member numbers have been boosted by the demise of other networks, in particular Network Data.
He says: “A few years ago you might have said that bigger is better when it comes to networks but I think brokers are now looking for more of a relationship with their network.
“Brokers are not looking at smaller networks anymore as being uncompetitive. The bigger guys are not outpacing us on fees.”
Mint Financial Services saw its member numbers rise by 37% last year while Mortgage Support Network saw its ARs numbers up 34%.
Last year saw the collapse of several major networks, including The Mortgage Times Group, Network Data and Premier Network Group.
As at December 31 2009 a total of 11 networks were no longer showing on the FSA register as authorised, compared to the same time in 2008.
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Mortgage Strategy and Follow @mortgagestrat











Readers' comments (1)
Alun Thomas | 26 Jan 2010 7:12 am
Does anyone know what is going on with the administration of the Mortgage Times Group?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment