BSA left out of trade body talks to define roles in mortgage market
The Building Societies Association has been left out of initial coalition talks between the other mortgage trade bodies that are drawing up guidelines for the responsibilities lenders and brokers should hold.
The Council of Mortgage Lenders, the Intermediary Mortgage Lenders Association and the Association of Mortgage Intermediaries are trying to achieve a consensus between lenders and brokers on what their roles should be following the publication of the Mortgage Market Review.
Some of the issues the trade associations are debating include who owns clients and who should take responsibility for different aspects of the sale.
But AMI director Robert Sinclair says the more people there are around the table the harder it could be to reach a consensus.
He says: “It would be odd not to include the BSA at some point but one of the challenges we face is that the more people you have in a room during a discussion the harder it is to reach a consensus.”
He says it works just to have three trade bodies at the moment and that most building societies are already members of the CML.
He adds: “This doesn’t mean we won’t take the document to the BSA and ask if it wants to endorse it further down the line.”
A spokeswoman for the BSA says: “Should the CML, IMLA and AMI wish the BSA to join the talks we would be pleased to participate.”
Sinclair says the Financial Services Authority is aware that the trade bodies are working on a guide for brokers and lenders, and has agreed to look over the completed document. But he adds that the regulator will not be able to go so far as to endorse it because it will not be a regulatory publication.
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Mortgage Strategy and Follow @mortgagestrat










Readers' comments (1)
Anonymous | 18 Jun 2010 8:44 am
The BSA really shouldn't care about being left out, these talks are irrelivant; a bit like arguing over an empty plate, no one will get anything to eat.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment