Barclays gives brokers direct access to underwriters
Share
Barclays is giving brokers access to a named underwriter for each mortgage application they submit to the lender.
From Monday, brokers will be called by a Barclays underwriter after submitting each case to discuss the application.
Brokers will also be given the underwriter’s direct number so they can contact them if they wish to discuss the case further.
David Finlay, intermediary managing director at Barclays, says: “We are committed to further enhancing our relationship with brokers which has been on our agenda for a number of years, and giving brokers named contact points makes the application process smoother and quicker.
“We have listened to brokers about further enhancements and today’s announcement ensures they have access to the person who will make the important lending decisions. We believe this will give them clarity in seconds, and will deliver excellent service to the broker and their clients as well.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Mortgage Strategy and Follow @mortgagestrat
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (13)
Liam Smith | 20 Jan 2012 11:41 am
A good positive move forward. Well done Woolwich
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 20 Jan 2012 12:32 pm
Is this before it gets sent out to outer Bangalore to be processed.? Terrible processing outfit and until this changes Im sure most brokers will still avoid them like the plague.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Simon Lee | 20 Jan 2012 3:40 pm
It's certainly a brave move but their service standards quoted today were a four day turnaround to action an in-bound query and a further two days to get the response out in the post so I think a lot of in-bound calls chasing responses or offers etc, which utilise their skilled resources will only have a detrimental effect on their overall service proposition, especially in light of the return to 75% BTL lending.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Bobby | 21 Jan 2012 8:12 am
Whats the betting the " underwriter " is in Bombay ?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Hemat Natha | 21 Jan 2012 10:09 am
I think this is a positive step forward.
I have had problems with the cases in the past. I also think they need to get their scanners upgraded because there is often a problem with them not seeing the documents correctly and have to send documents five or six times. From speaking to my BDM, e-mailing documents will be coming soon. So its a really positive step forward. Look forward to seeing how it works and giving it a go.
I like the autonomy to speak to one underwriter, having the contact could be the difference between a case being accepted or declined.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Grey Haired Underwriter | 23 Jan 2012 1:56 pm
This has been happening in small Societies for years but makes headlines here. Shows just how little notice many brokers take of anyone outside of the big 6.
I also hope Woolwich don't live to regret the move because I am more than aware of brokers trying to badger underwriters to change a decision and the time that is lost to other cases. I have found that brokers find 'no' to be the hardest word and can be persistent to the point of rudeness.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Luke Atkinson | 23 Jan 2012 4:57 pm
@ Grey Haired Underwriter - I'm sure there are many brokers that have the same view of underwriters, albeit in reverse.
There are some underwriters that find ''yes'' to be the hardest word!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
seagull | 24 Jan 2012 2:19 pm
i usually find Grey Haired Underwriter's comments amusing, enlightening and balanced but sadly he seems to be labelling all brokers as rude and bullying here.
It is actually a pity there aren't more Grey Haired Underwriters left, having worked on that side of the fence before and now Broking, I find most "underwriters" these days have little idea about how to review a file and unless they have every box ticked cannot make a decision themselves.
In fact, this actually works against lenders often as I have had to point out quite obvious detrimental issues such as bank statements confirming hardcore overdrafts and items being returned unpaid when the underwriter had passed the case because the could tick box that says "Bank Statements Seen?" Seen maybe but not read, whilst I could have used this to my advantage, as a responsible Broker (and with regulation as it is are there really any other sort left?) I could not let it go through without pointing out the deficiencies.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Iain | 25 Jan 2012 10:47 am
I don't ever remember it being the underwriters place to write the lending criteria?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Grey Haired Underwriter | 25 Jan 2012 2:07 pm
To seagull - my apologies - I had just finished with a particularly rude broker and was reading some of the comments to calm down. Unfortunately I left the bias from the previous call feed into my response and should say that the single minded brokers do tend to be in the minority and create a nuisance far larger than their profiles deserve. I am reminded of this by a call today where another broker let me know that he was concerned about part of a case and didn't want us to 'tar him with the applicant's brush'. I must learn to temper my comments with balance.
May I also say how much I agree with your sentiments about the machine minders that now pass for underwriters. The concern there is as to whether they have the experience to know the good from the bad and as to how they will react to direct broker contact.
To Luke however I must point out that Underwriters tend to say yes far more often than they say no. If they didn't say yes you would have no market.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment