The ordinary mortgage broker could be forgiven for feeling overlooked in the regulation melee. We hear sourcing systems going on about their technological masterpieces but where is the substance to back up the claims? Does it matter who had the first demonstration KFI if the broker has yet to be provided with a version of the system with which to become familiar?
Then there is the argument about online trading. I use the MTE regularly but primarily to obtain AIPs from lenders who don't have their own online system and it is slow, full of glitches and frequently results in having to print off an application form for postal submission. And if Mortgage Brain's 'verified' product details are anything to go by we won't be able to rely on it either. At a recent MBL roadshow I pointed out that a lender's old products were showing as verified after the withdrawal date while the new products were not showing as verified.
Then we have the networks preaching away but can they be trusted? I agree with recent comments about Network Data's commission and proc fee levels. Either Richard Griffiths and his team are terrible at negotiating terms or they are holding back a hefty chunk for themselves.
And what about the promises of compliance support? We went for direct authorisation and chose to work with a large network that offers compliance support service for DA firms – but now we are told the compliance manual won't be available until October. Emails asking for guidance on what should appear on our business stationery remain unanswered.
And is the only issue worth discussing in detail the accuracy of KFIs? If my only worry is being sued by an unhappy client because his KFI was £1.01 out then it's not such a big deal. Is this what FSA legislation boils down to? Admittedly Mortgage Strategy has covered issues concerning IDDs but this adds up to a few column inches compared with the volumes written on KFIs.
Good luck after Mortgage Day to all the ordinary brokers who have been let down in this shambles.
Name and address supplied