View more on these topics

Barclays gives brokers direct access to underwriters

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.”


Claims firms responsible for nearly half of FOS cases

Claims management companies accounted for almost half of all cases received by the Financial Ombudsman Service during 2011. Figures cited in a review of FOS by the National Audit Office last week show claims firms generated 45% of complaints to FOS last year, compared with 43% that came directly from consumers. The number of complaints […]

Woolwich offers its 75% deals via direct channel

Woolwich says it will relaunch its 75% LTV buy-to-let range through brokers as soon as it can, after relaunching the deals through its direct channel last week. The lender was forced to pull its 75% LTV deals in November, less than a month after launching them, to manage service levels. It suffered another setback earlier […]

Navigating volatility

The making of any fund can be seen in how it responds to crises and opportunities. In this short video, Head of Multi Asset at Royal London Asset Management Trevor Greetham outlines how the Royal London Global Multi Asset Portfolios or GMAPs navigated through Brexit and the US election cycle. He also highlights the importance […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up
  • Post a comment
  • Grey Haired Underwriter 30th January 2012 at 2:06 pm

    Seagull – I go back to the three canons of credit and that seems to be unheard of. BTW I recognise CAMPARI but not sure about the addition of ICE.

  • Dazed & Confused 27th January 2012 at 4:24 pm

    One of my admin team hit upon a query that a Woolwich underwriter needed to talk to me about. I was given a direct line to speak to said underwriter. I phoned the number and it rang and rang and rang. I checked the number again with my admin team dialled again and it rang and rang and rang…That’s the wonder of the Woolwich I guess!

  • seagull 27th January 2012 at 4:07 am

    Grey Haired Underwriter, you have nothing to apologise for, sadly some brokers have no manners.
    I must say I think I should add the Grey Haired monicker to my name I seem to get reminders about how old I’m getting everyday.
    Was talking to a female underwriter the other day to attempt an appeal and told her that I had done a CAMPARI & ICE review of the file. When it was clear she had no idea what I was talking about I got worried that she might think I was making an improper proposition to her only to discover that the drink is a thing of the past as well!

  • Grey Haired Underwriter 25th January 2012 at 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.

  • Iain 25th January 2012 at 10:47 am

    I don’t ever remember it being the underwriters place to write the lending criteria?

  • seagull 24th January 2012 at 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.

  • Luke Atkinson 23rd January 2012 at 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!

  • Grey Haired Underwriter 23rd January 2012 at 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.

  • Hemat Natha 21st January 2012 at 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.

  • Bobby 21st January 2012 at 8:12 am

    Whats the betting the ” underwriter ” is in Bombay ?

  • Simon Lee 20th January 2012 at 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.

  • Luke Atkinson 20th January 2012 at 3:37 pm

    Will Barclays also be providing a Hindi translator with each case?

  • anon 20th January 2012 at 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.

  • Liam Smith 20th January 2012 at 11:41 am

    A good positive move forward. Well done Woolwich

  • Liam Smith 20th January 2012 at 11:41 am

    A good positive move forward. Well done Woolwich