Copy article

Mortgage brokers and lender panel removal

Journalist: Anna Sagar, Mortgage Solutions / Specialist Lending Solutions

ended 27. January 2023

Interested in getting mortgage brokers' thoughts on lender panel removal. 

A blog on Mortgage Solutions suggested that firms should be able to get broker references from regulators and providers about whether they have stopped dealing with them, noting that currently firms do not have this kind of transparency.

 https://www.mortgagesolutions.co.uk/better-business/2023/01/25/firms-should-be-able-to-obtain-broker-references-from-regulators-and-providers-wilkinson/

  1. What would be the pros and cons of references?
  2. Do you think there needs to be a better appeal process?

 

2 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Copy

Premium
Mark Hosker
Mortgage Adviser at Cyborg Finance
A reference would be desirable but not crucial. Mortgage advisers removed from panels should disclose it as nothing is gained by omission. The firm will find out ultimately, anyway.

Panel removals can be a severe risk to individual advisers. Our research showed that most panel removals occur even though the adviser is not "complicit" in fraud. They too, are being manipulated.

As such, The Industry Mortgage Lenders Association (IMLA) and the Association of Mortgage Intermediaries (AMI) have agreed upon a process for individual panel removals. Still, this process appears highly voluntary and is not being followed by many big-name lenders.

Halifax is reportedly a leader in broker rehabilitation, with a pragmatic and understanding procedure that works with intermediaries towards the joint goal of better standards.
Copy

Jonathan Burridge
Founding Adviser at We Are Money
Isn't the point of individual registration to provide a central record of licenced advisers? Providers are much more careful with panel removal than once they were, but still, panel removal can be prejudicial against the individual possibly excluding them from the industry. So, if a references system was introduced with the ambition of transparency it would perhaps give those individuals a route to understand and redress any unfair decision against them. If it helps exclude wronguns all the better. It will make the process of recruiting even more arduous, so, would it actually be beneficial for the vast majority of professional, fit and proper advisers looking to further their career or just make it harder and slower for their career progression?