Mehrdad Yousefi,

Alliance & Leicester

There have been a number of fantastic achievements by the Mortgage Code Compliance Board (MCCB), in particular the introduction of the CeMap examinations. However, I note from the balance sheet section of the MCCB Review 1999-2004, the organisation had in excess of £4.7m in the bank as at 30 April 2004. Analysing its balance sheet between April and 31 October 2004, one estimates that the MCCB is left with surplus cash of £1.5m.

There are several options available. For example, the money could be either returned to more than 10,300 firms who registered with the MCCB or handed out as a donation to a charitable cause. Alternatively, why not donate the money to the Financial Services Authority (FSA) which, after all, is the successor to the MCCB and has the same objectives.

Being a fair-minded sort of chap, personally I feel the money should be returned to all mortgage intermediaries who renewed their registration with the MCCB in April 2004.

Alick Howard,

MDM Associates

Bearing in mind the amount of adverse press our industry gets (much of which seems to be based on sensationalism and a lack of understanding of the real issues), I feel it would be the best idea all round to donate the money to a charitable cause. Perhaps it would be appropriate to donate the money to a homeless charity, if this does not draw too much cynicism.

Due to the fact there are so many firms which may be due money, the administration alone would prove cumbersome. Along with this, there is always the possibility that some firms may argue they are due more than others. Is it worth it for just £26?

With regards to distributing the surplus to similar organisations such as the FSA, I think as an industry we pay more than enough in personal indemnity insurance, compensation levies and so on. A more deserving cause, to my mind, would be appropriate.

Colin Dale,

Skipton Building Society

The logical answer would be to give the money back to the subscribers who paid it to the MCCB in the first place. However, as the amounts involved would be somewhere in the region of £25 each, the costs of administering the refunds would not make this worthwhile. So, as it is the season of goodwill, the best option would be to give the £1m surplus to charity – perhaps one relevant to the housing industry, like Shelter, or one to help people in debt, like the Money Advice Trust.

Giving it to the FSA would also make sense, but only if this was then taken off the costs to lenders which, as said before, would be more administration than benefit. Also, some would argue the FSA already has enough money from subscriptions and certainly does not need any more.

Andrew Frankish,

Mortgage Talk

Thanks to the recent FSA regulations, brokers have collectively invested millions in their systems and infrastructure, for which there is no direct financial recompense other than charging fees to clients. Lenders, on the other hand, have the perfect answer. They can simply tweak their interest rates very marginally and recover all their costs and more.

The truth, however, is that it would be physically impossible to reimburse or compensate brokers for what they have expended. Having said that, with approximately 70% of brokers represented by the Association of Mortgage Intermediaries (AMI), an estimated £1m would go a long way towards properly resourcing the brokers’ trade body for the time and effort it has put into achieving a fair outcome under the new legislation.

In addition to this, with more and more of Britain’s approximately 38,000 broker firms taking up membership of the AMI, a windfall of this magnitude would enable the body to be a true representative of the profession.

Mark Harris,

Savills Private Finance

While £1m might sound like a lot of money, split between the registered 38,000 or so firms it works out at just over £25 each. I cannot see that it is worth the hassle of making out and posting all those cheques.

I would not hand the cash over to the FSA either. It is wealthy enough so it would not have much of an impact and would probably just get swallowed up in administration costs. I would be tempted to do the decent thing and plump for a charitable donation, particularly with Christmas almost upon us. The homeless charity Shelter, which is extremely busy at this time of year and needs all the help it can get, would be able to do a lot of good with such a sum and make a real difference to many needy people.

Andy Barr,

Chelsea Building Society

At this stage the £1m MCCB surplus figure is only an estimation and, as such, it is difficult to give a definitive answer.

Much has been said about where the money should go but it is only fair that the best interests of all parties are taken into account before a final decision is made. I would recommend a formal consultation in order to allow all stakeholders to input their opinions on what should happen with the money in order for a democratic decision to be made. As a mutual building society, it is a core part of our business ethos that we deliver benefit to the community in which we operate and with this in mind it is our opinion that the money be given to charity.

It is also important to remember that the administrative cost of calculating, dividing and distributing the money back to members would see the figure significantly reduce in size – another good reason to cut out this task and simply hand it over to a charity.