FCA promises tough action as it takes control of consumer credit
So they are ‘forcing a quarter of the companies out of the industry’. Let me guess, they will then increase the fees and levies to the remaining companies. Well more specifically the mortgage and insurance brokers. We were all told that the FCA taking over the CCL was to clamp down on high interest payday loan companies and not to worry.
Then the fee structure gets leaked any broker wanting to do anything other than standard residential full repayment mortgages is deemed high risk and could see not only the yearly licence fee rocket but also a massive increase in monthly payments!
I fear a decent sized proportion of the quarter of companies that will be forced out will be honest hard working mortgage brokers who are faced with paying massive amounts out in FCA fees and huge amounts of red tape and regulation or jacking it in to leave the industry.
Had the FSA done a proper job back on M-day would we be in this situation now? If someone had thought ‘this self-cert malarkey could be a bit risky’ would it have mushroomed as it did? Who can brokers question about this? To whom can we seek redress?
Well if we speak to the FCA, we will no doubt get a rather harsh visit from them. We could speak to our trade bodies like IFS, CII and AMI who as good as they are and I really do mean that, are largely toothless when it comes to the FCA. Would there be anyone that could help brokers fight their corner against these new impositions?
Voice of the people
Ask the Experts: How can I lure clients away from comparison sites?
The quality of a product and the benefit of proper advice are the two things that a comparison site cannot guarantee. GI providers should be helping brokers more with this.
It’s all well and good talking about it in an industry blog but providers need to be giving brokers the tools to compete. Uinsure do this well with their Defaqto tool which gives info against the whole market that both broker and client can understand.
Steve Johnson
Repossessed often architects of own destruction not victims – FCA
An inkling of intelligence and common sense at the FCA? Someone been out in the real world have they? Whatever next? Lenders don’t have much more than the regulator as past behaviour demonstrates.
Dave H
House prices jump 6.8% in a year – ONS
I am a financial adviser specialising in mortgages based in South Yorkshire and am aware that different regions show different levels of house price growth. What does concern me is the valuations being put on properties by the valuers.
When advising a client you often have to give them a reality check in respect to property prices by looking at house price sales in the area, regional indexes provided by Nationwide, Halifax and Land Registry, however taking all this into account properties being down valued are still an issue.
Some lenders have an appeals process where three comparables have to be provided but 99 times out of 100 a valuer will not reconsider, and will not divulge the comparable properties they have used and will not justify their valuation of the property.
This makes a mockery of the whole process and as far as the client and often advisers are concerned the professionalism of valuers concerned. I would welcome comments from valuers to explain why they refuse to justify their decisions to advisers or lenders.
Steve
TMW axes buy-to-let maturity age limits
I find it somewhat contradictory that Mr Jordan realises that clients wish to use BTL as part of their pension strategy but bars people of pensionable age from using the service.
A self-employed client may work past age 70 and defer taking pension until after age 70, the intention is then to use some TFC as deposit for BTL property. If they cannot access funding the maximum age limit is redundant.
Similarly a client may be repaying mortgages (residential or BTL) at present to past age 70 with a view to then building a portfolio using equity and savings to raise deposits for new purchases. Again this post retirement strategy is blocked.
Age 90 suited clients as they generally expected to have either redeemed of have sold by his age, The upper limit removal is laudable as it allows persons to have long term income security but the lower limit for application is a retrograde step for clients using BTL as a retirement strategy. Surely the risk to the lender and the suitability of the product for the client is the best criteria to start from?
Ronnie Forrest
Thank you for your comments this week
