Mortgage Solutions spoke to brokers Dan Gracie, co-founder of Pavilion Finance, and Chris Sykes, co-founder of MSP Financial Solutions, who highlighted the repetitive nature of some lender processes.
They described how brokers are often required to complete separate decision in principle (DIP), application and illustration forms despite much of the information being identical across each stage.
Gracie branded the process a “total mess”, arguing that older building societies were among the most frequent offenders when it came to relying on outdated systems and manual workarounds.
Sykes said: “It’s just archaic systems… It loops back to… lenders basically wasting brokers’ time.”
The pair argued that many lenders have introduced new forms and systems without replacing older processes, creating layers of administration rather than removing them.
£2.5m paid to help broker clients benefit from greener homes
Sponsored by Halifax Intermediaries
Gracie said: “They need to stop adding new policy to old policy. They need to replace old policy with new policy. They’ve all brought out these new forms, but they’re adding them to the old DIP system.”
Underwriting outweighs technology
While the discussion began with technology concerns, both brokers ultimately suggested that underwriting practices and communication have a greater impact on broker experience than the systems themselves.
Gracie argued that “a slick application system is no replacement for good underwriting or good communication”.
He said a lack of ownership within the underwriting process can create significant issues for brokers.
“A big issue for me is what I call a non-ownership underwriting approach,” he explained.
He described cases where one underwriter approved a DIP, only for another underwriter to take over later and adopt a completely different position.
“I’ve actually had an underwriter say: ‘I do not agree with the stance of my colleague on this’,” he said.
The brokers also criticised what they described as a piecemeal approach to information requests, where underwriters ask for documents one at a time rather than providing a complete list at the outset.
“They’ve got a list of 12 things they’re going to need to ask and they ask for the top one,” said Gracie.
The hidden cost of lender requests
According to Gracie, lenders often underestimate the impact their requests have on clients and advisers.
“I don’t think lenders think about the chain reaction from their knee-jerk request,” he said.
Gracie pointed to situations where a request for an accountant’s letter can trigger a lengthy chain of communication involving brokers, clients and accountants, adding both delay and cost to the process.
He added: “It can be standard procedures that don’t make sense, or an overzealous person asking for more than is needed.”
The discussion also touched on lender portals and secure messaging systems, with brokers arguing that tasks such as responding to straightforward queries can take several minutes because of multiple logins, two-factor authentication requirements and separate document-upload systems.
Sykes said these systems can become a deciding factor when choosing between lenders.
“If it comes down to two lenders, I might choose the lender that doesn’t have one of these systems because it makes it really difficult to get the client’s work done as quickly as they want it,” he said.
Relationships remain critical
One underwriter, Gracie recalled, phoned him directly and advised him to ignore several standard document requests because they were unnecessary for the case in question.
Gracie said business development managers (BDMs) can also play a crucial role in improving outcomes.
“I’ve had some business development managers before where a case has declined and they’ve called me and gone: ‘I don’t think they should have declined that’,” he said.
He argued that lenders should make greater use of broker feedback, particularly from experienced advisers who understand how competitor lenders operate and where processes can be improved.
The conversation concluded with both brokers agreeing that while lenders are investing heavily in technology, successful intermediary relationships still depend on people.
Gracie continued: “There are some really poor systems out there that cause us a lot of hassle. There are many lenders fixing their systems. But those fixes don’t replace good relationships, common sense, appetite to lend and communication.”
