Mortgage Brokers

<html><body>
Australian homeowners are skeptical about receiving unbiased advice from a bank when it comes to refinancing a home loan, according to research commissioned Mortgage Choice.

The research reveals two out of five (38%) homeowners are either in the process of refinancing or are considering making the move to a new loan.

However, 53% of homeowners are wary that if they speak to a bank they won’t be advised if they could get a similar or better home loan deal elsewhere. One in two (49%) homeowners feel that banks don’t always have their best interests at heart.

High levels of trust for mortgage brokers 

The survey results confirmed that a significant majority (94%) of Australian homeowners say they trust the loan recommendations made by a mortgage broker.

For half (55%) of the respondents surveyed, the number one benefit of partnering with a mortgage broker during the refinancing process is professional support comparing loan options, rates and features. For 45% of refinancers, a mortgage broker streamlines the process, “saving time and hassle”.

“Faced with what can be an overwhelming choice of home loans, homeowners want to be confident they are making the move to a loan that will improve their financial wellbeing through a lower rate, improved loan features, or both," Susan Mitchell, CEO of Mortgage Choice said.

“While banks can provide information on their own product suite, they do not have an in-depth understanding of competitors’ products. That is why I urge borrowers in the market for a better deal to engage the help of an experienced mortgage broker to learn what other options they have,” she added.
</body></html>

Mortgage Choice found 53% of homeowners are wary that if they speak to a bank they won’t be advised if they could get a similar or better home loan deal elsewhere

urban.com.au

Australians are skeptical about receiving unbiased refinancing advice from banks

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
Labor's Bowen and Shorten had insisted they'd adopt all of the Royal Commission recommendations sight unseen - a pretty much ill-advised idea when you think about it - ostensibly because they wanted to be seen as 'tough' on the banks, but just as likely to put pressure on the government to clamp down on lending and credit further.
What the ALP think-tanks hadn't foreseen is the major banks getting off relatively lightly and some cataclysmic reforms recommended for the mortgage broking industry, especially in terms of commission structure.
The initial reaction from Bowen, on his Twitter feed, seemed to misread the mood:
<div>
<div class="separator"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dsgb5a4Mt4Y/XFyPFXaKgdI/AAAAAAAAuWI/vgdeNgBxAHM9NNI2GOoMwVEAPG3HpLHdQCLcBGAs/s1600/CB.jpg"><img src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dsgb5a4Mt4Y/XFyPFXaKgdI/AAAAAAAAuWI/vgdeNgBxAHM9NNI2GOoMwVEAPG3HpLHdQCLcBGAs/s640/CB.jpg" width="640" height="122" data-original-height="138" data-original-width="721"></a></div>
<div class="separator"> </div>
<div class="separator">The Coalition (and apparently even the Reserve Bank Governor) believe that ramming through such wholesale changes to the broking industry warrant caution, since they'd reduce competition in the market, line the pockets of the 4 major banks as they carve up more market share, and decimate the mortgage broking industry, putting thousands of brokers out of business.</div>
</div>
<div>
 My view is that overwhelmingly brokers add value to consumers, and help borrowers to navigate the maze. Some of the information put forward by the banks during the hearings was misguided at best, misleading at worst. Although naturally a 'best interest' test must be enforced, the existing model is superior to a potential fee-for-service alternative.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It'll be interesting to see whether Bowen is so in favour of implementing all recommendations now.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>If I was a betting man I'd say the ALP will demur on this point, or give a waffling or non-committal answer...else they'll face instantly losing the votes of 16,000 brokers. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Of course, they might well decide that they don't need those votes anyway given signals from internal polling, but let's see what their response is, if any. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>PETE WARGENT is the co-founder of AllenWargent property buyers (London, Sydney) and a best-selling author and <a href="https://petewargent.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">blogger</a>.</div>
</body></html>

pwargent-M4siyDbqQY

Royal Commission backfires on mortgage broker reform: Pete Wargent

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER 
<div id="post-body-6541198538703456871" class="post-body entry-content">
<div>What a win it's been for the major banks last week.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Hearteningly there's been sensible commentary aplenty about the misguided recommendations on the structure of mortgage broking, which don't make any sense with a 'real world' hat on. </div>
 <div class="separator"><img src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pL1yB52iNFg/XF1iUBBmg3I/AAAAAAAAuWU/6sYwVipdspstnDR_2fu2Cp6ffJpVlmJcQCLcBGAs/s640/CBA2.jpg" width="640" height="364" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1403"></div>
 <div>
As prominent industry stalwart John Manciameli has pointed out, imagine the outcry when banks raise mortgage rates off the cuff by 50 basis points on 'funding cost pressures' (or whatever) and customers have to pay another $5,000 fee to refinance out of their loan (leaving the borrower paying $10,000 just to get in and out of the deal). Just one of a thousand potentially daft scenarios. 
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Everyone agrees that there should be a 'best interest' imperative for mortgage brokers. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>But commission structures should be left alone, and the scenarios being discussed would just load even more power into the four major banks. If broking ain't broke...</div>
<div> </div>
<div>PETE WARGENT is the co-founder of AllenWargent property buyers (London, Sydney) and a best-selling author and <a href="https://petewargent.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">blogger</a>.</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Banks flying high; mortgage brokers thrashed: Pete Wargent

<html><body>
ASIC has published regulatory guidance to assist in the application of the new best interests duty for mortgage brokers, which is set to come into effect in 2021.
The new obligations were legislated by Parliament, in direct response to recommendations made by the Financial Services Royal Commission.
From 1 January 2021 mortgage brokers will be required to act in the best interests of consumers and to prioritise consumers' interests when providing credit assistance.
Consistent with this legislation, the guidance is high level and principles-based, but also incorporates practical worked examples.
The purpose of the guidance is to explain the obligations introduced by the Government – it does not prescribe minimum standards of conduct, nor does it impose new or additional obligations.
Regulatory Guide 273 Mortgage brokers: Best interests duty (RG 273) contains ASIC’s views on how mortgage brokers may comply with their best interests obligations at key stages of the credit assistance process.
It provides guidance on:
<ul>
<li>the effect of the range of credit providers and products brokers can access</li>
<li>recommending packages of credit products</li>
<li>the types of records that may be kept to demonstrate compliance.</li>
</ul>
‘These are important and timely reforms for the mortgage broking industry and for customers shopping for a loan. This reform was legislated by the Parliament to improve the quality of credit assistance provided to consumers. ASIC supports that objective,’ said ASIC Commissioner Sean Hughes.
‘Consumers rightly expect mortgage brokers to act in their best interests and ASIC’s guidance describes how we expect them to do so. Under these new obligations, let there be no doubt – the consumer must always come first.
‘We released this regulatory guide as early as effectively possible, to help industry prepare on a timely basis for the best interests duty and related obligations before January 2021.’
From 1 January 2021, ASIC will closely monitor conduct and outcomes to ensure mortgage brokers are complying effectively with the best interests duty.
Alongside the new guidance, ASIC has also published a report responding to feedback received during the consultation process.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

ASIC unveils guidance scheme for mortgage brokers in preparation for royal commission-backed legislation 

<html><body>
Australian mortgage broker, Aussie, has launched a major expansion plan to recruit 200 new brokers in 2020 and increase retail stores to 300 nationally by 2023, as its business model proves to be resilient during the COVID-19 crisis.
“Our brokers are self-employed, however they are far from operating alone. We have always provided industry leading training, support, and mentoring to help them get their businesses up and running. We believe providing our newest brokers remuneration during this period will help give them the kick start they need to become successful and long-term brokers with Aussie,” said Aussie CEO James Symond.
On the successful completion of the training program, recruits will be qualified for a Certificate IV in Mortgage Broking and could be on their way to a full Diploma in Mortgage Broking over a 12-month period.
“We’re delighted to be providing people the opportunity to gain new skills and qualifications, particularly during this time,” added Mr Symond.
The recruitment campaign is part of Aussie’s larger investment campaign into technology, marketing, and broker support.
“We are increasingly receiving inquiries from new and existing customers keen to take advantage of historically low interest rates and understand their options,” Mr Symond concluded.
</body></html>

wdavis-8cCN98p7xp

Mortgage broker Aussie launch major expansion plan

<html><body>
ASIC has cancelled the Australian financial services (AFS) licence of Warrnambool-based, Southern Mortgages Ltd (SML), for failure to comply with financial services laws.
The licence cancellation was effective from 24 September 2019.
SML had not complied with a number of important financial services laws over a significant period of time. It did not maintain sufficient financial resources. It failed to lodge its financial statements and audit reports for consecutive years since 30 June 2015.
SML had also not complied with its obligation to hold membership of a dispute resolution system.
"A responsible entity must carry on their duties with reasonable care and diligence. This includes actively monitoring each scheme and, where necessary, winding up a scheme that is no longer viable in a timely manner."
"ASIC took action to cancel the licence of SML because we formed the view it was not completing the wind up of the Scheme in a timely manner, nor continuing to comply with their core duties as a licensee," said ASIC Commissioner Danielle Press.
Under the terms of the licence cancellation, SML can continue limited operations until 24 March 2020 to facilitate the winding up.
SML held an AFS licence number Since 31 January 2004.
</body></html>

ASIC cancel Southern Mortgages Ltd's AFS licence

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
Today the Treasurer has outlined how the government will make sure that banks, insurers and mortgage brokers act fairly and provide services that help, rather than harm, the people they serve.
The Royal Commission was clear - Australians deserve better. We need mortgage brokers to act in the interests of their clients, banks to face real consequences when they break their promises and an end to aggressive sales cultures that leave people with products they don’t need.
We are glad that the Government has committed to move fast on key reforms like stronger professional obligations for mortgage brokers.
Reform to the mortgage broking sector is urgent. We’ve known since ASIC’s 2017 investigation that mortgage brokers fail to get their clients better interest rates and arrange riskier loans. 
Forcing this sector to act in the best interest of consumers will lead to more people getting a better deal on their home loan.
The faster these reforms are legislated, the sooner consumers will be better protected from the practices revealed at the Royal Commission.
But the path to reform won’t be easy, with industry lobbyists already fighting change. 
We’ve seen industry lobbyists try and water down every single reform to their sector. We saw it just this weekend with financial advice groups pushing back against new bare-minimum education standards for their profession.
Commissioner Hayne warned that industry groups would attempt to undermine the reforms he recommended by arguing for loopholes or exemptions.
The Federal Government will need to stand strong against industry pressure to ensure that the Royal Commission recommendations are implemented effectively.
Ensuring that the financial sector lives up to community expectations was a major focus of the Royal Commission.
The community expects the Government to stand up for the rights of customers and today is a good start.
The only way to solve the problems uncovered in the Banking Royal Commission is to make sure these reforms are passed as intended, as rapidly as possible.
Alan Kirkland is the CEO of Choice, a leading consumer advocacy group.
 
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

Reform to the mortgage broking sector is urgent: Choice CEO Alan Kirkland

<html><body>
The Mortgage and Finance Association of Australia (MFAA) has announced the mortgage broker channel has achieved its highest ever residential home loan market share despite the toughest of market conditions. 
The mortgage broker channel has recorded its highest ever residential home loan market share result with brokers settling six out of 10 mortgages in Australia (59.7%) during the January – March 2019 quarter.  Susan Mitchell, chief executive officer at Mortgage Choice said she is delighted to see that support for brokers has grown in recent months. 
"Currently, six out of ten Australians select the services of a broker to write their home loan and more than 90% of mortgage broker customers are happy with the service they receive. “The MFAA’s data is a true reflection of the trust customers place in the ability of mortgage brokers to meet their needs and is a testament to the high calibre of professionalism within this industry.  “In what must be described as the strongest customer vote of confidence yet in the mortgage broker channel, the future looks bright for the country’s 17,000 brokers,” said Ms Mitchell.  The mortgage broking industry contributes $2.9 billion to the Australian economy each year, according to Deloitte Access Economics.   “These new figures highlight the significant contribution the mortgage broking channel delivers to the Australian economy, especially in the context of a weaker overall property market and at a time when tougher lending practices are at play and credit is restricted," Mitchell added. "Brokers enable Australians to invest in property and secure the home of their dreams because they offer choice, expert advice and valuable services during the increasingly complex journey to home ownership.  “As housing affordability continues to challenge many home buyers, brokers perform a vital service at no cost to the borrower. 
"This includes a unique combination of  choice and  price discovery, coupled with the experience and expertise to help guide them through an increasingly complex environment."
</body></html>

Mortgage brokers settling record six out of 10 mortgages

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
What a backdown.
On Tuesday, with all the grace he could muster, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg declared that he wouldn’t be implementing as many of the banking royal commission recommendations as he had said he would.
As he <a href="http://jaf.ministers.treasury.gov.au/media-release/040-2019/" target="_blank">put it</a>:
"Following consultation with the mortgage broking industry and smaller lenders, the Coalition Government has decided to not prohibit trail commissions on new loans, but rather review their operation in three years’ time."
Trail commissions are the small annual payments lenders make to mortgage brokers to reward them for loans they have arranged, typically between 0.165% and 0.275% of the amount outstanding per year.
They are paid in addition to the upfront commission, which is typically between 0.65% and 0.7% of the amount lent.
On a loan of A$500,000 they could amount to A$1000 per year, a payment which, in the words of Royal Commissioner Kenneth Hayne is “<a href="https://financialservices.royalcommission.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx" target="_blank">money for nothing</a>”.
Hayne recommended that the borrower, not the lender, pay the mortgage broker a fee. Trail commissions would be axed straight away, and after a period of two or three years upfront commissions would go too.
In responding to the report on Day 1, Frydenberg more or less endorsed Hayne’s recommendation.
From July 1, 2020, the government would <a href="https://static.treasury.gov.au/uploads/sites/1/2019/02/FSRC-Government-Response-1.pdf" target="_blank">outlaw trail commissions on new loans</a>.
It would ask the Council of Financial Regulators and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to review the impact of the changes and implications of moving to complete borrower-pays remuneration in three years time.
The backdown means trail commissions are also safe for three years, which, given the likelihood of another lobbying campaign from brokers in three years time, means they are probably safe forever.
There’s a case against commissions
Anyone who has seen the movie “The Big Short” has seen a dramatic and only somewhat fictional representation of what can go wrong in the mortgage broking industry.
In that rendition, a bunch of highly incentivised, all care and no responsibility brokers help borrowers get loans they have no reasonable ability to repay. The brokers make out like bandits and the world economy is brought to the brink of total collapse.
We can all agree that was a bad outcome. According to Hayne, the problem with commissions is that they make brokers act in their <a href="https://financialservices.royalcommission.gov.au/Pages/reports.aspx" target="_blank">own interests</a>, rather than those of their customers.
But commissions are common…
It’s a legitimate concern, but let’s not forget that a range of actors in the economy act in their own interests all the time. Consumers buying everything from orange juice to health insurance to television sets act in their own interests. And firms selling them do too. Many pay their sales staff commissions.
Deferred commissions are common too. For executives, they ensure that they have something at risk after their term of services. For mortgage brokers, they create an incentive to recommend loans their customers won’t later switch out of.
Hayne thought that wouldn’t be needed. He recommended (and the government agreed) that the law be amended to require mortgage brokers to act in the best interests of borrowers.
It’s a nice idea, but tricky to police. It might be better to properly align the incentives to ensure the interests of the broker and borrower coincide, which is the position the government has belatedly adopted.
If it keeps commissions, as it now seems determined to do, it might need to apply some latitude to the term “best interests”. It is hard to require brokers to act in the literal best interests of their clients when the best loans for many of them will be the cheapest – mortgages from lenders that don’t pay commissions.
…and so is politics
The politics are complicated. Mortgage brokers account for more than half of all new mortgages written.
Notwithstanding the desire to look tough and adopt all of the Hayne recommendations, both sides of politics are aware that brokers are typically small(ish) business people of the kind they usually court aggressively, and that many would not survive having to charge upfront fees.
If the old adage is right, that the most dangerous place is between a politician and a camera, then another fairly hazardous spot is between a voter and property.
Mortgage brokers play an important role. At their best they help borrowers get better terms and inject some competition into an otherwise very concentrated banking market.
But if their incentives are not well-aligned then things can go awry, Big Short style.
We’ll have to wait
The best solution might be to make sure brokers get paid for getting their clients a good mortgage, rather than just a big mortgage.
This could involve “bands” of commissions based on mortgage size, rather than a bigger commission for every extra dollar borrowed.
And it could involve “skin in the game” where the size of the repayment is related to the commission.
Doing nothing would be a bad idea. So too might be doing something radical as Hayne has proposed.
But nothing might be exactly what we’ll get. The Coalition appears to have put off designing a proper commission structure for the next three years in order to buy some peace.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113544/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-its-one-thing-to-back-down-on-haynes-recommendation-about-mortgage-brokers-its-another-to-offer-nothing-in-its-place-113544" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

rh-YsoTT2xMuQ

It’s one thing to back down on Hayne’s recommendation about mortgage brokers, it’s another to offer nothing in its place: Richard Holden

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The Hayne Royal Commission began and ended with strident criticism of the mortgage broking industry.
It recommended brokers be required to act in the “best interests” of intending borrowers, and that intending borrowers, rather than the successful lender, pay the broker’s fee.
So-called “trailing” annual payments from lenders would be outlawed as soon as possible and upfront commissions outlawed after two or three years.
It’s the only set of recommendations the government has been lukewarm about adopting, announcing instead that while brokers will be required to act in the best interests of borrowers and from July 1 2020 will no longer be able to accept new trailing commissions, decisions about upfront commissions will be delayed until a further review, to take place “in three years time”.
The government is right to be cautious.
What’s the problem with commissions?
Both the royal commission and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission are concerned commissions:
<ul>
<li>encourage brokers to recommend mortgages that borrowers cannot plausibly afford</li>
<li>cause the broker to recommend higher paying products over lower paying products, potentially to the detriment of borrowers.</li>
</ul>
So what’s the go with brokers?
Typically a borrower approaches a broker who works with banks to secure a loan.
According to ASIC, the method of payment is fairly standard:
<ul>
<li>the broker receives a commission from banks for each successful home loan. The commission is often divided into an upfront payment and a trailing commission, which is paid over time</li>
<li>the lender benefits because it can spread its commission expenses over time and can also terminate commissions if it believes a broker has behaved badly</li>
<li>the commission rates are relatively similar across lenders, with upfront commissions typically ranging from 0.46% to 0.65% of the loan amount, about $3,000 on a $500,000 loan. Trailing commissions typically range from 0.1% to 0.35% of the ongoing loan, about $1,000 per year on a $500,000 loan</li>
<li>lenders can also offer bonus payments, loyalty payments and “soft dollar commissions” which take many forms, including overseas conferences and holidays, shopping vouchers and tickets to sporting events</li>
<li>loan aggregators can also play a role. They provide back-office support and ancillary services to brokers. Some are partly owned by banks. These banks receive a slightly larger share of loans from brokers who deal with these aggregators than from brokers that don’t.</li>
</ul>
In practice brokers often provide good service
ASIC research finds that regardless of the conflicted remuneration structure the interest rates brokers obtain for clients are not significantly worse (or better) than those obtained by borrowers who deal with banks direct.
Their clients are slightly different, on average two years younger than bank clients and with incomes about A$6,000 lower. Brokers’ clients borrow slightly more than direct bank clients and their loans are more likely to be interest only.
Although until now legislation has not compelled brokers to act in clients’ best interests, other professional standards often do so.
And brokers are keen to get referrals and repeat business, which relies on brokers providing good service in the first place.
They’ve little incentive to push bad loans
Because banks compete for business, they tend to pay similar commissions, in much the same way as they tend to charge similar interest rates. It means that in practice there is isn’t much incentive for a broker to recommend one lender over another. This is especially so when you factor in the desire to get repeat business, and referrals, which they would lose if they pushed poor products.
And it is hard to recommend unnecessary loans. Borrowers usually come to brokers to arrange loans for homes they are already planning to buy. There aren’t that many extra dollars in recommending clients borrow more, and even if brokers did recommend higher loans they would still be subject to banks’ serviceability and equity checks.
At the moment banks are highly reluctant to lend large sums at high loan-to-valuation ratios.
All this means that commissions have a muted effect on brokers’ lending recommendations, with conflicts being ameliorated by the practical reality of commission homogenisation and the desire for repeat business and referrals.
And if commissions went…
If commissions went, brokers would have to be paid by borrowers.
Many borrowers would baulk at the fees, and would go to banks instead. This would increase banks’ costs, which could be passed on through additional borrowing fees. It would also increase the time borrowers must devote to sorting through potential lenders.
Some borrowers who lack financial expertise would then have to rely on banks’ advice, rather than brokers’; and, banks are hardly less independent about their products than are brokers.
It would be the smaller brokers that would suffer the most, some going out of business. Larger brokers would also be affected, but less so, due to economies of scale. The end result would be fewer brokers and less access to advice.
It’d be an unintended consequence of what Hayne recommended, and perhaps an unnecessary one.
While there are always bad apples in every industry, removing commissions would be a blunt – and potentially unnecessary – instrument with plenty of downsides. <img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111631/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Mark Humphery-Jenner, Associate Professor of Finance, UNSW
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/honest-brokers-why-mortgage-broker-commissions-arent-the-problem-111631" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Mortgage Brokers

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Mortgage Brokers

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News