Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

CBA champions new broker practising certificate

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 23 Feb 2012, 06:00 AM Agree 0
The Commonwealth Bank has called on the MFAA to introduce a new 'Certified Practising Certificate' across the broker market, to improve broker ability to submit quality applications
  • brokerboy | 23 Feb 2012, 10:13 AM Agree 0
    yep thats just what we need more certificates, how about maybe making sure credit assessors and loan processes meet a standard set by brokers.
  • Mark Lewis | 23 Feb 2012, 10:16 AM Agree 0
    I think this is a great idea for Brokers as it will improve timeframes, I think the banks need to realise some complex structures will need re-working and may need to additional credit work but the majority of loans should be submitted ready for approval.

    Mark Lewis
    Director / MFAA Credit Adviser™ (CA)
    Zar Mortgage Brokers - Australian Credit Licence No: 385365

    P – 1800 180 927
    W – www.zar.com.au
  • Scott Hawkanson | 23 Feb 2012, 10:17 AM Agree 0
    So the file being touched 10 times is ALL the brokers fault?
  • Darren | 23 Feb 2012, 10:18 AM Agree 0
    How does CBA's conversion figures compare with other banks? That may provide insight as to which lenders have better systems. It is easy to blame the broker. How many times do lenders ask for information that has already been provided, or for information that is not on their checklist, and not relevant to the deal????
  • Peter Fast | 23 Feb 2012, 10:20 AM Agree 0
    I'd be interested to know the statistics on branch processing accuracy just to put the matter into perspective. The idea has merit but where there's a title there's a fee opportunity.
  • John Robbo | 23 Feb 2012, 10:23 AM Agree 0
    You have to laugh at all the requirements that the CBA want on their brokers. They want us to skill up etc at our own cost - but don't require the same levels of qualifications / competencies from THEIR OWN STAFF.
  • Brad Q | 23 Feb 2012, 10:26 AM Agree 0
    that sounds fine... but if a broker supplies everything on the submission checklist, you cant turn around and say its bad submission quality when the assessor then asks for more information...can you?
  • Jerry | 23 Feb 2012, 10:26 AM Agree 0
    Are they pre-empting an excuse to cut commissions? I'd like to know how the submission quality of their branch staff stacks up. I'd also like to know how these 'straight through processing' stats could be improved by having better trained staff in the back office. In my last dealing with CBA, I had to spend close to an hour on the phone with the assessor and her supervisor explaining to them, how the client's income should be calculated. Fortunately the deal got approved in the end, but it did leave me wondering how many deals get turned away due to untrained staff
  • John | 23 Feb 2012, 10:26 AM Agree 0
    About time, as long as it is taken into consideration. I try to submit a quality application every time, whatever bank I use, and I get angry when banks place restrictions based on quantity, as a means to quantify quality (The more they lodge means they must be better at it). I argue that 1 quality application is worth more than 10 poorly submitted applications. Instead of segmenting based on quantity, it should be based on quality.
  • oldBroker | 23 Feb 2012, 10:37 AM Agree 0
    Why don't CBA invest in front-end improvements to submission software so that bad/incorrect deals cannot get through. The more validation up-front, the better quality the deals will be that get through. CBA needs to get their own house in-order before they externalise the blame.
  • David | 23 Feb 2012, 10:42 AM Agree 0
    The premise is that it is the fault of the broker for all of the rework. I'm all for a straight through process but I think that the CBA needs to take a look internally instead of perennially telling brokers they don't know what they're doing.
  • Michael Keating | 23 Feb 2012, 10:59 AM Agree 0
    CBAs retail network lenders last time I heard had a 70% submission quality. In my opinion the Brokers that are left in this industry genuinely try to get this right every time.
    Michael Keating, Better Finance Brokers
  • Donut | 23 Feb 2012, 11:02 AM Agree 0
    I think the same could be said for the CBA Credit Assessors and the document collection and retention area as that bank always are asking for documents that have already been submitted.
  • JBJB | 23 Feb 2012, 11:06 AM Agree 0
    Rather than encourange brokers to support and use CBA, this is the normal complaint about quality submissions. We've got 20 lenders to choose from, not 1. CBA's BDM's often wonder why assessors or credit are asking for more documentation. Get closer to the loan submission rockface and you will find there are many shades of grey, much as you would like the one perfect gold brick deal.
  • Larry Terrance | 23 Feb 2012, 11:33 AM Agree 0
    When the CBA improves the standard of their assessors, they can start talking about brokers improving lodgement standards.
  • PC | 23 Feb 2012, 11:50 AM Agree 0
    Of course the MFAA will agree to this as it will mean more money to them by way of education fees.
    I wish the MFAA would stop bowing to the Big Banks, especially CBA, my prediction is that the Broker space will soon be run entirely by the banks and we will no longer be independent.
    Perhaps keeping assessors in Australia where English is the first language might solve a few problems too.
  • melo | 23 Feb 2012, 11:50 AM Agree 0
    Mfaa already introduced Dipoloma which basicaly is certfified practising broker certificate?Personaly think ,CBa need to simplfy process ,paperwork and all unneceasary requirement they have.This what stops file numerous times.Ie one pay slip,ytd income,last years tax returns only for SE,no statements for non refiancing loans ,5 page consent form amd how about 100% offset?
  • A Broker | 23 Feb 2012, 11:59 AM Agree 0
    As I've said before, I'm happy enough to use CBA despite being one of the proles that doesn't enjoy 'Diamond' status. However, perhaps they need to look as some of their own systems before blaming brokers for files being touched up to 10 times with the average file going to Credit 1.4 times. COLA can be very frustrating to use, especially for things like pre-approvals where loans amounts may change prior to the deal being bedded down.
  • Kate | 23 Feb 2012, 12:39 PM Agree 0
    Most times delay is due to being asked many times for items already received by the bank - and noted on their system! Conversion rates also rely keavily on a very unsatisfactory valuation system. Sometimes deals fall due to the inconsistency in the valuation process, which does not allow us to predict outcomes easily. Banks, Asic, MFAA are all making money from brokers and placing ridiculous responsibilities upon them. How about raising the commissions to reflect the work, clean up your processess and start treating your brokers like valuable clients
  • Steve McClure | 23 Feb 2012, 12:57 PM Agree 0
    It's a problem of skill sets. Brokers usually have a greater capacity to generate business and clients than most bankers or processors. However, it follows that brokers usually have poorer micro-skills. Yet, we are increasingly occupying a broker's time with their less proficient ability. The remuneration is not high enough, except in the case of long established brokers to employ processors. The panacea is creditworthy volumes but this often has no relationship to quality data input. Both sides of the debate need to work on resolving the systems, rather than compromising skill sets. Commission cuts will lead neither to better business or even better processing in the bigger picture.
  • Peter White FBAA National President | 23 Feb 2012, 04:14 PM Agree 0
    Why would any Association take over the responsibility of the lender's credit training obligations to their broker network - especially handing it to an Association that by its own admission has no practical lending background or practical lending skills - in fact admitance to me that they have never ever written a loan themself - gee that would make a great certificate on the wall - "hey congratulations Mr Broker your a certified expert loan writter , not that we'd know as we've never written a loan ourselves - but we're pretty sure you are anyway !" !!
    Sorry harsh I know but all the Directors and National Executives of the FBAA are active or been long term active loan writers in one form or another with an average Director having at least 25+yrs practical lending experience in this industry ... and for the critics yes I have been invovled in banking and writing loans since 1979 and still involved today in niche markets !!
    It wasn't that long ago CBA were in the press stating their systems and training would basicaly take care of poor broker submissions they were getting. Hmm that must not have work so let's get someone else to do it - not.
    Slackness in supplying hwat is required is never a good thing nor acceptable from a broker, but I suspect it is the various systems being used by different banks and varying requirements varying degrees of bank staff compentencies are the bigger issues to deal with. One answer might be consistancy between banks/lenders - one common platform one common application form one common list of requirements one common process - be hard to screw that up. Brokers being constantly asked to resubmit information already supplied is incompetence somewhere. Cert IV is the recognised as a minimum educational requirement by ASIC, Diploma is only an option NOT MANDATORY BY LAW under the NCCP and a diploma will not fix poor applications being submitted. Greater experience, better more focused training by those responsibile to conduct it ... Banks, BDMS maybe. I dont hear the non-bank sector screaming the same issues - maybe their training and systems are far superior to the banks so maybe the banks should take a leaf out of their books on this ?
    Blaming the brokers is not the answer, getting someone else to do you work is not the answer especially when they dont have this skillset to do it, taking responsibility for your own issues and doing something about it yourself is.
  • Noel | 23 Feb 2012, 04:22 PM Agree 0
    So the restrictions placed on brokers by way of minimum deals per quarter to improve quality did not work. Do not need to be a genius to work that out. As most everyone else has mentioned, streamlined processes, and a workable credit policy will assist, together with an improved assessment process.
Post a reply