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

Consumer Action Law Centre takes aim at brokers

Notify me of new replies via email
Julia Corderoy | 11 Sep 2014, 08:17 AM Agree 0
A leading solicitor has rubbished claims about broker fees by the Consumer Action Law Centre
  • Clarke Kent | 11 Sep 2014, 09:13 AM Agree 0
    A vexed question but a valid one. They have used the service obtained the outcome paid nothing at the front end then refinanced and the broker loses his payment which was clearly disclosed upfront.

    I hope the brokers wins his case for all of us!
  • Insane | 11 Sep 2014, 09:16 AM Agree 0
    I wonder if this clown will let his client off the hook when they decide not to pay him for his advice or service. He will be the first one to take legal action against them for not doing so.

    Brokers have the right to get paid for the service they provide. So long as the clawback fee is disclosed to the client via a Credit Quote (which it appears to be the case here) and the client acknowledges the fee by signing the quote then they should be bound by the agreement and pay up!
  • Tony | 11 Sep 2014, 09:16 AM Agree 0
    It gets harder and harder to keep an open mind on consumer advocate organizations when outlandish and nonsensical comments are made especially when it comes from the top. So Chief Brody would have borrowers go directly to a Bank to get around claw back fees. And of course he knows the Bank will point out the best products available even if that Bank doesn't offer them? Joke!
  • SIDBROKER | 11 Sep 2014, 09:22 AM Agree 0
    Well put John. Thank you.
  • Country Broker | 11 Sep 2014, 09:26 AM Agree 0
    PLEASE stop giving solicitors who know nothing about mortgage broking publicity .

    A consumer with a 940K mortgage is not what I would call an inexperienced borrower .

    If the broker gave the client a copy of the agreement and explained it to them , it would seem to be a case of the consumer simply trying to get out of a contract which they were well aware of .
    If this solicitor was in practice and had a fee agreement signed would he /her say oh its Ok do not pay it , NO of course not .
  • Brado | 11 Sep 2014, 09:33 AM Agree 0
    Good one...
  • Steven | 11 Sep 2014, 09:59 AM Agree 0
    This is hilarious, it's a clear cut case of the consumer trying to get out of paying the fee that the broker as rightly earned. I think the solicitor acting for the consumer should lose his license for creating a case out of absolute rubbish. It's very clear that the solicitor is very inexperienced with CONTRACTS and I wonder if he is taking this case on free of charge?. I'm certain that the cost for legals will be higher than the claw back fee. Well played inexperienced solicitor, well played.
  • Grahame Hale | 11 Sep 2014, 10:31 AM Agree 0
    The only income we get is the commissions. The banks don't pay us a salary or car allowance, etc.
    The average broker puts a lot of time and effort into a loan, often outside normal banking hours. Why are the banks increasing the commissions, because we earn them and we care about our clients, banks do not.
  • Tim H | 11 Sep 2014, 11:28 AM Agree 0
    Can Gerard Brody tell the lenders that clawbacks are "unfair Contract terms".
    We as brokers have been saying this for years !!!!
  • Ed Ridge | 11 Sep 2014, 11:39 AM Agree 0
    The consumer had also taken it to COSL and they agreed with the broker, the consumer agreed in writing to the clawback clause and it was not hidden. The consumer also advised that he was broke...hahaha with a $940K loan I doubt it but if true then ANZ his current lender better look at that application with a fine tooth comb as ASIC will be all over this won't they with the loan being unsuitable. So with all of that out in the open Mr Brody attacks the broker not ANZ for giving his client a $940K loan that he can't afford. Mr Brody for someone with a degree (remember we need more education) it would seem that you perhaps haven't quite grasped the NCCP or contract law yet can do a press release. Perhaps if you stick with what you know because as Mr Denovan said this is all bull$%^#.
  • Maria Rigoni | 11 Sep 2014, 12:09 PM Agree 0
    See how easy it is for the banks to get away with not paying for outsourced loan writing tasks under a contract with wording we pay for the introduction of "new business" that stays on our books for a predetermined time decided by us. Put the microscope on the lenders who use their superior bargaining power to clawback a broker's gross business turnover. Focus on the real culprit of these consumers having to pay for the costs which should belong to the bank.
  • The Guy | 11 Sep 2014, 12:32 PM Agree 0
    This is no different to a Deffered Establishment Fee, which is no longer legal..

    The banks pay us commission, and trail in exchange for which, we are supposed to service the client. You should be arguing with the bank, not the client.


    If you are good at servicing your clients, then claw backs are not an issue because you will either work with the client to avoid them, or will help them with the refinance and get the claw back refunded by the refinance settlement

    Just FYI, writing the loan with St.George, was your first mistake... their service has gone down the toilet, you can't blame a client for wanting to leave
  • Peter Economos | 11 Sep 2014, 12:51 PM Agree 0
    Just another solicitor who does not understand the role of a broker. This kind of publicity does nothing but harm the industry we are in by tainting it with the fee element, which as we all know is normally paid by the lender. This client is stupid enough to refinance without using HLE again (which possibly would have eliminated the fee), ensuring payment of fees as per their signed authority and then they add additional fees (double? tripple?) by going down the legal path??? Smart. The client needs an "about life" broker, not just a mortgage broker.
  • Darryl Benn | 11 Sep 2014, 02:27 PM Agree 0
    I understand the concern of the consumer, no one likes to pay for a service after the event. I wonder if COSL would have been engaged if the loan was for a 'fixed period' and the borrower wanted to exit the loan early, would they have made the same complaint about the a large exit fee (possibly tens of thousands of dollars)?
Post a reply