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

Footy team spirit invoked in low-doc defence

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 12 Sep 2012, 05:00 AM Agree 0
There is no difference between the current low-doc lending scandals and a footy team member who has brought his team and club into disrepute, according to one non-conforming lender
  • Dean | 12 Sep 2012, 09:45 AM Agree 0
    Outdated cliches and tired football analogies prove how out of step Mr Watson is and why the likes MKM are in decline.
  • Country Broker | 12 Sep 2012, 10:04 AM Agree 0
    Football teams omly lose games, bad players tarnish reputation and maybe cause a sponsor to withdraw suppoert but they do not commit fraud , or cause the vunerable to lose everything , ect . There is no sense in this argument at all.
  • Still Broking after all these years | 12 Sep 2012, 10:39 AM Agree 0
    What about the Low Doc Loans written that have never missed payments, never had an overdue notice and still make their payments today......Are all Lo Doc loans no good? I dont think so, many of my clients have Lo Doc loans and would still take them if they could because of ease of transaction.
  • mortgage road warrior | 12 Sep 2012, 11:57 AM Agree 0
    " Still Broking after all these years " , just wanted to know how these customers could pay all their bills & repayments on time & not be able to prove their income ??? They need to patent their system so that we could all do it !! Lo Doc lending is on life support & no amount of bleating from Brokers is going to bring it back to the " Glory"days. My suggestion to Brokers is do what you are paid for & put a full doc deal together & build a story as to why the Bank should support your application . A good Broker doesn't automatically default to Lo Doc because they can't be bothered doing the work of a full doc deal .
  • broker called Caz | 12 Sep 2012, 03:23 PM Agree 0
    i thought it was a well-written article. it's basically saying not to judge today's market participants on the behaviour of some rogue operators five or more years ago. What's wrong with that?
Post a reply