Forum: Damned if you do, mad if you don't?

by Mackenzie McCarty17 Apr 2012

AFG's Mark Hewitt has questioned the efficacy of writing clawback clauses into loan contracts, arguing they would be difficult to enforce, and may not do 'great things' for a broker's reputation.

But as clawbacks begin to bite, broker feedback shows many already use such clauses in their contracts, and Forum participants are urging others to protect themselves.

In response to our recent poll (Poll: How severely have commission clawbacks impacted your business?), Damien responded by saying: "All brokers should be using a clawback provision - you are simply mad if you don't."

Likewise, Ray and Casey are both using and support clawback clauses.

"Not an issue for me," said Ray. " I have a clawback clause in our contract where the client pays."

"I believe in and use a clawback provision," Casey said. "Why should I pay for the actions of the other two parties in the transaction? If I stuff up or churn the client, then I'm happy to wear the cost. But if the client decides to sell up early, I pay. If the bank ruins the relationship, I pay.

As Casey finishes, "Why are we paying for other people's actions?"

Have you voted in our poll, or had your say on clawbacks? Have your say by clicking here.

 

COMMENTS

  • by Ray 11/04/2012 7:52:57 PM

    Not an issue for me. i have a clawback clause in our contract where the client pays.

  • by Casey 16/04/2012 3:28:20 PM

    I believe in and use a clawback provision. Why should I pay for the actions of the other 2 parties in the transaction? If I stuff up or churn the client then I'm happy to wear the cost. If the client decides to sell up early, I pay. If the bank ruins the relationship, I pay. Why are we paying for other peoples actions?

  • by Damien 16/04/2012 4:39:03 PM

    All Brokers should be using a clawback provision, you are simply mad if you don't.