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

Broker clients “slightly more likely to default”

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 26 Oct 2016, 07:00 AM Agree 0
Analysis by an industry leader has examined how the type of borrower affects the likelihood of a mortgage default
  • | 26 Oct 2016, 10:28 AM Agree 0
    Conclusion appears inconsistent with statements made by NAB Broker for example regarding the quality of clients originated through the broker channel.
  • | 26 Oct 2016, 10:37 AM Agree 1
    Can we just draw a line ion the sand and before giving this guy publicity get the full details of his surveys. What questions were asked to whom or who supplied what information to him, in making these conclusions.
  • dont walk run | 26 Oct 2016, 11:01 AM Agree 0
    How about they go and actually look at the loan books, oh that's right no-one is going to let them. I came out of a Big 4 and at the end of 2015 they did the analysis to find out that 3rd party introduced loans had a LOWER arrears/default ratio than self generated business! Why because self generated business could be internally disputed and reworked time and time again so deals that no introducer could get approved, would get approved. Lets get the truth out there, the Big 4 bank's are trying everything to stop the bleed of clients to the broker market - except invest in quality staff with sufficient support, which is the main reason clients are walking, no running, away from the traditional banks.
  • Mark B | 26 Oct 2016, 11:12 AM Agree 1
    When the broker channel writes more volume than the retail channel, of course this is going to occur. It is simple math. Let's now see an article how broker introduce more new to bank clients than the retail arms or would that too be stating the obvious?
  • Banker | 26 Oct 2016, 03:58 PM Agree 1
    No surprises here when you look at the market as a whole - brokers have access to far more solutions for "riskier" clients than a mobile banker or a branch lender, and we know that "trickier" clients are likely to seek out the advice of a broker.
    When you compare apples to apples - ie a big bank who has the same credit policy for 1st and 3rd party mortgages, the default rates are no different. Broker managed customers also tend to recover from arrears more quickly as they have the guidance of an adviser who can assist with options to get them out of trouble.
  • Joel | 26 Oct 2016, 07:36 PM Agree 0
    Could there be a more misleading graph then the first one. Lets's start the base line at 1.6% to make 1.73% look low and then make a 10% difference look 4 times as high. Poorly edited article and should know better.
    As many comments state the riskier clients are invariably written by brokers because they have access to lenders who price for risk such as the Pepper & Bluestone's of the world.
  • Steve McClure | 05 Jan 2017, 01:33 PM Agree 0
    Martin North's record over many years shows that he rejoices in "mortgage stress" and dire predictions. His "research" was a catalyst for an article that heralded (and quote) "ALMOST a fifth of first-home buyers are facing the prospect of losing their homes within months, according to an alarming new survey.". That was in 2012. He went on... "They don't know what their incomes are or their outgoings are and they don't have the money to maintain their lifestyles," Mr North said.

    So, my question is, which banks gave you this latest data & when Mr North? What was the sample size and where's the full stats? Until we see that, we should measure the accuracy and validity of the research in accordance with past results of his research. There are just too many hangers on in this industry trying to get cheap publicity with "research".
Post a reply