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

Broker sackings leave FBAA laughing all the way to the bank

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 26 Mar 2013, 08:45 AM Agree 0
FBAA CEO, Peter White, says he supports the MFAA's decision to cancel memberships - and is looking forward to the influx of new members
  • Broker | 26 Mar 2013, 10:24 AM Agree 0
    The MFAA must be loving this.

    Nice to see the chickens come home to roost!
  • Rastafarian | 26 Mar 2013, 10:27 AM Agree 0
    I agree, having done the Diploma which was mostly RPL based in a fortnight, that it really does not provide any new knowledge to brokers, who mostly would have known the vast majority of the content through experience.
    A few years ago there was a push to make Brokers 146 compliant, I certainly hope that is not the next step on the agenda,
  • Michael | 26 Mar 2013, 10:28 AM Agree 0
    I think that this is a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. Industry participants need to consider from an industry-wide perspective rather than an individual, myopic view.

    Take a step back and compare the narratives each industry body is trying to create: The MFAA with a diploma-level membership who undertake substantial continuing professional development; versus the FBAA who has no entry requirements and no ongoing CPD. In fact, the FBAA revel in the fact that they'll take any broker who can't be bothered with the higher standards enforced by the MFAA.

    Now lets fast-forward our thinking and consider how the future may play out for the two groups... Hmm, I know which one I'd be hitching myself to the coat-tails of...

    Oh, and a footnote regarding ongoing education: If you don't think you're going to learn anything from a diploma, then you probably wont.
  • Broker IQ | 26 Mar 2013, 10:29 AM Agree 0
    Good luck to the FBAA for wanting to take on a bunch of brokers de-registered for non-compliance. It will be to the detriment of the FBAA brand and FBAA members.

    Well done MFAA!
  • allan faint | 26 Mar 2013, 10:34 AM Agree 0
    wonder when and how much our mfaa fees will now go up, to cover the loss of 1100 members.
  • Wilko | 26 Mar 2013, 10:37 AM Agree 0
    I obtained my Diploma of Business Management in 5 days through a University and it holds great legitimacy. Don't tell me I cannot obtain a qualification to validate my experience if I want to.

    When I became a broker I would have preferred the Diploma as I was coming from a small business background. When I did it I found it far more relevant than the certificate IV.

    The DIPFMBM qualification is a step up and asks a practicing broker to demonstrate recall and applicability of fact when assessed correctly just the same as the Certificate IV. Same process, different Qualification.

    The FBAA is becoming well known for picking up the dregs of the industry including a lot of the expelled brokers from the MFAA.

    And what happens when ASIC asks for Diploma as a minimum standard? FBAAwill be shown to be behind the times as they always are. Good luck Mr White. You are going to need it.
  • Peter | 26 Mar 2013, 10:39 AM Agree 0
    The MFAA had this coming,their arrogance has lost them lots of existing members and new potential business.
  • Peter | 26 Mar 2013, 10:50 AM Agree 0
    how can you guys assume that the 'dregs' of the industry will filter down to FBAA??? Many experienced brokers who do end up doing the Diploma say it was a waste of time as it didn't teach them anything new. Members move to the FBAA purely out of principle, not because of their standards.
  • Nick | 26 Mar 2013, 10:57 AM Agree 0
    Now Im sure they notified all these memebers by certified mail etc etc asking for the diploma and giving reasonable warning. I can see a class action ( legal) brewing here. You cant just boot people out without any reasonable notice and proof of having sent such notice.
    You just cant boot people out.
  • Country Broker | 26 Mar 2013, 11:10 AM Agree 0
    The comment about 5 day diplomas is just not credible ! (I suppose Peter White may not want talk about 5 day Cert 4s ,) to do a 5 day diploma the person must have recognition of prior learning and or a CERT 4, and industry experience ,if not it will take at least 12 months after they have done a CERT4 , All the diplomas are still delivered by registered training bodies and recognised as such . The point is we all knew the MFAA was going to Diplomas 3 yaers ago , that gave all members PLENTY of time. If the FBAA have a different standard and are willing to admit the 1,100 who are not with the MFAA any more well and good , hopefully all will be able to hold onto their accredations . I also suspect many are probably already FBAa members.
    Ther MFAA needs to be congratulated on their stand , to say it is serving the lenders is just BS there are no lenders on their current national board !! I am staying with the MFAA . I am NOT and never have been on any MFAA board .
  • Walter | 26 Mar 2013, 11:10 AM Agree 0
    Great work MFAA for holding yourselves and your members to a higher standard. It's the RIGHT thing and sometimes doing the RIGHT thing isn't popular for everyone.
    That is why you are known as the PREMIER industry body with the FBAA pretty much picking up the crumbs..
  • Peter | 26 Mar 2013, 11:12 AM Agree 0
    Why do you need a diploma if you have a tertiary qualification and 30 years of experience
  • Ray Perth | 26 Mar 2013, 11:22 AM Agree 0
    The Diploma for me was a total waste of time and money. I learnt nothing new. In protest I and all my direct colleagues resigned from the MFAA and now very happily with the FBAA, The MFAA always seemed the lenders police .. it deserves all the bad flak it is now receiving.
  • Nick | 26 Mar 2013, 11:32 AM Agree 0
    Peter the term " dregs" is a bit heavy mate .A bit of respect to your fellow brokers is warranted .Although the diploma was a waste of time for me ( I am a CPA) there was some useful content and some material that could stimulate a brokers thinking especially in risk management. Broking comes from a very low academic base and any form of education is important. I am critical however that it did not cover a brokers legal obligations when client facing. By this I mean comments, statements, inferences, advice that could result in a lawsuit and advice that is not covered by a brokers professional indemnity insurance. Some big pitfalls is discussing tax issues and what is tax deductible and or property investments and or property values among other
  • Edgar | 26 Mar 2013, 11:55 AM Agree 0
    I've got to agree with the FBAA on this, already having a Masters degree I don't see how an extra couple of days of a Brokers course adds to either my credibility nor my professional development.

    As for arguments about the value of the brand, such as those made by Broker IQ and Michael, I'd draw a comparison with the two major accounting bodies CA and CPA. CA have always maintained that their exams are harder but the CPA has done a far better job of marketing themselves such that Joe Public would assume that CPA was the highest qualification. Moreover organizations such as CPA are broadening the avenues to and entry requirements to becoming a CPA recognizing that experience does count for something.

    To me it's a hard sell to say a couple of extra days training make any significant difference. Even though a Diploma is only a Level 5 qualification on the Australian Qualifications Framework the volume of learning for a Diploma qualification, as indicated by that same framework, is one to two years. As someone who values learning I'm much more concerned about the effect of 10,000 odd diplomas being issued off the back of a couple of days learning devaluing the diplomas themselves.

    One last comment on the MFAA trying to raise the standard by increasing the minimum education requirement. I worked through the same sort of thing when nursing decided it needed to be a profession and not a vocation. The result was a lot of nurses being thrown to the wolves, knowing the theory but not how to put that into practical experience (took several years before it was finally accepted that they needed a graduate year of on the job training)
  • May | 26 Mar 2013, 12:00 PM Agree 0
    FBAA is for brokers ONLY. They represent brokers interest ONLY.
    MFAA is run by the LENDERS to control brokers.
  • Edgar | 26 Mar 2013, 12:12 PM Agree 0
    I can't help thinking that if any of the industry bodies were serious about raising standards they would set their own exams and have them administered under the same sort of conditions a CPA or CA examination is undertaken.

    The whole hoopla about the diploma vs the Cert IV seems way over the top to me. What image does it send for a professional industry that sees you 'qualified' after a 4 day Cert IV and another 2-3 days to upgrade to a diploma? Yes I know you need two years mentoring but again you're not required to follow the MFAA's suggested structure so the value of that mentoring can vary widely. As for accreditation with lenders, how many of us have been to accreditation sessions where its little more than a sales pitch with the answers are given to the participants - seriously makes you wonder why the lenders want any qualifications at all
  • Bruce | 26 Mar 2013, 12:25 PM Agree 0
    To you Big "Nick", from a broker who does not share your academic success but has 32yrs of client/lender experience. All this MFAA business is simply an example of 'third line enforcing'. I believe the new ASIC regime will discharge its responsibilities and achieve fair outcomes for all serious participants. One big brother is enough.
    What no one seems to have considered is why the MFAA has been so stubborn in this regard. Is it due to the fact they may have having 'special' relationships with the training firms, and leading brokerage houses!

  • AccountantBroker | 26 Mar 2013, 12:42 PM Agree 0
    I agrees with Edgar and Nick, having a number of degrees both in Accounting and other areas (undergraduate, masters and a PhD), and being in my 8th year of broking, the Diploma probably didn't add much value for me. However there needs to be a base level for everyone, the public expects it, so for those broker's who have dismissed it wholesale, I'd say you should perhaps consider again whether you want to do it at your own pace, or have to complete it before a government imposed deadline. I agree again with Nick, however, the course is lacking in guidance around what brokers should and shouldn't be discussing with clients, particularly with respect to tax, boy we see some doozies come in to be unravelled! A little bit of extra guideance would have really helped in those cases.
  • Supporting the FBAA | 26 Mar 2013, 01:30 PM Agree 0
    I am amused with the amount of brokers on here that keep commenting that the FBAA do not have on going CPD or any entry requirements or that they take "dregs" or "Crumbs", when was the last time you all tried to become a member.
    From what their website is showing there is over 20 requirements for a new membership with them and 25 hours CPD each year that gets tracked and monitored by them so how can you all go on and on about the FBAA having no requirements.
    Also i don't think i read anywhere in Peter Whites article where he stated that the FBAA was against the Diploma, he simply stated that the FBAA is following the directions from the regulator in what is already an over regulated industry and asking for a MINIMUM of a certificate 4 one would think that this is in fact a smart move from the FBAA. It is the bare minimum they will accept not saying that they will surpass anyone with a diploma or who has the intent to get the Diploma. I am sure in an article in the past 2 weeks that i have read from Mr White and the FBAA camp he stated he encourages brokers to get the Diploma the FBAA just doesn't push them to HAVE to do something that the regulator does not require at this point in time. I also state the fact that should ASIC change their position on this and lets face it we have all been warned it will happen in time, that the FBAA will move in line at the same pace as ASIC, there is always a time completion window. So the FBAA wont in fact be behind anyone or anything.
    Oh and to Nick, I passed my HSC with a 98% TER, I went to UNI and studied law, I have been a broker for the past 16 years , I don't class myself as coming from a low academic base, sure i am only 1 person but is it not pot calling kettle black when you state to Mr White to give respect to his fellow brokers when you yourself and i quote state "Broking comes from a very low academic base and any form of education is important". There are some very well educated brokers out there that may take offence to your comments as well my friend.
  • David | 26 Mar 2013, 05:30 PM Agree 0
    Peter White is quite correct - a university diploma can take at least 4 semesters full time. I found the Diploma studies an insult to my professionalism and experience - 2 days in between client calls etc. The MFAA should take a leaf out of Labor politics and clean out the old caucus and get back to its constituent base - the brokers. Lenders are represented by other much more powerful bodies and in my 10 years of membership have never taken direction from the MFAA. The only reason lenders are members is because the MAA needs them to enforce membership as a accreditation condition.
  • Bryce | 26 Mar 2013, 06:49 PM Agree 0
    Look at the bright side, at least the FBAA should be now able to bring in some monies and actually put in some professional support toward their membership!
  • SIDBROKER | 26 Mar 2013, 10:44 PM Agree 0
    mfaa didn`t get me. I never gave them the opportuity in the first place. Can`t see the point in paying anyone to have any control over me.
  • Michael | 27 Mar 2013, 12:12 AM Agree 0
    C'mon, we all know that the FBAA was set up as the "also ran" to the MFAA.
    I have been a member of both and the difference in increased professionalism by the MFAA is clearly evident. If we are forced to be a member of an industry body then we need at least two alternates to choose from anyway.
    The bigger question is why we need to be a member of ANY industry body these days as I struggle to see the value proposition?
  • Bruce | 27 Mar 2013, 02:39 AM Agree 0
    With a touch of humour... To "BIG" Nick the CPA. I as others take offence to your comments BIG Nick or Dick. With fear of being struck off are you very short, fat and have no personality, have no succession planning and well I wont go on. All I have Nick is 34.5 years of banking and lending and broker experience and a large supportive client base and a very loyal mixed breed dog.
    On a serious note, I personally am intriged in what the final outcome between the three players will be. I refer to the FBAA, the legions of Trainers, and of course the major Leading Brokerage houses. This is all relevant in the final outcome. Third line enforcing!!Regretably, after reading all the pros and cons of the enforced educational requirements by the FBAA it is very interesting to note that most brokers feel indifferenet as to the worthiness of the exercise.H'mmm
  • Broker | 27 Mar 2013, 07:01 AM Agree 0
    I fail to understand why any Broker would choose the MFAA over the FBAA, can someone please explain...
  • Amy | 28 Mar 2013, 01:33 PM Agree 0
    I agree with Peter White. It takes at least 2 years full time for Diploma studies. I have studied for 10 years & our Diploma was an absolute insult & waste of $1200 & the trainer was a Financial Planner. I do believe there should be an entry requirement, as for most Professions, but for our Diploma, was a forced accreditation by the MFAA & the course & trainer did not necessarily meet our requirements, as Finance/ Mortgage Broking.
  • Chris Szigeti | 28 Mar 2013, 02:10 PM Agree 0
    My Diploma which I did in 2003 through the Securities Institute took over 12 months - 6 modules with each module having 10 half day attendance at the training room with a full written assignment and 3 hour closed book exam on each module ( had to do real study ) and had to pass both the assignment and Exam - plus the cost from memory was about $750 per Module - now that's a REAL Diploma !! PS I am also on the National Board of the FBAA
  • Greg | 28 Mar 2013, 04:07 PM Agree 0
    There are some nasty comments here indeed. The short Diploma Course was in recognition of industry experience. It provided for those of us that have been lending, through banks and brokers, for 35 years or more. You are right that the course material did not necessarily add to your knowledge as you have gained that knowledge through experience. You had not, however, been subject to an assessment until now. You would have done the shortened course, completed the assignments and submitted. You have passed and are now qualified to proceed. The course material will be much more onerous for someone new to the industry and of great benefit to them. I appreciate that someone had the fortitude to grant me some kudos for the many years I have been doing this instead of demanding I spend thousands of dollars to do the full course to do what I do, albeit with a piece of official paper. To those of you who studied zoology, metalurgy, law, medicine etc, I welcome you as a newly qualified Mortgage Professional and trust the transition was not too difficult. I would not however allow an exemption from the Diploma based on your unrelated qualifications.
  • Robert | 02 Apr 2013, 01:17 PM Agree 0
    Seems every couple of years I have to pay for another course to cover the same stuff which I have been doing in my busiess for the past 13 years. No new info from the diploma and to call it upskilling is straight out spin.
    Currently I'm with MFAA and FBAA. I won't be renewing my membership with FBAA as if they accept 1100 drop outs from MFAA, then FBAA loses all credibility.
  • Lyndal | 02 Apr 2013, 07:51 PM Agree 0
    As a current member of the FBAA I really hope we don't just accept 1100 of the MFAA "drop outs".
    I already don't like to go the FBAA events anymore as they are either poorly attended like the annual conference or a get together for the boys.
    Even Mr White verbalises on the FBAA website that membership is EASY! Maybe too easy from what I hear. That just may be the FBAA's downfall and why I may head back to the MFAA... unfortunately!
  • DM | 02 Apr 2013, 09:05 PM Agree 0
    where does it say in the article that the FBAA took all the dispelled MFAA members?
Post a reply