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

Brokers accused of fleecing clients

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 25 Mar 2013, 08:00 AM Agree 0
Despite industry disclosure requirements, one high-profile analyst says brokers can't help but act in their own best interests
  • Aaron | 25 Mar 2013, 09:18 AM Agree 0
    This is a load of utter rubbish from someone who neither works in the industry nor deals with brokers. There is far more to loan selection than commissions since most of the lenders pay the same rates anyway. If what he said was true then we would all be referring business to the Resimacs to get out 1% upfront.
  • Brado | 25 Mar 2013, 09:19 AM Agree 0
    I would generally agree that this is true. I know many colleagues that favour one bank over another regardless of rate or service. These brokers have usually come from the banking system. However its also true that many brokers are out there just getting the most suitable loan for their clients, regardless of commission, and the statements above are a bit broad brushed to be anything more than sensationalist.
  • Lee @ LoanMarket Shellharbour | 25 Mar 2013, 09:19 AM Agree 0
    This seems like an outsiders comment with no thorough knowledge of current regulation, NCCP and responsible lending. I would challenge this "analyst" to walk into any brokers office and spend just one day and I am positive there would be NO EVIDENCE to support these claims
  • Broker from Brighton | 25 Mar 2013, 09:21 AM Agree 0
    This fellow is just a headline grabber! My aggregator software shows the loans that are most suited to the client's needs and I let the client make the choice. I don't "push" one lender over another! I'm sure many brokers do the same thing.
  • Michael | 25 Mar 2013, 09:22 AM Agree 0
    2 things here. 1. Good brokers do recommend good products and good banks. It makes business sense to make a recommendation and stand by that product and service. 2. Good brokers are not chasing commission, .10 makes little difference and isn't enough to sway a good broker. These comments are far too broad and general and are no accurate at all. Sure, a cap of $400,000 will work...this is another worthless comment.
  • annonymous | 25 Mar 2013, 09:26 AM Agree 0
    Out of pure curiousity, I logged onto the "Wealth Within" website. The company he is employed by also arranges residential finance for customers along with financial planning products.

    I'm struggling to understand what his agenda is. Australian Broker shouldn't even publish this garbage.
  • Rob W | 25 Mar 2013, 09:26 AM Agree 0
    I like how everyone is an expert on how brokers work, articles like this are in there own self interest and shot for publicity. This maybe the case for a small majority on a hole brokers do whats right for the client based on there needs
  • Wayne | 25 Mar 2013, 09:28 AM Agree 0
    Perhaps Mr Gillham would like the govt. to regulate analysts to make sure teh comments they make are accurate. Of the thousands of analysts that make their money making predicitions, strange taht only one or two picked the GFC BEFORE it happened and they were catigated by their peers. Correct Mr Gillam!!
  • Blake | 25 Mar 2013, 09:33 AM Agree 0
    Goes to show that you don't need a long neck to be a goose. Why would you promote this persons opinion when his title is analyst and he admits having no evidence to analyse? Sour grapes perhaps?
  • Mike C | 25 Mar 2013, 09:33 AM Agree 0
    Give Gillham my email & ask him to contact me. I will demonstrate to him beyond a shadow of a doubt that the mortgage broking industry in regards to ethical behaviour & acting in the clients interests in preference to their own is moving well & truly in the right direction. Its a pity we were not able to take a snapshot in time for say comparisons between 1993 / 2003 & 2013. I think we would see marked differences in a positive direction. One could argue that 'lenders' themselves do not act in the clients best interests, after all they only promote their own products & their staff just happen to be employees paid to promote their own products!
  • Paul Hautaniemi | 25 Mar 2013, 09:33 AM Agree 0
    He sounds like a very sour guy, has he recently had ASIC investigating him or something? He makes some very broad statements here but has no proof what so ever. I would say very few (if any) only use one lender, and if they are well these are the ones ASIC should look at but I think you will find most brokers use a fair range of lenders.
  • Country Broker | 25 Mar 2013, 09:35 AM Agree 0
    Thsi article smacks of self promotion by dale Gilliham, he acknowledges he has no concrete proof , and he also speaks of his practices at Westpac ?? Why give these types of so called analysts/experts any credibility at all , has he ever worked as a Mortgage broker , does he understand what we must do? I have never hear of this fellow .
  • Judy West | 25 Mar 2013, 09:37 AM Agree 0
    Mr Gillham needs to provide evidence for his claim rather than judge others by his own experience as a Westpac Bank staff member. Most brokers would be as wealthy as 'high profile financial analysts' if they behaved that way.
  • Albert Waldron | 25 Mar 2013, 09:39 AM Agree 0
    With all the regulation around mortgage broking who has time to work out which loan is going to pay more commission?
    Of course you have lenders who are utilised more often. They are the ones where the client is going to have the best experience, which will then lead to a referal to their family and friends which is worth a heck of a lot more than an extra $100 commission.
    Not only that but the NCCP Credit Guide provided to every client clearly indicates which are our top lenders. "When (he) worked for Westpac"... maybe that says it all..
  • Jeff Mazzini | 25 Mar 2013, 09:43 AM Agree 0
    Dale generalisations of this nature without evidence does no one any good and least of all you. There are many professional brokers out there that place their clients interest first. No matter what profession you will always find some who place their own interest above the clients but that does not mean everyone is doing it. (Evidence by court or legal actions) If enough of these stories are written and printed someone might believe it, so best to stump up or shut up. Evidence produces results, loose lips sink ships.
  • Matt | 25 Mar 2013, 09:47 AM Agree 0
    Perhaps this person needs to look at lender spikes when they come out with leading pricing before making these claims. He clearly does not understand this industry. Brokers tend to use certian lenders a lot because they deliver a service that provides the outcome the client needs. The difference in commissions in minuscule compared to the benefits of great service a lender provides to satisfying a client and in being a productive broker.
  • DJ | 25 Mar 2013, 09:50 AM Agree 0
    Who is Dale Gillham?
  • Shane | 25 Mar 2013, 09:51 AM Agree 0
    Well I guess the last client I assisted whereby I actually received less commission than one of the other lenders was going to pay must have been a figment of my imagination. Don't tar us all with the same unprofessional, unethical brush. Just 'cos ASIC doesn't let us call ourselves unbiased, doesn't mean we can't be.
  • overtheborderbroker | 25 Mar 2013, 10:04 AM Agree 0
    One hit wonder. His comment will be forgotten within 24 hours. Wonder how ASIC views statements like "Do you want to trade as a professional to achieve safe,
    profitable and consistent returns?" This is a headline on his website that talks about sharemarket trading. Interesting claims by someone who is happy to take potshots at others.
  • 1martym1 | 25 Mar 2013, 10:05 AM Agree 0
    Confussing price and quality again and thinking it means the consumer is being ripped. Must we always recommend the lender with the lowest rate? What about service, credit policy and for active clients future flexibility ie phone call to change loan rather than full new app. The more you are in this industry the more that stuff is important. Price comes a close second. Nothing to be ashamed of. Also if two or three providers are essentially the same price (this happends an aweful lot) why can't we offer the client the one that pays a bit more commission (as long as the service aspect etc is OK as well). How is that a conflict?
  • Tim | 25 Mar 2013, 10:07 AM Agree 0
    This bloke must be related to Jessica Irvine.
    Two people cleiming to be experts without a clue. It is time the MFAA and the FBAA got out in the mainstream media and let the general public (and these so-called experts) know how a Professional Finance broker really works.
  • NQ Broker | 25 Mar 2013, 10:09 AM Agree 0
    He has been dealing with brokers for over a "Gazillion" years. This gentleman sounds like he is a bit prone to over exagrerating and generalising. All without any cold hard facts or evidence. Why do these publications see the light of day. I know for one I'm not one of the very few brokers he maybe speaking about. I wonder if he could write one of his articulate and well researched articles about his own profession and leave ours alone. Go away Dale.
  • Peter Fast | 25 Mar 2013, 10:20 AM Agree 0
    A big statement. A big headline. Lots of publicity.
    Let's see the facts?
  • QEDRisk | 25 Mar 2013, 10:30 AM Agree 0
    As the biggest provider of compliance services to the mortgage broking fraternity, with over 300 clients and many, many more that we have assisted and conversed with in the past, I can happily say that my team and I have NEVER experienced a broker that would behave in the way in which this planner accuses here. Seeing as Mr Gillham has "no evidence", I think I trump him there!

    Commissions result in a conflict of interest, for sure, but the disclosure and responsible lending regimes together combine to ensure that this sort of behaviour is not the norm in this industry.

    Go back to whatever it is you think you're good at, Mr Gillham.
  • AaronG | 25 Mar 2013, 10:41 AM Agree 0
    So what if what he does say is true? Really. So what? So what if brokers have found through years of experience that they have preferred lenders? A preferred lender gets there for many reasons, including price, ease of use, lack of post settlement complaints etc.... Gillham thinks we need more training on contruction loans. So what? As many of my colleagues have already pointed out, who made him the arbiter with admittedly no evidence? But back to the so what theory... So what if new brokers are ham-fisted with constructions deals? So are new bank staff. Somehow, the houses all got built. Even new brokers/staff figure it out eventually and we all were new at one stage.
    The marketplace does just fine. Brokers introduce far more loans as a percentage of the market place than in previous years. Why? Well it isn't because consumers are so stupid that they need protecting with new regs by the Nanny State. The reason brokers are absolutley killing market share today is because we are so damn good at what we do and word gets out. Word gets out if we are bad too. People talk and unhappy people talk a lot more than happy people do. And yet, broker share is growing....
    I'm always asking this question.... What propblem is he asking to solve? There is none. If anything, brokers have made a much more fair banking industry by giving clients more choices and rewarding good banks and punishing crappy ones. Let the market place sort it out.
  • Michael B | 25 Mar 2013, 10:47 AM Agree 0
    "Wealth Within prides itself on its superior knowledge of the mortgage financing market to support you secure the right loan the first time." This is a quote directly from the Wealth Within's web site. Say no more! Sensationalist diatribe.
  • Brett | 25 Mar 2013, 10:54 AM Agree 0
    This guy must have written this many years ago. As a financial adviser I work in user pays advice, and for the mortgage broking side of my business commissions are disclosed for clients to view. ASIC already heavily regulates our industry. This guy is not in touch with what is going on.....he should hold his head in shame for not keeping in touch as a "financial analyst".
  • PeterT | 25 Mar 2013, 10:58 AM Agree 0
    I actually put together a spreadsheet of our most popular 10 lenders and their commissions over a 5 year period. It takes into account the upfront paid by each lender and accurately models their trail.
    Over a 5 year period there were a few exceptions that pay a little less, but on the whole, the income is so close it's almost negligible.
    I find it very difficult to believe that there is a problem of commission based conflict of interest in the broking industry.
  • PC | 25 Mar 2013, 11:37 AM Agree 0
    Legend in his own Bathtime that's what this guy is. He has no idea whate he is on about, the only true thing that he is doing here is promoting his own business.
  • Gary Perth | 25 Mar 2013, 11:44 AM Agree 0
    It doesn't matter how many letters you have after your name or what profession you are in, there will always be approx 5% who lie, cheat, steal. and break the rules. judges, lawyers, accountants mortgage brokers and yes Mr. Gillham, even economists and wealth creators, break the law.
    The other approx 95% always conduct themselves in a professional manner in the clients best interest. If I was Mr. Pickett, the chairmen of your board, I would be asking you no to envolve the name of Wealth Within the next time you wish to make an outlandish and unprofessional comment.
  • NJC | 25 Mar 2013, 11:54 AM Agree 0
    What an insult to the industry. Every broker I know, thoroughly researches the clients needs and provides solutions most suited to the client. Yes sometimes there is only one option - due to policy or the fact they are an existing customer nothing wrong with that as long as we disclose. This PR stunt by Dale is only damaging to our industry.
  • Kamran | 25 Mar 2013, 04:36 PM Agree 0
    Is this the first time someone tries to rubbish brokers? would it be the last time? For me is 'Get used to it and get on with it.'.
  • Fiesty man broker | 25 Mar 2013, 05:07 PM Agree 0
    The likes of people like Dale Gilham really annoy me. How come I have never heard of this so called "high profile" financial analyst?
    I totally agree with Aaron.How come the industry goes on and on about the majors having an overwhelming majority of the market?I'll tell you why. The majority of brokers are not chasing the best commissions to suit ourselves. We are working in the best interests of our clients and in many cases forgoing any trail payments in the first year,despite the fact that the average loan only lasts 4 years.I've got preferred lenders alright! It just happens that they are pretty ordinary when it comes to commissions. Wake up to yourself Gilham!And don't start me on Jessica Irvine!
  • OzBoy | 26 Mar 2013, 08:08 AM Agree 0
    MFAA/FBAA how about protecting us by commencing legal action against Mr Gillham. This constant broker bashing needs to be stopped. This highly inflammatory comments that certain people push out for their own benefit (at our expense) is becoming tedious.

    More than happy to donate/increase membership fee's to combat this. It would also show, with your public action, that you really are supporting us.
  • Nick | 26 Mar 2013, 10:35 AM Agree 0
    What a load of crap. When it comes to home loans banks have the same product. The major difference within lenders is policy and assessment rates and trying to differentiate is not possible. I cant see how a broker would have a case to answer when all products are the same irrespective which bank he lodged the loan with. I lodge loan with a preferred lender as their service is fantastic. This does not mean I’m fleecing the client. The product comparisons over a period of 30 years are absolute nonsense and of no relevance as the cheapest lender today id not the cheapest lender tomorrow and I can prove my case in a court of law . All regulations have to be interpreted by the court s and to this date I have not seen this and it seems as in this case its an individual’s opinion and not a legal opinion. Even our peak bodies are answerable to the courts as well as the ASIC.
  • Positive Broker | 26 Mar 2013, 04:07 PM Agree 0
    This fellow must have had long lunch! If you check out his website it's basically a get rich quick scheme and drill down to the finance section to find out they are mortgage brokers themselves. Uneducated drivel such as this should doesn't really deserve our attention.
  • John Cooper, AFB - NSW/ACT President of the FBAA | 27 Mar 2013, 08:10 AM Agree 0
    Comments noted - but not sure we would need to take any action if the claim cannot be verified by actual facts. But I agree with many of the comments that as most lenders/aggregators pay similar upfronts and and trails the suggestion would not seem to hold any water. Ofcourse anyone carrying out the practice should be reported to his professionaly organisation and ASIC providing evidence of the so called offence.
Post a reply