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

Complaints against brokers plummet

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 29 Jan 2014, 08:24 AM Agree 0
Reports show a 'substantial drop' in disciplinary matters against brokers in the past year.
  • Country Broker | 29 Jan 2014, 09:04 AM Agree 0
    Surely this is contrary to the report last week attributed to ASIC about a "substantial number " of brokers being banned.
    Congratulations to Australian Broker for this report .
  • Keith of the West | 29 Jan 2014, 09:20 AM Agree 0
    Totally agree with Country Broker totally contrary to ASIC reports. ASIC are the first to blow their trumpets with banning a broker and justifying the tax funded salaries!
  • Stewart | 29 Jan 2014, 09:31 AM Agree 0
    So, let's see.

    ASIC come out with allegations Brokers are essentially bad & doing the wrong this.

    ACA pick up the story and run a report on bad Brokers (the couple in the story got their loan 8 years ago, what have they done in the meantime???)

    MFAA does NOTHING until this statement above - which is ONLY read by Brokers who get this email.

    Way to go MFAA, useless stuff again.

    Get on the media bandwagon and do some of the promotion of the good of the industry that you are supposed to do & for what we pay our high membership fees for!!
  • SIDBROKER | 29 Jan 2014, 10:01 AM Agree 0
  • TomTom | 29 Jan 2014, 10:15 AM Agree 0
    This reminds me of my time in the military, where we had 'Support Units' that supported only themselves, the proverbial 'Self Licking Ice cream'. The MFAA, FBAA and probably ASIC are just that.
  • Wombat | 29 Jan 2014, 10:17 AM Agree 0
    Based on MFAA's belated comment, why can't Aus Broker interview Kell at ASIC and get him to substantiate "substantial". Make him accountable for his words, just as he makes us accountable for ours!
  • Dave Robinson | 29 Jan 2014, 10:34 AM Agree 0
    ASIC banned brokers and the MFAA deals with MFAA members only. The two are not necessarily related.
  • Incognito | 29 Jan 2014, 10:39 AM Agree 0
    I was going to comment on how pathetic brokers sound on this blog but decided not to..
  • Call me naive | 29 Jan 2014, 12:03 PM Agree 0
    Do you seriously think Phil whats his name of MFAA reads all the comments above.
    We have to pay membership fees because MFAA did such a good sell job to the banks/lenders and like all good sheep they all require such membership. When was the last time heard MFAA standing up or speaking out for their members? When was the last time you saw any positive article in the media/press promoting MFAA brokers?
  • Stewart | 29 Jan 2014, 02:14 PM Agree 0
    Phil is a wishy washy fool. And a bigger fool if they don't read comments on Australian Broker - given it is where they would actually get the best feedback about how they are perfoming and what members really think.

    This is (supposedly) an unbiased place to voice our anonymous opinions on matters. What better place to learn from for the MFAA.

    I have never had any confidence in him whatsoever in being the best person for that job.

    Surely there has to be someone better out there. Especially after all the time he has been in the job & still hasn't got it right yet.
  • Broker | 29 Jan 2014, 02:58 PM Agree 0
    The MFAA is appears rather stale and seems to be out of know-how and initiative when it comes to what it actually should be doing, for its long suffering members as opposed to what it does do.
    If membership was optional (as educations standards etc could and probably should be left up to the Aggregators) I suspect that their membership numbers would plummet overnight and the MFAA would probably cease to exist, which is hardly a strong foundation of any organisation.
    To me it appears that the MFAA constantly fiddle and react to anything and everything in the broker industry news (I use that term loosely!!), as it gives them something to do, or at least creates the false perception that something constructive is actually occurring in MFAA land, which the majority know to be false, as no tangible improvements for Brokers have ever eventuated, not in my 10 plus years as a broker anyway!

  • Wombat | 29 Jan 2014, 08:48 PM Agree 0
    Dave Robinson is absolutely right - MFAA does not have a regulatory role and should not be linked with ASIC's role. While the MFAA's comment could have been more timely to follow Peter Kell's assertions, the real issue is ASIC's unsubstantiated claims about escalating problems with credit intermediaries. As MFAA has to deal with ASIC on policy and operational issues, it has a delicate balancing act in deciding whether or when to flex its muscle and directly attack ASIC; I believe this "soft" approach sends a message to ASIC without prejudicing the professional relationship. There is an old adage: it is extremely difficult to win a debate with the government or, in this case, ASIC who can hide behind legislation and privilege. The key is for the media (AB?) to become more active and to question ASIC's assertions and force some level of accountability for unsubstantiated statements (if any).
  • Dave Robinson | 30 Jan 2014, 09:32 AM Agree 0
    Wombat gets my vote for Comment Of The Week.
Post a reply