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

MFAA takes aim at APRA over broker comments

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 27 Aug 2015, 01:53 PM Agree 0
The MFAA has blasted APRA's critique of brokers as misguided
  • observer | 27 Aug 2015, 02:10 PM Agree 0
    He probably holds bank shares and doesn't want to see them devalued.
  • Clarke Kent | 27 Aug 2015, 02:14 PM Agree 0
    Good to see our governing body sticking one back at this uninformed public servant fat cat!
  • Adrian W | 27 Aug 2015, 02:16 PM Agree 0
    Thank you Siobhan for standing up for us.
  • AF | 27 Aug 2015, 02:23 PM Agree 0
    Its time those that set high standards on brokers started practicing what they preach. Again, another clueless official big noting himself. Should be sacked.
  • MCC | 27 Aug 2015, 02:40 PM Agree 0
    Well that is going about it the correct way - not sure whether the sensational term ''blasted'' needs to be used in the content of the article. Seems to be a common problem in journo's reporting of information these days - use of sensationalism in order to catch a readers gaze (sigh)
  • Don | 27 Aug 2015, 02:42 PM Agree 0
    APRA & ASIC can say whatever they want because they can't be sued for defamation. They are a bunch of disgrace, only good at pointing the fingers and hiding behind the desk.
  • Rick Reeks | 27 Aug 2015, 02:43 PM Agree 0
    This is just another example of idiocy from APRA. Where did this magical figure of 10% limit for investment loans come from? That has led to most of the banks now "making hay while the sun shines" from existing investment clients. Illogical and why should the rest of Australia pay for the excesses of Sydney & Melbourne. Wayne Byers needs to take a pill and have a good lie down.
  • Marco Meloni | 27 Aug 2015, 02:54 PM Agree 0
    great to see mfaa respond with facts. Unlike apra unfounded comments . APRA if serious , should look how lenders on supposed apra directive have loaded investment rates , reduced Lvrs , changed terms & conditions on existing inv loans , which at best against spirit & purpose of NCCP. Basically all apra have achieved ,is adding profit to banks balance sheet year in advance.
  • Brissie Broker | 27 Aug 2015, 02:56 PM Agree 0
    Good work MFAA!
  • Keith Hazell | 27 Aug 2015, 03:05 PM Agree 0
    MFAA must insist upon an evidenced based response from Wayne Byrnes and it an apology. As a broker I am getting tied of these types of unjustified comments
  • QEDRisk | 27 Aug 2015, 03:08 PM Agree 0
    Ooooo...careful what you wish for Siobhan.

    I know Wayne. He's an intensely intelligent man and definitely not a bullsh!t artist. What's the next move if he does decide to release the data?

    I think we should accept the argument and start looking at why. Why are there still some bad apples out in broker land that don't want to get in line with the rest of us? Why maybe are lenders taking their eyes off the ball just because they think a broker's done all the work for them? Is it something to do with KPIs? Why isn't ASIC tackling the Big Bank branches who will take a loan deal after refusing that same deal from a broker?

    Ante-up Wayne so we can move on to the next phase of our lives.
  • Buddo | 27 Aug 2015, 03:12 PM Agree 0
    Well said Siobhan Hayden! Good to see we finally have a voice on our side from the MFAA.
    It's far too easy for APRA or ASIC to make sweeping statements like this, with very little knowledge on the subject, & they need to be kept accountable for these statements.
    Keep up the good work!
  • John | 27 Aug 2015, 03:20 PM Agree 0
    I find APRA's comments offensive. This could be a liable case coming up? Who is this guy think he is, to say these comments. Let's see if a retraction is forthcoming?
  • Coast Broker | 27 Aug 2015, 05:27 PM Agree 0
    Interesting story I heard about a recent loan approved by a Home Loan Lender in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney for the CBA. A 61 year old first home buyer buying a unit to be treated as an investment initially and then Owner Occupied when he retires was approved a 30 year loan term with interest only for 5 years and was talked into borrowing more money that he needed.
    He wanted P & I. Property being purchased is in an older over 55s unit complex. I would love to see if the CBA would allow this scenario to be approved through the third party channel. Maybe APRA needs to take a long hard look at the Retail Lenders employed by the Majors first.
  • Harold Spencer | 27 Aug 2015, 06:29 PM Agree 0
    Well done MFAA I note that ozboy asked for someone to do this on another industry related website. Let us all know how you go.
  • David | 28 Aug 2015, 09:42 AM Agree 0
    Well done Siobhan - I recently lost a 10yr client to a major bank because the clients wanted a further interest only term but the youngest was 63, had no super, short term employment and high LVR @ 80% , was a decent sized loan and the client said they couldn't afford P & I - went to the bank - approved ! I see this sort of thing happening all the time - maybe APRA should look at banks not broker!s
  • Steve McClure | 28 Aug 2015, 10:14 AM Agree 0
    The fact that brokers introduce more than 50% of home loans means that instances of arrears will occur on our loans - but is that the "be all and end all"?

    Despite federal gov't pleas to investors to "have a go", APRA has enforced measures from which $Billions in cost has flowed on to all consumers. They are now stifling the key economic driver of investment. And yet they have a shot at brokers? Well done Siobhan.
  • Wayne D | 02 Sep 2015, 10:19 AM Agree 0
    Well done Siobhan, it's good to see this sort of support for us brokers.
    We work very hard to do the right thing, to be responsible and to remain compliant and this is the sort of rubbish our regulators spruik.
    It's a shame the regulators need regulating? It's just another bureaucratic embarrassment come farce. No surprise really.
Post a reply