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

Skype no substitute for face-to-face: Vow

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 12 May 2011, 06:00 AM Agree 0
Skype interviews are not enough to satisfy a face-to-face interview requirement for brokers, according to a policy stance taken by Vow Financial based on legal advice from Gadens Lawyers
  • Ozboy | 12 May 2011, 11:04 AM Agree 0
    Well there is a good reason not to belong to Vow. While other aggregators and lenders (have 6 that have signed off on skype) are embracing technology Vow seems to be of the old school. While I have a lot respect for Mr Denovan one lawyers interpretation does not make it law. The divide between aggregators seems to be getting bigger by the day, it certainly makes the decision to move a lot easier as none of us want our business's held back by our partners. If your an aggregator your USP just got a leg up.
  • jcodrington | 12 May 2011, 12:54 PM Agree 0
    Ozboy, It is up to the individual organisations interpretation of the Act. I am sure if ASIC or the other appropriate Government Departments sanctioned the use of Skype (or similar Video conferencing facilities) then I am sure Vow Financial would not have an issue. Vow is being conservative as they don't particularly want to be a guinea pig in any prospective action if there is an issue down the track. If the other Aggregators are willing to take a risk with their interpretation of the Act, good on them, particularly if they have the resources to take on the Regulator if the meaning of the Act is to be tested at some future point. No one has a problem with technology, even Bankruptcy Notices can be served on you through your Face book Page, however unless the use of Video Conferencing Facilities has been sanctioned by the authorities, why would you want take a risk being hauled into court costing thousands and thousands of dollars to prove a point! This is how ridiculous this legislation has become!In any case how would you know if the person sitting on the other end of Skype is who they say they are. You are still going to have face to face identification at some point even if it is with their lawyers/conveyancers. For taking an application and discussing aspects of a prospective borrowers requirements, no isses using Skype (or any other similar medium)however I would still want independant confirmation that they are who they say they are.
  • petert71 | 12 May 2011, 02:13 PM Agree 0
    If you can't use moddern telecomunications to originate a loan, then nobody's going to be writting loans for ex-pats.
    Technology also helps us 'know the client'. I've looked up phone numbers and addresses of clients in the UK, been able to ring their employer and conduct an independant employment check. Email allows me to have an audiable trail of information and advice with clients. Skype allows you to record conversations.

    Face to face is better from a sales perspective, but remote work doesn't impeed the quality of advice or compliance.
  • Ozboy | 13 May 2011, 08:21 AM Agree 0
    jcodrington, the article clearly states Skype fulfills the NCCP requirement so the argument brought forward about litigation etc has no relevance. I personally don't find the legislation ridiculous it's the untruths spread about by people who are running their own agenda's that is causing the confusion. Like the aggregator stating you can't belong to two aggregators under the NCCP, this is incorrect as confirmed by ASIC but the aggregator is using this line for their own purposes. If you have any queries in relation to the NCCP then approach ASIC they are more than happy to walk you through any issues you may find "ridiculous". You may also like to know that there are lenders on your panel that will actually do the ID of the client for you. So it is possible to do that whole application with out actually "shaking hands" with the client and all within lender and NCCP guidelines. Would you want to? It would depend on the broker and probably where the potential client came from. As stated if VOW wish to take a "conservative approach" that is their decision but if these decisions minimise my ability as a broker to compete against other brokers then I would have reassess my partnership. Add to this things like handcuff agreements and all of sudden you can see that an aggregator can have a truly detrimental effect on your business, income, family etc. This is just another case of an aggregator pushing it's agenda onto it's clients quoting things like NCCP and lender agreements all which have nothing at all to do with their decision. I don't know about you but as a broker I want my aggregator to assist in competing with other brokers not making it harder. I hope this helps clear up any misunderstanding.
Post a reply