From: "Rob graham" 
Newsgroups: uk.finance
Subject: Re: Mortgages-should i use a broker?
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 23:10:22 +0100


"Andy Pandy"  wrote in message 
news:4ckeg8F16caeaU1@individual.net...
>
> "Rob graham"  wrote in message
> news:e7adnbU0hrcrS_nZnZ2dnUVZ8qOdnZ2d@bt.com...
>> > A mortgage broker shouldn't be asking me what life insurance/critical
>> > illness
>> > insurance I have in place, or trying to sell me any (unless that's a
>> > genuine
>> > requirement of a particular lender).
>>
>> If he doesn't then he gets picked up by the short and curlies when the
>> client's wife complains, after her husband has died, that no life cover 
>> was
>> discussed, let alone arranged. Same goes for MPPI. The client doesn't 
>> have
>> to have it, but the mortgage arranger - call him what you will - is duty
>> bound to mention it. Trouble is, when he does people think he's on the 
>> make.
>> can't win really.
>
> If he simply brokers you a mortgage, then he is a mortgage broker.  In the 
> same way
> as any other sort of broker.  If he assesses your financial situation on a 
> wider
> basis, and advises you on other financial products which aren't directly 
> relevant or
> necessary to secure the mortgage, then the term "mortgage broker" is 
> misleading.  Not
> everyone wants or needs advice - which is why there should be a 
> distinction between a
> "broker" and an "advisor".
>
> --

The problem here is that you haven't kept up with (a) the effects of 
regulation and (b) the propensity of people to sue and demand compensation 
if things go wrong. You may wish to have a separate definition for broker 
and advisor and that is your prerogative. But if a 'broker' does not at 
least offer to attend to the insurance requirements of his client he is 
guilty of dereliction of duty. This is 2006, not 1996.

Rob.