View more on these topics

Andrew Montlake: Criticism of ‘hidden proc fees’ is unwelcome

Like many brokers I have spoken to in the past few days, I was a little confused by the comments from the Council of Mortgage Lenders’ chairman Martijn van der Heijden, that “hidden procuration fees” were distorting consumer choice.

Apart from some of the more unprintable responses that I have heard, it does seem strange for van der Heijden, who is also head of lending at HSBC, to lump procuration fees in the same category as branch sales incentives and targets.

They could not be more fundamentally different. Ordering your staff, on pain of death by a thousand lashes or some such punishment, to sell a certain product whether it is in the customers best interests or not is another thing entirely.

Whether or not this was a thinly veiled attack on mortgage brokers themselves, or just a general observation is not clear, but I am sure Mr van der Heijden knew exactly the response those comments would receive from the broker community.

Whilst I have much time and respect for the CML chairman, these comments are unhelpful and it is the implication in the use of the word “hidden” that causes the issue.

We all know that during the advice process, not only do independent advisers have to declare how they are paid, but a key features document is produced that shows very clearly the exact amount of the procuration fee received; so hardly hidden then.

To the public, however, comments such as this imply that there is another level of fees, secretly hidden away in the small print somewhere that help to determine where a broker sends their mortgage business, further undermining the idea of truly independent advice. This is simply not the case.

Thankfully, in the main there is very little difference between lenders where proc fees are concerned and in any case, no broker worth their salt is going to sell a mortgage based on proc fee alone. To do so, especially in this market where every client is sacrosanct, is commercial suicide for a broker business with any hope of building a decent reputation.

Whilst the word “hidden” was the poor choice then, the question is does the CML chairman actually have a more accurate general point around proc fees?

Would it just be easier to remove any question of bias once and for all and have an industry agreed proc fee level set at say, 0.35 per cent for residential and 0.5 per cent for buy-to-let, or at the very least an agreed maximum?

It is a discussion that has been going on since proc fees were first introduced and previous companies I have worked for did do this, for a time at least, for their brokers to eliminate any accusation of bias, reaping the benefit when proc fees were higher than their cap and taking the hit when these fees were actually lower.

The issue, however, is far more complex and is now governed by the top level discussions of networks and mortgage clubs, rather than the average broker who just wants to do the best possible job for their client and build a nice referral base.

Whatever the view, I have yet to see any evidence of fundamental proc fee bias in the broker community and we all need to work doubly hard to ensure that trust remains the key word for all intermediaries.

Andrew Montlake is director of Coreco


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I agree totally with Andrews comments in fact i do think Mr van der Heijden ouhgt to explain himself by what he means by ‘hidden’ we cannot hide these proc fes and for the amount of administration we as brokers go through are we really not paid enough,particularly when estate agents are paid between 1% to 3% of the sale price ,did they have to qualify? We are professionals in the job we do and every client knows exactly what we are being paid!!!!.

  2. I despair at the damage these individuals do to the IFA and mortgage broker community with their badly worded statements. ‘Hidden’, implies there’s something naughty going on and this information is being somehow withheld. Apart from the Key Facts Document and other information I provide the client at the point of sale most lenders I deal with make a point of ensuring this information is again sent when sending out an offer letter. How then; can he say these proc fees are hidden? Having spent hours submitting cases then dancing to their tune in providing more and more supporting information I would say whatever they’re paying me isn’t enough to put up with the nonsense the lenders think fit in looking to decline cases. What a wonderful business model these providers have managed to secure for themselves. Introducers not only placing business with them for at times what seems a pittance for the work involved, but they’ve also managed to get us to submit the cases online and deal with most of the supporting verification of identity and administration requirements. Hidden proc fees, you insult us Mr Martijn van der Heijden with you ill advised comments.

Leave a comment


Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm