View more on these topics

Claims chaser targets mortgage brokers in TV ad

Money-Currency-UK-20-note-480.jpg

Claims management firm Money Boomerang is launching a TV advertising campaign this month targeting mortgage misselling through intermediaries.

Money Boomerang says the ads, which will be aired from 15 April across Freeview and digital channels, are designed to determine the amount of “potential business” in the sector. It will only accept mortgage claims where the applicant has been sold a mortgage by either a broker or an independent financial adviser.

Money Boomerang director and head of mortgages Ian Barlow says: “Interest is building up and we would expect to be drawing 200 new enquiries per month to start off with.

“We are going to be the first company to advertise on TV for mortgage misselling so we are hoping to be the vanguard for misselling. We may be able to get a larger slice of the market then we did with PPI but how large that market is, we just do not know.”

Association of Mortgage Intermediaries chairman Pat Bunton says: “We are obviously concerned this type of advertising is starting to emerge and it adds unnecessary costs to intermediary firms. While we would never decry a consumer’s rights to make a complaint about a valid misselling issue, that is completely different to a claims management firm trawling and making a complaint where there is no issue.”

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 25 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. designed to determine the amount of “potential business” in the sector
    In other words, boomerang have no knowledge of any misselling. They are putting ideas into peoples heads and will then look for anything which may be construed as misselling.
    You may have been missold for any of the following reasons.
    You do not like the house you bought
    you do not get on with your neighbour
    You want a bigger house
    You are hoping that by signing this form
    You will get rich quick
    You have nothing to lose.
    When will these claim mongers be made to pay?
    They are commercial entities,not consumers,not charities and should have to pay to claim and not get a free ride at FOS.

  2. Where there’s blame, there’s a claim !

    Well well, welcome to Britain 2013. Rampant claims culture. It is not surprising considering that the most important financial decision of one’s life has been made with the assistance of cowboys for many years. Chicken’s /home/roost….

  3. Okay can somebody please explain to me why a claims management firm who are reviewing a customer’s file and commenting on the advice doesn’t have to be authorised and regulated by the FCA.

    I thought if you’re actually giving a recommendation to a client you had to be regulated and authorised. Particularly if you’re planning to air TV adverts asking clients to review previous advice!

    Doesn’t the actual Financial Services Marketing Act 2000 applied to these firms or is it simply the regulator turning a blind eye to anybody doesn’t pay regulator fees. Before any solicitors say there are exempt you are not if you give advice or review client advice and give an opinion you should be regulated. E.g. personal recommendation

    May be these firms would be a bit slower in their demands for compensation if they actually had to pay into the regulatory structure – come on politicians please act and force the FCA to actually do their job for a change.

  4. I would heavily suggest that people make a report to the FCA voicing their concerns – we don’t need the new rules we only need the regulator to enforce the existing rules!

    whistle@fca.org.uk

  5. I find it interesting that they are to target the broker and IFA community only. Why would they not include the banks?

  6. Anon@ 3.35
    Provide some proof of your unfounded accusation please.

  7. Harry Katz Alias the Dribbler 8th April 2013 at 5:05 pm

    Anon @3.35

    Valid point. Particularly as the Mortgage Market has largely escaped the RDR. Advisers only need the barest of qualifications. The regulatory regime is a pussycat compared to that which the investment community undergoes and even disclosure under the MMR is a weak affair. Even the concept of independence is bastardised and as I commented in a recent article the regulations for mortgage advisers are stepping stones rather than hurdles.

    No wonder these ambulance chasers feel that there is fertile ground. I wonder what the uphold proportions will be between IFAs and ‘plain’ mortgage advisers. I know where I would bet.

    Hope that answers some of your points Anon @ 4.35

  8. There will be a bucket load of fraudulent mortgage applications uncovered.

    Expect a few firms will be worried

  9. Whilst I and our firm don’t advise on mortgages, I have heard from a mortgage broker I know well that a CMC spoke to a client of his and essentially said ‘get copies of all the paperwork your IFA has on file and we’ll find you grounds for a complaint’ ….. which I find shocking.

  10. They won’t go after banks because bank mortgages are sold without advice.

  11. I think Pat Bunton’s comments are spot on. Genuine complaints should be thoroughly investigated, but spurious solicited ones are simply an expensive diversion that the industry can ill afford.

    Perhaps we should inundate their 0800 number with bogus enquiries and waste as much of their time as they surely will of ours.

    As for some of the comments on here suggesting that we somehow had this coming, it is one thing to be caught out for taking part in mortgage fraud, but quite another when a client has selective amnesia about the discussions you had or the documentation provided when you advised them on a completely above board transaction. How many advisers issue reasons why or suitability letters by recorded delivery?

  12. 17 years in the industry, 9 as a mortgage adviser and seen it all. (well probably most, and chose not to participate in the coming storm, so ‘managed out’)

    self cert/ unaffordable income multiples/ WOL sold for term needs.

    Need I say more ????

  13. How many customers understand that their bank mortgages (the biggest loan in their life) was taken ‘without advice’ ? Sorry ‘your mortgage was sold to you without advice’ is not a moral get out of jail card !

  14. Because mortgage brokerage firms have reduced from about 32000 down to 8000, close to 75% of enquiries will result in “firm gone away” and the mortgage firms that have survived the post crash carnage are likley to be the better quality companies that have good systems, controls and record keeping.

  15. The problem with opportunistic advertising is that it appeals to the greed seed that seems to inhabit a worryingly large percentage of the population.

    Their website contains the spurious suggestion that brokers coming back and remortgaging you after a few years is just cause for a complaint.

    Most sensible advisers will contact their clients and look to improve their mortgage position at the end of a tied-in period.

    This is our job, it is not a basis for complaint.

    The aim, as always, is to place the matter before the FOS in the hope that the adjudicator might ‘find’ some reason to uphold the claim. Don’t forget, the FOS uses an inquisitorial

    approach which means that they look beyond the specific complaint and may find some other factor the allows them to find in favour of the claimant.

  16. On this matter Alan I agree with you

  17. I think the adverts with a brain dead looking woman with wads of cash in her hand advertising PPI mis-selling claim services sums it up really.

    This isn’t about mis-selling its about easy money – and in today’s economy people who have nothing to lose will try it on.

  18. Why all the fuss if you acted legitimately for your clients and not for yourself there will be no claim

  19. Anonymous | 9 Apr 2013 2:38 pm

    The cost in time and money silly; which cannot be recouped from those trying it on.

  20. Anon @ 2.38
    This stupid statement typifies the thinking of the day, including those held by government bodies.
    Legitimately sold/advised mortgages still have to be investigated at the behest of CMC’s, who pay nothing. It costs nothing to complain. The legitimate adviser has to spend time and money answering false and fraudulent accusations.
    Where will it all end?
    It will end when advisers are so sick and tired of lying cheating fraudsters, that they simply give up.
    Then there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, at the lack of advice.

  21. If the claims chasers want to fish for complaints, then play them at their own game. they send out mass emails, tests and stuff at NO cost to them and a lot to us.
    IF they cannot articulate a true reason for the complaint and need to trawl a file, then the DPA allows a firm to charge a maximum of £10 for providing the info. It doesn’t say in what format or to where. I live and work within 5 metres of the Sea. I will not post files as most of my clients are local and can collect the file. all my files are electronic, not paper, so they will have to come with their own paper, computer with evidence that there is no virus and an IT consultant to connect to download the paper and so on….. make it as awkward for the bar stewards to get the info to manufacture a complaint BUT if the complaint comes directly from the client OR the complaint handler provides a certified general power of attorney (limited to information) to act on their behalf, then provide the info for the £10.
    Make the claims chasers work for there daylight robbery.

  22. Why can’t we reclaim the costs?

    Surely a client makes a bogus claim then your entitlement to sue that client for the cost involved in defending the claim, particularly of the claims management firm in question cannot provide adequate evidence of miss selling.

    I would definitely to a claims management firm or client through the Small Claims Court if I felt that the claims bogus!

    I suspect there’s going to be some interesting legal cases over the next few years if claims management firms decide to go after brokers and independent advisers. Unlike PPI insurance advisers do have sales files and supporting evidence.

  23. I not only have recordings of client meetings, but am encouraging clients to record claims chasers and play them along so we can pursue them through the courts if they try and fabricate something. I suggest all advisers start doing the same and we start asking prof bodies to support firms in pursuit of fraudster claim firms and ex clients where appropriate.

  24. The comments made above speak more of fear than true concern. It is true that spurious claims have been made by CMC’s and even by consumers themselves. The industry has only itself to blame that includes the banks, lenders insurers and ifa/brokers. Much of the advice given was poor ill thought out or down right wrong. Even the RBS has said 98% of its advised mortgages where given the wrong advice. As with PPI and before that endowments the chicken is roosting. Even now we have the same sort of tactics being used to avoid paperwork being handed over for inspection and we have three ex compliance officers working for us, the tales they tell say so much about this industry it would turn your hair white. So less of the handringing and complaining, you brought it on your own heads

  25. Gareth E K Smith 10th April 2013 at 3:54 pm

    If a client pursue a claim against a self-certification mortgage then surely the broker should “remind” the client that they have a duty to inform HMRC of the income they declared for that year and if it was different surely that is mortgage fraud.

Leave a comment