View more on these topics

Mortgage edge: Richard Coulson

The Treasury&#39s confirmed position is that buy-to-let mortgages will not be included within the scope of direct regulation because it believes the letting of residential properties is a business activity and associated mortgages are therefore commercial loans.

The FSA had to draw the line somewhere, but it does seem to have excluded a market area that should be included. Zurich believes it is a serious oversight not to include buy to let in the impending mortgage regulation. We believe taking out a buy-to-let mortgage is, in the majority of cases, not viewed by borrowers as a “business transaction” the same way it is by the FSA.

We acknowledge that the people and organisations who buy, sell and own rental property as their main business activity should certainly be able to trust their own judgement when choosing sources of finance.

We also believe that they do not need a regulatory regime to shield them from ill-informed or biased advice about how best to finance their property deals.

However, we feel that the FSA&#39s grouping of individual buy-to-let investors/ borrowers together with these truly commercial enterprises may not be in the best interests of these individuals in the long run. Most people investing in buy to let would not regard the mortgage for their rental property as a commercial loan.

Buy-to-let mortgages are sold through the same channels as residential mortgages and are offered by the same lenders. So far, buy-to-let borrowers have not been treated as commercial customers.

When they go to their financial adviser in the future (post-regulatory) environment, will they fully understand that buy-to-let mort- gages – and any associated advice they are given – are unregulated?

The main reason for FSA regulation is to provide consumer protection. Thousands of amateur landlords are active in this market and certainly do need greater protection.

FSA regulation seems the only sensible approach to ensure that this sector of the market receives the same professional advice and consumer protection that will be provided to the mainstream residential market.

However, the benefits of regulation must outweigh the costs. The buy-to-let sector has grown enormously but still only represents about 10 per cent of the rental market. If high costs were imposed on a small niche market, the customer would bear these costs at the end of the day.

If the FSA has no intention of covering buy-to-let, then another route to consumer protection could be to ensure that the activities of the practitioners involved in financing, valuing, and selling of buy-to-let properties are subject to a robust voluntary code of practice.

Similar to the Mortgage Code Compliance Board, this code of practice could become the industry norm and buy-to-let applications only accepted if advisers subscribe to the code.

It seems likely that many mortgage brokers will be forced into the non-regulated fringe industry as they will not be either authorised by, or exempt from, authorisation in time for the October 31 deadline.

Buy-to-let mortgages can be riskier than standard residential mortgages. There are far more elements to consider and generally a higher standard of advice is required.

It is true that, to date, the buy-to-let niche has attracted very little negative press.

This is hardly unsurprising when property prices continue to soar. How- ever, we all recognise that this is unlikely to continue – as with endowments, it is often not until the market turns that investors seek redress.

Zurich will treat buy-to-let in exactly the same way as we would a normal residential mortgage. Our advisers will be expected to provide the same sales docu- mentation as for a residential mortgage. We expect other networks to take a similar approach. Many buy-to-let lenders are already saying that they will only accept applications from brokers where the application is submitted with a valid FSA number. This in itself will mean that most applications will come from FSA authorised advisers. This adds further weight to the argument to include these mortgages under FSA control.

The recent announcement by the Treasury that home reversion schemes will be included under the FSA statutory remit was widely applauded by the mortgage industry. Common sense had won the day. We hope that a similar level of common sense will be given to buy to let and that in the future we will see it covered by the FSA&#39s statutory regulation.

Richard Coulson is a director of Zurich Mortgage Network


Intelligence is accused of panic over free deal

Mortgage Intelligence is offering mortgage intermediaries free membership to its network, prompting claims that it is a panic move. The offer applies until October 31 and applies both to its Spirit solution for appointed representatives and Vantage for directly authorised intermediaries. Mortgage Intelligence believes that intermediaries are delaying making a decision about which network to […]

&#39Suite is simply not worthwhile selling&#39

The Financial Ombudsman&#39s refusal to give the Sandler suite immunity from misselling means distributing them is not worthwhile, says Royal London chief executive Mike Yardley. Yardley says there is no margin in distributing Sandler products through a direct salesforce even if the price cap is raised. Last week, Royal London shut its DSF to become […]

Unum backs MPs on mental illness move

Disability insurer Unum Provident has backed calls from a committee of MPs for further clarification of mental illness as a disability. Unum wants to see mental illness included in the legal definition of disability to make it easier for employers to process the increasing number of claims made by staff. Corporate services director Joanne Hindle […]

HSA tailors super modules for PMI

HSA is offering a private medical insurance package which allows firms to choose from a range of modules to create their own flexible, tailor-made cover for company and employee needs. The personal medical plans are a set of simple and adaptable modules that can be mixed and matched to fit in with an individual&#39s lifestyle […]

Health - thumbnail

Absence management systems gone AWOL from UK’s SMEs, reports Jelf

A quarter (23 per cent)* of the UK’s small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) do not have an absence management system in place, according to new research from Jelf Employee Benefits. Despite 69 per cent* of organisations having a system in place, three-quarters (75 per cent) report that it is not providing them with sufficiently empowering absence or health data to inform an effective wellbeing programme.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    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