I would just like to add a few thoughts to the ongoing debate over whether mortgage intermediaries should become a network appointed representative or be directly regulated by the FSA.
The chief arguments against network membership are that you will face a restricted choice of products, be forced into an inflexible compliance regime, and that you will lose control of your business and your client base.
It is undoubtedly true that there are instances where this has proved to be the case but our own experience as an appointed representative of a network has been entirely positive and has led to considerable business benefits- As a member of the Personal Touch Insurance network, we have access to virtually the entire market for mortgage and insurance products while compliance is promoted as a tool which enables us to develop an in-depth understanding of our clients and so build stronger relationships- Far from losing control of our business, it has grown and prospered as a result of PTF's excellent proposition and its belief that the growth of its business depends on the growth and profitability of its ARs.
It seems clear to me that those commentators who are most active in denigrating the networks are those who stand to gain the most from intermediaries becoming directly regulated.
If anyone would like to contact me, I would be delighted to elaborate on precisely why we have opted to be an AR.
Commercial Direct UK,
13 Everard Road,