View more on these topics

Santander removes Lakey from broker panel for abusive language

Alan Lakey 160 byline

Santander has removed Highclere Financial Services from the Abbey for Intermediaries broker panel, accusing partner Alan Lakey of using abusive language towards its employees.

Lakey was informed that his fast-track functionality was being removed following an audit of the cases he was submitting on 29 November.

He then sent two emails to the lender about the decision on 29 and 30 November. As a result of the language used in both emails, the decision was made to terminate Highclere’s involvement with immediate effect.

In a letter to Lakey, who is also a council member on the Association of Professional Financial Advisers, Santander says: “As a responsible employer Santander must support its employees and ensure that employees are not subject to abuse, whether written or verbal, within the workplace.”

A Santander spokesman says: “Mr Lakey is fully aware of the reasons why we have removed him from our panel. We have nothing further to add.”

Lakey says he had already decided to stop using AfI’s broker panel due to its lack of flexibility around lending criteria.

Lakey says: “I have endured six months of idiotic and unacceptable rigid underwriting and precise attention to pointless detail to the ultimate disservice of myself and my clients.

“The total failure to accept any responsibility and its total inability to allow me any type of discourse with someone who can make decisions has led my clients to ask me why they have been put with this lender.

“There comes a point where you reach the straw that broke the camel’s back. The email I received led me to react the way I did.”

Four brokers have been removed from Santander’s panel this year for reasons relating to professional standards.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 96 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Daphnie Jenkins-Smyth 3rd December 2012 at 1:45 pm

    doesn’t matter how angry you are with service there is no need for effin and jeffin at staff.

    a true professional would keep that in their head.

    what a silly bissim….

    see i can swear with the best of them!

  2. Santander are an appallling organisation and I can quite understand how anybody dealing with them can be pushed to the edge.

    Alan Lakey has no case to answer in my book.

  3. Does this mean that the Association of “Professional” Financial Advisers needs to change its name already?

  4. David Trenner - Intelligent Pensions 3rd December 2012 at 1:56 pm

    “Four brokers have been removed from Santander’s panel this year for reasons relating to professional standards.”

    I don’t condone the use of inappropriate language, but being called unprofessional by a bank is a bit rich!

  5. It’s such a shame when people need to resort to abusive language to get their point across. Whilst I can understand the occasional frustrations in dealing with product providers, this sounds like truly unprofessional behaviour.

  6. Presumably Alan was using Abbey becuse they offered the best solution to his clients needs. What does he do now? Give the business to the second best, refer the clients to another adviser or explain that he is now restricted?

  7. Daphne—we don’t know what he said so don’t assume that he used any swear words at all—–Abbey tried to tell me that I was being unreasonable and abusive for suggesting that as they were paid to administer mortgage applications that on their record to that point they were infringing the Trades Descriptions Act.
    It is also interesting and disturbing that Abbey has chosen to leak details of a conversation with a broker.
    Would you like that if they did it to you?

  8. You could not resist that, could you martin?
    Whilst I cannot abide bad language, self righteousness is even more abhorrent.

  9. Derek Bradley ceo Panacea 3rd December 2012 at 2:11 pm

    John Lacy is correct, we do not know. It is a fact in today’s oh so PC correct society that often when a complaint is made, laced with signs of frustration it is seen as abusive when in fact it is not.

  10. Sorry Alan but you seem to have scored an own goal – no matter how provoked.

    Don’t let them grind you down.

    If your client is unhappy with them then it pass it on for them to deal with as a regulated complaint.

  11. We can all see straight through that, you had 7 days to respond to income disclosure, you obviously didn’t respond and then kicked off at the lender when they didn’t pay your proc fee and removed you from the panel. If this was not the case you would not have needed to be abusive – no one is abusive if they ‘want to’ stop using a lender – shame you messed up, I couldn’t be without Abbey. Rules is Rules, did you appeal for more time because you were away or didn’t receive the audit request? Or did you just beleive they wouldn’t remove you. This is a warning to other brokers, act immediately with Abbey audit requests, make sure you have all inocme sources verified even before submission – and have them ready for audit (whether or not they ask for it). Finally, any problems speak with your BDM, do not be abusive and the clients would have already known why you used abbey – from their reason’s why.

  12. Quite understand, their underwriting systems are rediculous and being called unprofessional by Santander/Abbey is quite galling. We must expect this from all lenders once the FSA has been through their processes. If Cameron wants the building industry to re-ignite he has to let the banks become lenders again and not deposit takers!

  13. Oh tut tut! We all know that life offices and banks can drive us to the point of distraction and ‘keeping one’s cool’ is often a well-nigh impossible task.

    How abusive was abusive? There are some firms that are so completely inept that my first question on getting through is “Who has the brain cell today and may I speak to her/him please”

    Then of course it is always a matter of money. I’ll bet he can be as asbusive as he likes if he were to introduce £100 million a year.

    In Alan’s case perhaps he needed to use the Spanish. Might I suggest “Vaya adelante y multiplique”, as no doubt Santander are used to this on their home ground when dealing with a more fiery Latin Temperament.

    As to some of the prissy remarks on this site I can only imagine that they have only had experience of UK business. If you want some truly abusive examples Europe and the US have a lot to teach us!

  14. I can empathise.

    We have been driven mad by many an organisation who constantly fail to ‘Treat Customers Fairly’, however, we tend to take our ball home before they’ve had a chance to take theirs home!

    If they can’t provide the service they claim to offer go elsewhere.

  15. Daphnie Jenkins-Smyth 3rd December 2012 at 2:20 pm

    John, if that is the case then they are out of order and they should be told to Go To Fullum or that they shold C U Next Tuesday

  16. Santander Abbey have an appauling attitude. Their staff are controlled by strings, very poor underwriting, no logic , no common sense. The problem comes in that their employees pretend that Santander is a good lender … they are not.

    This note was 25 words longer, however I had to remove the swear words.

  17. David Trenner - Intelligent Pensions 3rd December 2012 at 2:21 pm

    Santander’s mouthpiece (bravely hiding behind anonymity) said: “We can all see straight through that, you had 7 days to respond to income disclosure, you obviously didn’t respond and then kicked off at the lender when they didn’t pay your proc fee and removed you from the panel. If this was not the case you would not have needed to be abusive – no one is abusive if they ‘want to’ stop using a lender – shame you messed up, I couldn’t be without Abbey. Rules is Rules, did you appeal for more time because you were away or didn’t receive the audit request? Or did you just beleive they wouldn’t remove you. This is a warning to other brokers, act immediately with Abbey audit requests, make sure you have all inocme sources verified even before submission – and have them ready for audit (whether or not they ask for it). Finally, any problems speak with your BDM, do not be abusive and the clients would have already known why you used abbey – from their reason’s why.”

    If this is the standard of professionalism that Santander aspire to, I reckon Alan is well shot of them!!

  18. After being on the receiving end of some of Alan’s comments when I disagree with him in articles on Money Marketing I can only just imagine what the email contained.

    The employees of Santander are only working to policies set by managers at Santander and losing one’s temper is unprofessional particularly when the staff are normally poorly paid administration staff. We all know that lending criteria and decision-making at present is difficult and the only way to change that situation is to give feedback to the providers in a constructive manner and also set the client a good overview of the difficulties of the present mortgage market.

    I have not read any of the emails or heard any of the telephone conversations so I can only go on the information provided in the article above but there is a vast difference in pointing out a providers lack of adherence to their service standards and been abusive. We all get cross at some time in this industry but we should always remember that the other person on the line is also just trying to do their job even if they may be incompetent at it.

    My advice to Alan in the future is to use to complaints procedure with the organisations instead of losing one’s temper.

  19. This article made me chuckle – only because the few times I have met him he is really arrogant.

    I guess this is heart breaking news for him – as he is very much a self-professed IFA legend.

    What a fall from grace – one which I hope reminds him he is just another IFA

  20. Let me make a number of adjustments to this story.

    Firstly, last Thursday I wrote to Abbey advising them that their incipient stupidity and ongoing aggravation to my clients had resulted in them being removed from my panel of acceptable advisers.

    Secondly, they then chose to leak this story to Mortgage Strategy, in breach of their own Data Protection rules, no doubt seeking to embarrass me. After 35 years in financial services I find it hard to stand embarrassed.

    The body of feckless behaviour which has caused numerous of clients to complain about their processes is the basis for my disquiet. Other advisers feel similarly.

    At least it’ll give Nic another idea for a column.

  21. Alan has agreed that he was abusive – “The email I received led me to react the way I did.”

    He isn’t denying it.

    He must be happy though and was going to stop using them anyway – so alls well that ends well.

    Apart from Alan’s reputation which is now in tatters 🙂

  22. We all know that providers/lenders are not the best when it comes to servicing or related matters, however, when things get that bad/frustrating, the normal channels must be used, such as the BDM (if there is one) or formal compliant channels.

    I don’t agree that employee’s of any company should accept any sort of abuse and lenders now appear to be able to take the stance of removing brokers (what if they are the most suitable?). That said, in fairness to Alan, we do not know what he said and the circumstances that lead him down this path…….I would love to see the email!

  23. chuckles the adviser 3rd December 2012 at 2:49 pm

    Ha ha ha ha.

    The cats have come out to play, ever wonderd why IFA’s fail to unite against common enemies? See this thread for full details…

  24. Alan has merely let vent his feelings of frustration against those who don’t live up to their service standards and who create such anger as the normal civilised approach to bad service deserts one. We do not have the exact form of words he used, but one can only hold your hands up in dismay that someone introducing business to a lender has had to resort to such measures.

    But the clues about what has frustrated him lie in his own comments, it is not for him to determine the underwriting criteria of the lender or what detail was not provided, it is for him to find lenders who will specify clearly how they want applications to be constructed, what they need from the broker and that way any frustration is negated as you do what is required.

    BUT I do sympathise with him and can only commiserate on the loss of his agency with Santander. Is it really a loss not to have to deal with one of the most complained about banks in the country ?

  25. I have to agree with Alan this surely is a breach of DPA how would anyone find out this unless they worked for the company. Secondly Slow news day anyone surely a private company matter should not make it onto Money Marketing.

  26. @ Anonymous 2.13 p.m.

    You don’t know what you are talking about.

    Best keep quiet my fiend.

  27. I still use them, however I mentally wince as I hit the submit button in recognition of the impending aggrevation and frustration. The have gone from one of the best lenders to deal with to probably the worst in a matter of 6 months. You wonder if it is a way of controlling business through put. They have a responsibilty to be professional in their dealing as well. I have never been abusive to them i any way but I think the unprecedented volume of comments on an article tells its own story.

  28. IFA’s wonder why the general public generally treat them with disdain…..reading these comments it’s not hard to see why. Gloating at one man’s alleged moment loss of self control whilst at the same boasting about how you talk down to call centre staff. I was once one of these call centre staff many years ago, and I tell you this if you come through acting like a t*at I will treat you like one.

  29. I am very surprised that somebody from Santander seems to be responding to this article even anonymously and I’m just wondering which one is meant to be the professional the IFA or the large corporation. If indeed Santander have leaked this story and are indeed responding to this thread then I would have thought this is a break of their own T&C to keep information between broker and lender confidential. If it is not in their T&C then it should be as I don’t see what benefit this story possibly gives Santander or indeed Alan.

    I find this article amusing but also worrying and if I was a senior manager at Santander I’d also be wanting to know who leaked this story, as it doesn’t show Santander in a very good light.

    And to Alan just stop digging.

    To both grow up

  30. First rule of customer service is that if you walk into a business establishment and see a poster saying “Abuse towards our staff will not be tolerated”, walk straight back out again, because we all know why those signs are there.

    (Sadly most of them are unavoidable at times – post offices, train ticket offices, etc. You wouldn’t expect Banco Santander to qualify. Are they government-owned?)

  31. Where has Alan agreed that he was abusive? Have I missed something? From what I have read he has only told the Abbey how it really is! Is that abusive?

    According to Alan, he told Abbey that he is taking them off his own panel. They have responded to that by taking him off their broker panel and publicising that to everyone! To my knowledge they have not publicised other brokers who have been removed from their panel. Why the change now?

    As for reputation being in tatters – WHY? How can you make such a comment without knowing the full facts!

    Maybe Alan can publicise the full facts in a future article. That would make for some interesting reading.

  32. @ Peter Herd
    And you really enjoy giving out advice every chance you get.
    I have read Alan’s replies to some of your posts and none of them were even mildly abusive so stop jumping on the bandwagon.

  33. Anonymous | 3 Dec 2012 2:37 pm

    “Apart from Alan’s reputation which is now in tatters :-)”

    And what reputation do you have among the IFA community? Alan must be questionning why he works so hard for our industry when he has to face gloating comments like this.

    And it’s a shot in the foot from Santander who hardly come out of this storm in a teacup smelling of roses,

  34. I would wager that Alan’s reputation would have to plunge a long way before it plumbed the depths of that of Santander.

  35. Not surprised to see the self rightous Mr Bamford gloating as usual…

  36. This is absolutely priceless – and I didn’t even have to buy tickets !!

  37. Jonathan Burridge 3rd December 2012 at 3:25 pm

    I would very much like to read the emails in question and make my own judgement.

    That aside, the REAL issue here appears to me to be that a company is preventing an independent advisor from deal with it because it didnt like the way it was spoken to!? It is being dressed up under some convoluted association to its terms of business. Is there such as thing as Coprorate Bullying????

    Does not one else see that as a massive issue of abuse of power?

    For all we know the points that Mr Lakey may have raised might have been completely valid. Sometimes you need a blunt implement to get the job done.

    That said, he might have just been a very rude boy, in which case, he should be sent to bed without any tea.

    Someone in Abbey / Santander needs to sit down and have a long hard think about what has happened, this could the the thin end of the wedge.

    “I regret to advise that we are cancelling your introducers agreement because you once dated my wife (at school)”. “We have terminated your agreement as we dont like your website and my dad is bigger than yours”……….

  38. To Anonymous | 3 Dec 2012 3:19 pm

    Guess it is a race to the bottom lol

  39. Sometimes employees hide behind their employer’s incompetence and I often feel that perhaps the only way to get the message home and get something done is to vent your frustration at the employee in the hope that employees do something by haranguing their bosses. Too often employees say this is the way it is and do nothing to change things within, sheltering behind an employer who steadfastly refuses to do anything. It is not necessarily the customer that is responsible for abuse directing at employees but management.
    My son had debt collectors chasing him for nearly £10,000 Santander claimed he owed – a debt he never knew of, that damaged his credit rating and was never owed in the first place! Listening to his telephone calls over an extended period of time, I can only wonder at how Santander can claim to have any sense of decency, respect or appreciation of Treating Customers Fairly. I cannot condone abusive language directed at employees but frankly employees should expect it when you work for a company that treats customers so shabbily. As an (alleged) responsible lender, Santander should ask itself why someone has been driven to such extremes.

  40. Neil F Liversidge 3rd December 2012 at 3:41 pm

    No priggishness please. I’ve had little to do with mortgages but whenever I have had to contact a lender, in the absence of a mortgage consultant, I have found staff so incredibly arrogant that I’ve been left wondering how they keep their jobs. I recall one telling me how pleased he was that a deal had gone off and the client would have to pay more because it would be good for his bonus! Alan’s a good guy who has done more for the advisers’ cause than some of the windbags I can think of.

  41. Not lending related but I sought to transfer two cash ISAs from Santander. First they supposedly sent the funds to a totally different provider, and then they further delayed the transfers which meant each of my clients lost £1,500 on their new investment.Two letters of complaint were written and the same photocopied response received for each. I phoned the Customer Services Manager who signed the letters only to be told that she doesn’t speak to customers. I finally got the £1,500 for each client plus an additonal £50 each compensation, but it’s easier to draw chicken teeth than deal with this sorry company.

  42. Who here thinks that this is in direct response to Alan slating Abbey in his other blog “Alan Lakey: The rise of the automatons”?

    There is ranting, and there is a direct public attack on a lender you have on your panel. This was only going to end in tears.

    Santander might be bad, but is Alan so nieve to think that he can get them to change internal policies by ranting at them on a public forum or by email?

    This goes to show the intelligence of someone who many of you are passionately supporting. The sooner you realise he writes these blogs for his own ego then the quicker you will find another spokesperson to “change the industry”

    Alan has had a PR nightmare today – long over due in my opinion!

  43. I would say that Alan’s reputation remains far above that of Santander, even if he is guilty of being a rude and naughty little boy who has said nasty words to people who have made him rather cross. Interestingly whilst we bemoan the lack of financial education amongst the young my daughter saw me open a ‘junk mail’ credit card offer from Santander this week. She asked what it was, I explained, to which she replied, “But you wouldn’t want one from them, they’re really bad aren’t they?”, perhaps at 15 she is more educated than most, or Santander should be spending more resource on becoming the lender and bank that Abbey once were…..

  44. I agree with Neil L and Jonathan Burridge | 3 Dec 2012 3:25 pm.
    I record all my phone calsl as that way I can check to ensure I haven’t overstepped the line and phone back to appolgise if I think I might have done. If I am going to be angry on the phone I show my displeasure but I continually tell the individual I am NOT angry with them.
    I have a very interesting recording of a tele meeting with the head of legal from a major insurer who lost his cool with me and started swearing down the phone at me (he knew the telecon was being recorded). I also nearly had a member of the FSA on recording swearing about me as I had been very particular about something, unforuntaley the recored faield to work, but I still made sure I got the written appology below from the FSA.

    Our Ref: 425430.ISS10669336

    Dear Mr Castle

    Further to our telephone conversation yesterday which also involved my colleague Phillip Jxxxx, please accept my sincere apologies for the comment I made in an off-line conversation.”

    The reason ti happened is we use Skype and the FSA use headsets and the calls do not get cut off automatically so the “off line” conversation and abusive language was heard by the client ME.

    We are all human, so once the FSA staff member had appologised I told him I can be an awkward SOB, but it doesn’t mean I am not an awkward RIGHT sob. His appology was enough for me and i only use this as an example of how a simple SORRY goes a long way.

    I would be very interested to see a dedacted copy of the emails Alan.

  45. It will take more than this to defeat Alan, but based on Alan previous article, it is hard for me to conclude that this wasn’t partly self inflicted. It did seem that paroxysms of rage had been induced by what essentially was a risk decision on the part of the firm. A risk decision that was borne out of a tight risk framework which no doubt creates the environment for low rates which were attractive for Alan’s customers.

    Obviously no one knows the full story of what happened between Alan and Santander, though it does seem possible that previous dissatisfaction may have further affected any further dealings between the two.

    I know how bad Santander are, I really do. But whenever you lose it with the person on the end of the phone, the person with the least opportunity to change anything at the firm driving you round the twist, it only damages your own self respect. (The last time it happened it was HMRC, and I was mortified with myself afterwards for letting a muppet defeat me with my own anger…. and I only slammed the phone down… nowhere near any language issues)

    BTW – I don’t always see to eye to eye with Alan but I would strongly recommend he takes up the leak with them as a formal complaint. If there is a data protection breach, then the information commissioner may also be interested. A data protection breach to ‘punish’ someone in the public eye… even an industry sequestered public eye… is far beyond the principle of fair usage.

    Unfortunately, I am contract bound to not reveal my name. Interestingly, I have been on the receiving end of abuse from one of the people that have commented on this thread…. just because, as an IFA, they did not have the time or the inclination to familiarise themselves with AML and DPA legislative requirements. They were such happy days.

  46. To Anonymous | 3 Dec 2012 4:07 pm

    Would totally agree with you and Justin I would also agree with your comment about Santander

  47. I detest people swearing at call centre staff and abusive emails are not the way to go.

    However, we all have a “delete” key and can hang up the phone any time we like.

    Whatever has happened between Alan and Santander is between those two.

    Why have Santander released information about what is presumably a confidential arrangement?

    If any of you have tried to get information from one of these companies about even trivial, none specific, client related matters (including, for example, where an agency has been changed to) then you will know it is impossible.

    Santander have surely broken some data protection law and I wonder if Alan might have recourse if there is even a minor innacuracy in the comments leaked to the media.

    I have two friends whom have worked for Santander and neither would be of the opinion that it would be possible to besmirch their reputation further, but I think this shows that even those in the gutter can fall further still.

  48. We have a list of lenders that we will not use because of past problems they have caused clients, particularly self-employed clients. The last one we jettisoned was after the lender promised a mortgage subject to three years accounts proving income. That was done. Then valuation was instructed. Then lender went back on its word and asked for SA302s. The resulting delay meant the clients were unable to buy the property they wanted. The administration of many lenders is an absolute disgrace, and I have 21 years of experience at this. It has never been so bad.

  49. To Anonymous | 3 Dec 2012 4:07 pm

    I agree, it shows a total lack of dignity openly attacking someone you do business with.

    I can only assume that this is a direct retaliation by Santander. Quite a successful one at that. The previous article would have gone under the radar with most of his other partners, now I suspect many more of his panel (including life insurers) will now realise what he is capable of.

    Alan will live to regret this, as once you show you have the capacity to publicly denounce a company, all the other partners you have will be nervous that one of their own call centre staff will cause Alan to start a public tirade against them.

    The mistrust many large partners he relies on will now show towards him will now shut many doors that where previously open.

    One thing that is puzzling me though, why if Alan is the Director of a successful business is he on the phone to Santander and writing them emails? Surely he has a team that do that. Again as stated earlier his ego got the better of him “I’ll sort this out”

  50. Can’t believe most of the posts relate to abuse. (For which we do not know the details from Alan)
    But I can only assume you are all IFA’s because article for me has little to do with ‘abuse’ isn’t that just the smoke screen for being unable to provide full disclosure of income for a fast track case when the case was pulled for audit?
    (standard procedure with Abbey mortgages!!)
    So is the story, audit request that Alan couldn’t fulfill, they removed hime from panel and Alan argued? This appears to be a failed audit – from a ‘reputation in tatters, I don’t think it is, because everyone can be upset and irrate with lenders (we all know that) PROVIDING the situation did not emminate from being unable to ‘verify income’ – this would be the worrying part for me as a professional adviser. (we are not in 2000, gmac star no longer exists!)

  51. To Tracy

    Well said! Alan does live in the past though – but I would hope that both parties would learn from this.

  52. Frankly I’m confused about the whole thing and how it has got so out of hand. I like Alan & look forward to his comments – usually a voice of informed witness for the IFA BUT don’t shoot the messenger, a mere pawn working for the company – could be a son or daughter doing their job. I don’t mind ‘Abbey’ / Santander – they ask for everything but I know that and give it to them – last application was speedily dealt with.
    However, it is ridiculous that an organisation can remove him from their panel without ‘due process’,e.g. a verbal warning from a manager for first occurrence, written for second (with a time limitation) and then the final warning before removal. There is something sinister that allows Santander to act so quickly and with the possible effect on a persons ability to do business.
    As a previous contributer said ‘Alan should have been sent to bed early without his supper’.
    Santander……. ‘wise up’
    Alan ….. ‘Pick your battles’ and keep speaking out for the adviser.

  53. Oops, just read Peter Herd’s latest. Such a sniper and poor loser. Glad he wasn’t elected to represent the IFA. Bit holier than thou! Could be a replacement for Nic C. though. LOL!

  54. I cannot believe the amount of sanctimonious drivel being put on this link, much of it anonymously. If you have never been totally and utterly frustrated with responses from providers, especially whilst making phone calls, then you probably are not doing the job properly. In Alan’s case “there but for the grace of God…” for most of us.

    And as for those people who insist on commentating twice or three times on the same link, get a life. Express your opinion then get off and let someone else have a go. This is not a chat line.

  55. you are going to have no panel left soon if you dont start thinking with your head – you attacking Abbey in last months post was silly. As the guy above says – choose your battles wisely.

    You rely on your panel – not the other way round. You give people bad press too often and they will stop doing business.

    Stop ranting and make your CIC website look like its from the 21st century and not 1980. Its horrific

  56. Oh this takes me back in time to the days when IFA’s used to phone up Life Offices and Broker consultants and swear royally at us. Everything was our fault (occasionally it was) never their own. Once took a job with a company and in the first week 3 separate Brokers phoned me up and swore at me out of sheer frustration with the service the company had poorly delivered in the year prior to my joining. Wasn’t personal but was unpleasant.

    Not saying that Alan Lakey did that of course. I defer judgment on him unlike others on this post.

    The old glory days when a broker thought it great fun to get someone in the local Life office in tears or worse.

    Maybe Santander are just thin skinned.

  57. To Mike

    Have not stood for an election in anything so do not know where that has come from and it is usual me that is been sniped at when I comment on here.

    What this just proves is that manners and listening to other points of view without been rude is important in life particularly if you want to change someones viewpoint.

  58. william kingsley 3rd December 2012 at 6:39 pm

    Lenders have rules, stick by them and only recommend them when you know they fit criteria. If you wing it then your clients suffer. I used to dislike Abbey but I have a good BDM and my last 2 cases were offered in 6 days and 2 days respectively. But yes like most lenders, they do annoy me from time to time. I can always choose to do something else though.

  59. This is totally priceless!! Plus I didn’t even have to buy tickets for it !! Thanks everyone I didn’t think id be laughing much in December, haven’t laughed so much in ages.

  60. So let me get this right Alans upset that somebody wont bend the rules to give his customer thousands of pounds that they may or may not get back. No wonder your upset Alan you might have to do your job properly for once. Were all in the same boat your not more special than everyone else. Man up Alan.

  61. @ Peter herd

    Whatch out that your halo does not slip down and choke you

  62. Apart from the snivelong Peter Herd I note that most of the negative comments are from ‘Anonymous’.

    What brave guys you are.

  63. Good God !

    Self-Righteous and pompous doesnt come close to some of the comments on here !!

    Peter Herd – Priceless !

  64. @ Apollo Creed

    and I suppose that is your real name?

  65. I pity the fool…

  66. I’ve seen it all now.

    Someone comes onto this comment thread to berate people posting anonymously.

    And gives himself the name ‘Apollo Creed’.

    Oh, the irony.

  67. Again the issue with auditing fastrack applications. Lets read between the lines shall we ? Mr Lakey completed fast track applications on his clients behalf and when the lender asked for proof of income there was an issue. I wonder what that was ?

  68. If the last few comments from people demonstrate the professional standards within financial services I pity any call centre.

  69. We seem to be going through a rocky patch at the moment

  70. Sadly this thread clearly demonstrates what is wrong with this “profession” at the moment.

    If Alan was rude and abusive that is clearly wrong and I am sure he will accept that.

    However; the articles I have read written by Alan tend to be very supportive of the IFA community and he does appear to be fighting your corner.

    And what do you do in return – give him a kicking.

    What a sickeining, spiteful lot!

    Disgusting!

  71. I must admit this is a brilliant read.

    Alan has hung himself out to dry by thinking that writing blogs on how bad everything is was going to improve his statue in the IFA community.

    Very short sighted though – as you cannot say that about your business partners.

    Everyone on here is stuck with the rules and lenders – you cannot change them, they are in control. Alan has put his head above the parapet for his own ego – and it has gone wrong.

    I guess Alan now knows what people in the IFA community really think of him now – not alot!

  72. There may be an issue here that people haven’t considered.
    Alan’s decision not to reccomend Abbey/Santander Mortgages is one he can make based on his belief of their current systems and as we are talking about MORTGAGES, this has no implications for status as far as whole of market is concerned. it is a very different situation when we are talking about Investment business and Abbey staing they have removed him from panel, for whatever reason.
    With Investment business, refusing to deal with someone submitting new investment business on behalf of a new client to the provider would be one thing, but refusing to deal with an agent of a client on an existing plan, particularly when no due process/formal procedure has been followed for handling (alledged) abusive behaviour has implications for Independance and for the rights of the client to appoint their own agent over their own money. If a provider refuses to accept an adviser as an agent on the clients investment, what will happen I wonder?

  73. This is the future for journalism. I find it frustrating to read an article and see no readers’ responses and not to be allowed the opportunity to contribute my own response.

  74. Who needs brokers anyway 4th December 2012 at 2:27 pm

    During the time this rant has been transgressing, I have managed to contact my bank, complete a full fact find, have an agreement in principle for a repayment mortgage of 2.79% fixed for 2 years with the fee waived in an introductory offer (£999), and be waiting for the conveyancer to arrive to verify the figures, hopefully all completed in the next 4 weeks, and guess what “I AM NOT A MORTGAGE BROKER”, so wake up guys smell the coffee take some more exams and go and offer advice on something we (the general public) need advice on, not something we can pretty much work out for ourselves with little or no cost. You are all heading for the scrap heap and you don’t even realise it as you are too busy squabbling over what “Alan says” or what “Santander” has done.
    I have news for you people we don’t care.

  75. Sorry. Is this really news? IFA gets annoyed at bank. What a great story

  76. @ Who needs brokers anyway | 4 Dec 2012 2:27 pm
    Well I’m glad you have benefited by applying directly to a bank that probably was involved in PPI or LUBIR fixing and you trust them to ‘look after you’ – I’m sure they will!!! Because we scour the market, take into consideration hidden costs like fees, tie-ins, and dare I say ‘service and ability’, that interest rates are kept in check. Compare this with personal loan rates etc that we don’t do and the huge variation there and of course the ‘exclusive’ deals we have access to and perhaps you will more generous in your comments. Take us (who police the mortgage market) out of the equation and you will soon be at the mercy if the banks and paying more for your mortgage.

  77. No one needs brokers 4th December 2012 at 4:46 pm

    Mike – brilliant!

    There in the lies the problem with IFA’s – the way you just spoke to a member of the public is terrible!

    Yes he may have applied to a bank that has missold PPI – but he has saved your extortionate fee. You have been ripping customers off for years “advising” them on products they could buy themselves.

    Take life insurance – why would anyone need to get advice on buying such a simple product! It beggers belief!

    The internet is going to kill you – as EVERYONE can access the info you have been charging people for – not RDR or the FSA. You are a dying breed.

  78. I think only people who have never lost their temper should be allowed to comment on this article.

    It seems both disproportionate and a significant breach of confidentially for this information to be in the public domain.

    For all those parties making vitriolic comments I would have a long hard think about what is in your inbox and whether you would like it made public?

    I am not here to defend bad language and it does not appear Alan is trying to either.

    No one is perfect but Alan clearly plays everything with a straight bat and has an undeniable passion for his clients and our industry.

    I hope this can be resolved amicably for all parties.

  79. I have always found Santander staff friendly and helpful.
    Underwriting is shielded now by the call centres, everyone knows that, and call centre staff cant ever give you a straight answer until the case has been ‘reviewed’.

    Santander don’t pay their staff enough to take abuse from abrasive self interested brokers.

  80. I suspect he was driven to distraction, poor man. I dealt with them as an ordinary customer. I too was driven to distraction. The only difference between me and Mr Lakey is I couldn’t actually locate anyone to abuse.

  81. I had to smile at this story after speaking to new clients yesterday in a quiet little village in Cumbria- they tried to open a probate a/c with Santander to handle their cousin’s sizeable estate in North London after her death a while ago.

    Santander refused the Executors after going through all the details & keeping them waiting for an hour.

    Why?….Because one of the Executors lives in a house with no number – just a name – as is the case with many properties in this area. Apparently Santander’s database can’t handle a house with no number!

    Yet I live in an apartment, which has no number and I have a (former A & L account) Santander also!!

    You honestly couldn’t make this “tick box” banking/mortgage nightmare up!

  82. Sorry this is Off topic – but then at least it’s a little light relief from squabbling guys….

    @No one needs brokers

    “Take life insurance – why would anyone need to get advice on buying such a simple product! It beggers belief!”

    Could I mention the benefits of writing life assurance plans in Trust & the options regarding the different Trust’s… for starters

    With road accidents & suicide being the 2 biggest killers of males under 50 in the UK. Both require formal inquests – which can in some cases eg multiple pile ups…. take months – Insurers won’t pay out benefits until in receipt of death certificate.
    A Coroner cannot release the certificate until the inquest has taken place…..

    Unless it’s a joint plan, a grieving widow may have to struggle to pay a mortgage meantime covered by her late husband/partners life cover.

    If only they’d sought advice & not bought online… then perhaps the IFA would have recommended the plan was written in Trust – in which case the insurer would have paid out the benefits just on a note from the Coroner – no need for a death certificate….

    A mortgage is one of the biggest financial commitments many clients ever undertake in their entire lives. Going through all the options & pointing out considerations that they would never have thought of with a client is all part of that service known as financial planning.

    Perhaps you might be pleasantly surprised should you ever decide to speak to decent IFA.

  83. @Peter Herd

    The word “sanctimonious” was invented for you.

  84. Well said JulieB – i once spoke to a guy with the same point and how i was dreaming if i thought people needed advice on life cover.

    turns out he bought level term for his repayment mortgage. Was several years in and had already cost him several hundred pounds extra. (he was also single and childless so perhaps no need for any let alopne decreasing)

  85. RegulatorSaurusRex 6th December 2012 at 4:02 pm

    You should all be ashamed of yourselves, the regulators will be having the last laugh! The ones who haven’t yet gone to work for PWC, and the ones who have.

    I’m so glad I’m extinct.

  86. @Alan Lakey: why would an article about someone being abusive give me an idea for something to write? If that were the case, given so many people’s kind comments regularly attached at the bottom of my columns, I would have had an opportunity to write on the same subject up to 52 times a year.

    As for who leaked what, I wouldn’t rush to suggest it came from Santander. My own experience suggests it is just as possible that a financial reporter who “discovered” that Alan had “sacked” the lender from his panel (not that hard, given his previous comments about the same organisation), then used a bit of journalistic enterprise to call a contact at Santander.

    As for the abuse, live by the sword, die by it.

  87. @ Simon Kershaw: re. your comments about Peter Herd: REALLY?

  88. Just found out someone finally stood up to Flakey Lakey. About time!

    Instead of abusing people and turning all keyboard warrior when he doesn’t get his own way he should try submitting compliant business like the rest of us have to. He obviously thought he was above all that.

    If he’s been restricted from fast track that either means he didn’t even bothered to get income proof or it was rubbish – either way no excuse. I don’t use Fast Track because frankly if I’ve missed something I’d rather find out pronto. It’s his clients who are disadvantaged by this above everyone else because the banks have a house they can take if it all goes pear shaped while he’s away spending his procuration fees (or not in this case).

    And now he’s not “independent” in any sense he’s just an F.A. (Financial Advisor of course. I mind my language)

  89. Days away from the biggest single change in our industry in the last 20 years, and we spend over 9 pages arguing the toss about a guy that should have known better?

  90. Another ‘anonymous keyboard warrior’ (6/12/12 6.30 pm) with big talk but not even a vestige of courage sufficient to post under his own name.

    Interesting how many sad and vindictive plonkers have decided that they can take pot shots at somebody who has been standing up for their cause for years.

  91. To Grey Defector, 7 Dec, 8.43am

    Having a pop at ‘anomymous keyboard warriors’ posting who don’t use their own name.

    While not using your own name.

    Priceless.

  92. Could this be a record of comments on this site?

    How would we find this out?

  93. @Nic Cicutti.

    Yes. Really.

    Merry Christmas.

  94. Abbey accused me of submitting a fraudulent application (which I was trying to port to a new property). To add insult to injury, they then accused me or trying to port the mortgage in order to do a “back door” buy to let. I kept my complaint professional, but they are a truly shocking organisation and it seems that the have made a scapegoat of Lakey whilst flexing the muscles.

  95. When you do usually knowing you get abused by others who can’t string two sentences together and often have to resort to name-calling like Simon Kershaw | 6 Dec 2012 10:16.

    No wonder why we cannot and together we can’t agree on professional standards. I go back to the original point of the article and state that abusing a customer service staff member is not professional .

  96. Oh Alan, Alan, Alan.

    Much as I love your columns for the pure comedy value, this time you really have made my week! So, the voice of reason, etc etc and yet it sounds like you were trying to bash through a mortgage app with no evidence of affordability. Oh dear. Epic fail. Then to compound your error by showing the world that you are a bully by swearing at the staff at the Lender. Epic fail. Then blogging about it so that the FSA might suddenly take an interest in your client files……it does not get better really, does it?

    I’m sure when you are on AFA’s panel pontificating about model professionals to others in the industry they will be able to keep the sneers off their faces!

Leave a comment