Fincorp Director on rogue firms: If I had definitive evidence, then yes I'd report them

Fincorp Director on rogue firms: If I had definitive evidence, then yes I'd report them




In an era where the FCA has admitted to basing the majority of its bridging market intelligence on facts and opinions in the trade press, an awareness has fruited regarding the importance of.

In an era where the FCA has admitted to basing the majority of its bridging market intelligence on facts and opinions in the trade press, an awareness has fruited regarding the importance of reliability in the industry media.

As a result, some believe that commentators should exercise caution with analysis and thoughts expressed, ensuring that all items are fully substantiated with evidence.

See links: FCA’s bridging finance MI at risk of distortion
             
ASTL 2014: Review

With this in mind, it’s no surprise that Matthew Anderson of bridging lender Fincorp shocked and disgruntled some last year with the firm’s outlandish takes on the bridging world. 

B&C sat down with Matthew to get to the bottom of the lender’s accusations.

Some of your articles could be construed as controversial. What is your response to those who hold this opinion?

We thought the penalty rates [article] would be contentious, but it’s not been at all and yet some [other articles that we didn’t think would be], would appear to have been contentious so it is actually quite strange. It’s people’s perception.

I would like to think that if we are being contentious, someone will pull me up and say ‘Matt, what you said is wrong because…’. It’s alright people turning around to you and saying ‘Grumble grumble I don’t agree with that…’. OK, well if we are a mature industry, let’s have a discussion about it.

I can cite examples of what people do, the problem is a lot of it is hearsay.

You don’t seem like you’re one to shy from a debate, then?

 I think healthy debate is good, if you’re a maturing industry you have to have it. But who’s going to be the first person to jump and say “Do you know what, mate, I had phone call from a broker who was trying to get a loan out of you, and you were rubbish because…” Who’s going to throw the first stone? And once that happens, you’ll probably have a few months of throwing stones, and then it’ll all calm down again.

I know everyone’s going to go “Oh my God, the FCA are watching, what are they going to think?” but you have to have these things out.

If we’re not behaving properly, that’s going to come out eventually without a shadow of a doubt.

Give us some insight into the purpose of your articles?

I suppose in recent times the thrust of what we have been saying is that we are trying to differentiate ourselves as an organisation, and, I guess, we have highlighted that in the short term industry - we don’t think there is a huge amount of scrutiny in the way that the rates are marketed.

We now know that the FCA sources a lot of its bridging market intelligence from trade press, what are your thoughts on this?  

It is shocking [that] the FCA only know[s] what we’re doing from what people write.

We all talk a big game and that in itself causes problems.

Some of your blogs have referred to alleged malpractice within the industry, however we haven’t spotted you often identifying the firms or individuals in question. Why, don’t you name names?


Well, yes, the point is that I’ve got a fairly good idea. You know, instinct, and you talk to a number of brokers and you get the same story about the same people.

There’s no smoke without fire, but not having first-hand experience of it, it’s actually very difficult. I’m sure people say things about Fincorp, too.

I would like to think we generate a healthy debate, but also, throwing stones doesn’t look good to the outside world.

Have you ever used your information to report a company?


No… If I had definitive evidence, then yes of course [I would report them, and] if we did anything wrong, then I would expect we would be reported too.

Co–written by Beth Fisher, Chanice Henry

Leave a comment