The AOBP event which hosted a panel of eight lenders was certainly worth the journey from Nottingham to London and the trek back home did, at least, give ample time for reflection.
The forum seemed much like a quiz show at times but it worked and was innovative. We covered a lot in a short time and from an entertainment point of view the key pads were a success, especially when people managed to press them at the wrong moment!
Regarding audience participation, having set questions for lenders was obviously disappointing to some who were reluctant to accept that there were not going to be any questions from the floor.
On a more serious note i.e. the issue of IFS backed bridge qualifications, while I understand the need for education I have no doubt that the FCA will be making up its own mind on what it requires. So I was not exactly gripped by the responses at the forum. I expect the education debate to rumble on and on and while 49 per cent in favour is impressive, I wonder if this "good minority" could actually envisage what an IFS backed bridge qualification would entail.
I was disappointed with Alan Cleary's statement, saying that he had lent 20 per cent of his book at a heavily discounted rate. As I see it competition is a good thing and if you can be competitive, flaunt it. If that causes ripples in the market, so what? If your strength is discounting that's good for the consumer and good for the broker. And the industry needs to be seen to be providing good value, especially given the current level of scrutiny by the FCA.
I did enjoy the "when is a bridge not a bridge" debate. To add my own opinion, life is complicated and while in a perfect world a couple of days would be ideal, over 30 years experience in the industry has taught me that things go wrong and that frequently made assumptions can become the mother of all calamities. I don't believe the argument that beyond a two day completion a facility is "not a bridge" and I would suggest that broadcasting this ideal could give clients unrealistic expectations.
But overall it was pleasing to see lenders giving up their time to form the panel and to experience the level of openness and maturity that pervaded the day, something I am sure the FCA would have been proud of.
While the room at the Soho Hotel was nearly full, many more brokers could have attended and we need to reduce the number of BDMs in the room and increase the number of brokers. What's more, the attendance was southern-centric and we need a second forum (Birmingham / Manchester?) which could possibly be tagged on to the NACFB if needs be, so that brokers outside London can be better included. This would broaden the scope and development of the AOBP community.
In addition, if the questions set for lenders had been publicised ahead of the date, more brokers might have made the journey to London.
And that brings me neatly back to the education debate - an IFS backed qualification might be just the ticket if we could read minds at the FCA, but any exam process needs to be matched by opportunities for ongoing professional development so "We need a forum for the North"...sorry, have I said that before somewhere?
By Graham Allen, Managing Director Commercial Money Matters & member of the AOPB executive committee
Leave a comment