October recorded the highest volume of house sales in five months, according to new data
After four years at the helm of Harcourts, CEO Chris Kennedy has resigned
No one wants to go to work every day dreading the amount of time they are going to spend with his or her boss
Professional development and vague wording are among the issues discussed in its submission
Offerings are the lowest on record, firms say
Non-bank event a "hit" with mortgage advisers
David is making very good sense that is why he is not a politician or a rule maker.
I doubt whether there is anybody in the wider industry that does not agree that there should be bench marking- minimum standards re professional qualifications. But it is ostrich mentality not to give some off set- credit- acknowledgement for someone's industry experience and knowledge- some of us that is considerable.
Certificate 5 with the various strands soon mounts up cost wise by way of $$$'s- by way of time out of the office away from the coal face for those of us in outer regions other costs to attend course that are only running in the main three centre's.
My deceased Dad used to say to me when i was a boy- "son we there is a will there is a way.........." but you know what I doubt whether there is a will and yes I am impacted with my zillion years of "hands on" and industry experience and you know what it counts for absolutely nothing- yip absolutely nothing at that annoys me BIG time..............................the journey continues!!!
Anyone in an industry that can change people lives who does not have a paper qualification to prove knowledge is trying to dodge the bullet in my opinion. No other profession is a lax as ours and it's about time it's practitioners stepped up to the mark. Well done Code committee for making Level 5 the benchmark. Not perfect but a damn sight better than what we have.
Under the CCCFA does not the lender have a duty of care to ensure the client can afford the loan? If I recall correctly, the CCCFA states that you cannot provide a finance contract knowing that the contract could cause severe financial hardship. I am paraphrasing here but I remember when the CCCFA came out, it was pretty tough but no real enforcement, but if the clients you mentioned were to end up in a mortgagee sale, the whole loan could be null and void from outset. That's my opinion of course, and open for discussion, does anyone else here agree or disagree?
As a broker we must use bank calculators and they have to fit, occassionally the bank may work outside the calculator, but that would be rare. So I find it really interesting when a couple get a 95% loan, have more debt than deposit,($25k) and have lived in NZ approx 1-2 yrs. They are not professionals, have high HP bills and child care bills, yet the bank lends 95%. There is no way I could have got them a loan with those figures. Second client living in Rotorua buys a home and has to have boarder income to make the loan work, she definately cannot afford on her income, she is on a single income and is really stretched, now cannot afford her rates or life insurance. The bank has put her in a difficult situation, and there is no way I could have put that through for her, it would not have been accepted in Rotorua. The banks are doing loans we cannot procure, and under new rules probably shouldnt be doing them either. I have another story but you get the drift, three different banks
offering loans that mortgage brokers would could not get through broker units. One rule for them, and another rule for brokers.
Queenstown broker discusses the challenges of securing loans for clients within the current environment
New Zealand’s largest city has seen the highest volume of sales this month since 2003.
Get your testimonials online and make the most of the digital age
How mortgages are changing around the world, and what it could mean here