Login
ISCOVER
It is more viable for a financial planner to add a mortgage broking component to their business than for a mortgage broker to add financial planning services, according to Omniwealth.
Speaking to The Adviser’s sister publication InvestorDaily, Oniwealth managing director Matthew Kidd said that given the transactional nature of mortgage broking and the service-oriented nature of financial planning, convergence works best when planners bring brokers in-house.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Looking for more benefits? Become a Premium Member.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
Looking for more benefits? Become a Premium Member.
“It stands to reason that if you’ve got the strategy piece and the service piece and it is all about not being transactional, clearly the emphasis is going to be on the adviser to be able to control that process,” Mr Kidd said.
“By bringing a mortgage broker in-house, that is where that broker can add terrific value to the client relationship, but ultimately the adviser controls that,” he said.
While many brokers have attempted to add financial planning to their service proposition, “some have done it terribly” since brokers are “so transactionally-based”, he added.
“It needs to be a dollar figure – they are not about relationships,” he said.
So what they will do is bring a couple of advisers in, the advisers are standing there waiting for the leads to come in and the leads are poor quality or they haven’t been screened.
“At the end of the day, it just stands to reason that the advantage of the adviser bringing the mortgage broker in-house rather than the broker bringing the adviser in-house is far greater.”
