FTAdviser.com

Advertising

CV: Rob Clifford founded Mortgageforce in 2000 and took on the additional role as divisional director of West Bromwich Building Society in 2006. He has also worked as a Mortgage Code Compliance Board director for seven years and remains an Association of Mortgage Intermediaries board member. He was previously a director of Bishopscourt Group and founding director of MPI. In his earlier career, he was director Whitechurch Securities and marketing manager for Advanced Mortgage Systems.

Mortgage Adviser: How did you move into your current role?

Rob Clifford: I left my previous role at a Bank of Scotland subsidiary to set up Mortgageforce and to research an alternative to the model of mortgage advising in September 2000. That research led me to look at the North American and Australian mortgage markets. This ultimately resulted in the launch of Mortgageforce in the UK towards the end of 2000 and then that resulted in the acquisition of that business by West Bromwich Building Society. So effectively I have been in this role since the outset really. While technically my employment changed in 2005 when I became an executive of the West Bromwich Group, my day job has been quite constant since 2000. I am more actively involved in West Bromwich Group these days but my primary objective is still focused on Mortgageforce.

MA: Is the aim to grow the number of advisers you have or increase their productivity?

RC: We have a three-year corporate plan that sees us increasing the number of mortgage consultants not withstanding the credit crunch. So we are realistic in our view that the 2008 and 2009 financial year is going to be one which is not going to deliver huge growth. There may be a period of consolidation. However we still aim to end this year with more mortgage consultants than we started the year with. Certainly our strategy continues to be one of growing the franchise numbers by 15 per cent or so each year. We have delivered 15 to 20 per cent growth in mortgage consultants consistently for five years but I think we will see that scaled back this year due to market conditions. Our priority throughout this year is to hold the ship steady in a difficult market and achieve some growth to a lesser level than we have achieved in the last five years.

MA: Are advisers looking to have a big advisory brand behind them in this current market?

RC: That is one of the ironies of our recruitment proposition. When the market is stable and buoyant there is less movement and less discontinuity but we are certainly seeing greater instance of experience practitioners worried about being on their own and surviving. Something we did also not predict is we are seeing a high number of practitioners that are nervous about the future of the firm or network they work for. We have not seen an awful lot of movement from large adviser firms for a number of years and we have not seen a high incidence of people hopping around from networks and clubs. In many cases it is a very realistic set of concerns and it is entirely possible some small, medium and maybe even large adviser firms will struggle to survive and will retrench this year.

MA: How have you had to change your strategy to adapt to the changing market conditions?

RC: All intermediary businesses are looking at their product proposition and we are no exception. We have extended our range of directly relevant products and services so we are getting more active in secured loans, bridging finance and insurance products and even being more proactive in marketing services such as will writing. It has given advisers a focus on auxiliary income generation. For instance, we are seeing our conveyancing referrals increase significantly as advisers get more focused on the need to provide a more round service that happens to also generate more income and that is entirely sensible. In truth I do not see a seismic shift in the shape of our revenue lines. It will still be mortgage procuration fee, arrangement fees and insurance commissions that make up the bulk of our income.

MA: What is your opinion on the dual pricing debate?

RC: Dual pricing should not be outlawed per se but it is odd lenders should use such a blunt instrument that seems to ignore the value of their key intermediary relationships. There is no question some advisers are losing business as a direct result of consumers being able to get a product cheaper from the lender's retail branch. So it has to be curtailed in the sense it is so obvious and deliberate. While I do not welcome it I would understand why lenders would start to look at quotas for how they pay for acquiring mortgage business. I thought dual pricing would be potentially damaging to some long-term relationships.

MA: What is your prediction for the mortgage industry in the months ahead?

RC: It is inevitable the overall numbers of transactions will be down by at least 20 per cent, maybe not quite so seriously down as some of the trade bodies have predicted but there will be significantly less remortgage cases and we all know the purchase market is in turmoil. We need to bear in mind though that even the predictions for a poor 2008 are more promising than those for the market in 2001. We still have a very active mortgage market, just not nearly as prosperous as many firms have got used to in the last few years.

MA: What can lenders do to work better with advisers?

RC: Pay appropriate procuration fees for the work involved and avoid channel conflict such as dual pricing. At a practical level of course lenders can work with advisers to involve quality of business and appropriateness of product pricing and lending criteria but the key thing is consistent trading relationships. So tell us how you are going to trade with us and deliver that and channel conflict by way of activities like dual pricing can only destroy lender intermediary relationships.

MA: What is the biggest challenge Mortgageforce is facing at the moment?

RC: A reduced mortgage market in terms of the number of transactions, so less business to go around and the risk many smaller firms will find it tougher to make ends meet during this year. That problem gets aggravated if lenders decide to reduce procuration fees or decide to continue dual pricing.

MA: Last year you signed a partnership agreement with Bradford & Bingley. Are more link-ups such as these on the cards this year?

RC: We are enormously pleased with our corporate partnership programme where partners such as Bradford & Bingley refer clients to Mortgageforce for mortgage advice and we are engaged in tender and pitch presentations pretty much all of the time. I expect to announce new partnerships of that nature as often as every few months given the amount of ground work that has been going on in the last year or so. We generate thousands of mortgage opportunities from our 14 partnerships of that nature and it is a cornerstone of the Mortgageforce proposition these days. The central plank of that programme has always been lenders and out of those major partnerships nine of them are with banks and building societies so it is likely there will be a number of new relationships in the same mould. I am confident we will have two or three quite sizeable partners throughout the course of this year.

MA: What is the most valuable thing you have learnt in this industry?

RC: I have learnt the strength of face-to-face mortgage advice. Whether a consumer is doing a simple £90,000 remortgage or a professional is buying a £5m property with a £3m mortgage all consumers appreciate and value quality advice. I am delighted to say most consumers realise the best way to get that is face-to-face. Consumers like that emotional engagement, they like someone to reassure them and that has been the case in the 20 years I have worked in the market. It has nothing to do with the size of the loan or the intellect of the consumer. All shapes and sizes of mortgage and all types of people and levels of intelligence an experience. In every sense people seem to need an value good old fashioned face-to-face advice.