Three offers recommendation lost in translation - ComCom
The Commerce Commission says its proposal that advisers have to submit three offers to clients has been "lost in translation".
Thursday, April 3rd 2025, 9:39AM 
2 Comments
by Sally Lindsay
Commission deputy chairwoman Anne Callinan speaking at the Financial Advice New Zealand (FANZ) national adviser conference says the recommendation was qualified “where possible”.
She says it might have been lost in translation. “The commission appreciates it is not always possible to present three options.
“Obviously, the characteristics of a particular buyer or borrower or time constraints might mean this isn’t feasible in a given case.”
Callinan says the commission is not suggesting that advisers “should not be forced to present three offers fullstop.”
“We understand there are practical issues with getting loan application systems up to a level of standardisation and automation where it is feasible to process multiple offers for clients.
“And we do appreciate there are usually tight time constraints at play where people seeking to buy a home are understandably anxious about getting the applications accepted.”
An overnight turnaround on this is not the commission’s expectation, but it is placing the emphasis on banks to improve processes to make it easier for mortgage advisers to submit multiple applications on behalf of their clients and to make it more efficient for lenders to quickly process loan applications.
“We did this in part because one of the overarching problems we identified with the banking sector was the lack of investment in systems and processes of this kind,” Callinan says.
“And we considered that this needed to improve to reflect a more competitive market.”
The commission is anticipating that New Zealand Banking Association will work with the mortgage advice on opportunities to invest in better IT systems that will help everyone.
It says it is entirely reasonable for consumers, who are often making the single biggest financial commitment of their lives, to be presented with a few detailed options and for the independent adviser to explain which option is best for them and why.
“We think this is not only good for consumers but will enhance the reputation of mortgage advisers. Those who come to the party will be placing stronger pressure on the banks to compete harder.”
Callinan says the commission has been having good discussions across the sector about how the its recommendation on offers to clients can be implemented and is confident the industry can come up with a means of addressing its concerns. “We have a mutual interest here in promoting better options in consumer choice.
From here, she says mortgage advisers are “uniquely placed to give clients real choice and play a major role in driving stronger competition between banks”.
| « Borrowers behind in mortgage payments ebbing |
Special Offers
Comments from our readers
Somebody joked recently that if three floors of every government department in Wellington vanished overnight would New Zealanders even notice a difference to their everyday lives? I think we all know the answer to that.
Taxpayers demand a lot better because we are paying these people a salary and a handsome one at that when you look at some of the Commerce Commission's current salary bands available online…
Sign In to add your comment
|
|
Printable version |
|
Email to a friend |
On the 13th of February, this year TMM reported The Commerce Commission was sticking to its recommendation that mortgage advisers should have to submit three “actual offers” to every mortgage applicant.
The competition regulator was demanding that advisers agree to do this, or it would “recommend government intervention,” FAMNZ country manager Leigh Hodgetts said. ComCom even wrote to FAMNZ making this demand which it claimed would promote price competition and choice for home loans.
Fast forward to today and now we have Commerce Commission deputy chairwoman Anne Callinan saying that advisers “should not be forced to present three offers full stop.”
She says the Commission’s recommendation might have been lost in translation…. What exactly was lost in translation?
As illustrated by the above example the Commerce Commission clearly hasn’t got the foggiest idea what it is doing.
How much longer does this country continue to tolerate a public service based in Wellington which is clearly no longer fit for purpose?