Letâs talk about churning
Here is a good topic for consumers to understand... churning. Not butter, but instead brokers who churn their book of business to make more money.
It is a common practice in the mortgage brokerage community in Canada and is one of the ways that brokers negatively impact consumers... and lenders.
In the mortgage industry churning is what happens when a mortgage broker moves a customer from one lender to another. This most often happens when the client is looking to advance new funds against their homes. There may be several reasons why a customer would wish to advance new funds: (1) money for renovations (2) funds for school (3) to purchase a second property (4) debt consolidation, and the list goes on.
The mortgage broker, in their infinite wisdom, will convince the borrower that they need to move from lender A to lender B. The usual excuse is that lender A will not approve them (the broker rarely submits the application to the original lender) or because the interest rate from Lender B is slightly lower than offered by lender A. Â Well, here is the real reason why a broker does this. Money.
If the mortgage broker leaves the client at Lender A they are only paid for the new money advanced. Here are some example numbers to consider. The client has a $250,000 mortgage with lender A. They wish to advance $50,000 to complete renovations on their home. If the mortgage broker does what is called a âtop upâ with lender A they will only be paid on the $50,000 new money (roughly $500). However, if the broker moves the client to Lender B they will be paid on the full amount of the new mortgage ($300,000) with that lender (Roughly $3000).Â
Here is the real problem with that scenario. The client is coached to move their mortgage and as a result, they pay a penalty sometimes for as much as $9000 on a 250,000 mortgage - but letâs use three months interest of $3000. In order to pay the penalty, the broker rolls that amount into the new mortgage amount. So instead of borrowing $300,000, the client ends up with a mortgage of $303,000. The broker will also most likely set the new amortization on the mortgage back to the original 25years. So the client is in truth paying far more for that $50,000 then they would if they had simply stayed with the same lender. They broker, however, is happy because they earn considerably more commission.
When interest rates were higher and they started to come down brokers used to churn their book on a regular basis. They often told clients that the lowered rates meant that they could save big money, and in some cases, they could. When you factor in the penalties and the longer amortization the savings was usually far less than what the broker would sell the client. To try to shift focus away from themselves the brokers have started a campaign against lenders trying to say that they are not properly calculating penalties. This shift in focus caused all of the major media to paint lenders with a broad brush and accused them of being underhanded with how they do business. What brokers will not tell you is that the way those penalties are calculated was outlined in the mortgage contract.
The penalty would never have been an issue if the broker had simply left the client with the original lender. Most lenders will do what is known as a âblendâ where they will waive the penalty, increase the mortgage amount, and blend the new interest rate with the old. If the client does want to lengthen the amortization (say back to the original 25 years) on the mortgage that is known as an âextend and blendâ
This practice is very common (even though brokers will deny it) and is the reason why the average term that a broker originated mortgage remains with a lender is so much shorter than one which is originated by a branch. Broker mortgages only have an average life term with a lender of 28 months, versus a bank branch originated mortgage of 39 months.
The biggest issue here is that we have an industry which only earns if they can convince the customer to borrow as much money as possible. They shift their client books from lender to lender and that means it is harder and harder for consumers to pay off their mortgages.
There are mortgage brokers across Canada that work with syndicated mortgage providers, financial planners, and investment advisors. They are all working with the same goal... get consumers to borrow more and more money so that they can make commissions. They use lines like âget your equity to work for youâ and convince people that they should not worry about retiring debt free, it is better to borrow and invest. Earn an income from your home. In some cases that may be OK, but it also means that we will have generations of people in Canada that will never be debt free.
Brokers are at the front of the line to blame the banks and unsecured debt. They call for the government to regulate credit cards and other unsecured debt vehicles. They are not doing this to protect consumers, they are doing it to shift focus away from the ever escalating debt that is secured by property in this country.
Consider this. Our federal government provides lenders with mortgage insurance through three different vehicles: The CMHC, Genworth, and Canada Guarantee. They back 100% of The CMHC portfolio and 90% for Genworth and Canada Guarantee. With the many mono-line lenders bulk insuring their portfolio, and the banks also doing the same, it means that the Canadian government (the tax payer) is guaranteeing over a trillion dollars of mortgage debt.
So our government is essentially protecting (on the backs of the taxpayer) the profits of multi-billion dollar companies, and the incomes of mortgage brokers. Thatâs a serious problem. If our property industry was to fail in a big way the taxpayer would be on the hook for billions of dollars of mortgage debt. Enough to financially cripple the federal government.
Next blog we will talk about the truth behind the new mortgage rules and the real reason why mortgage brokers donât want that truth to come out.