I completed a transaction recently that wasn't without controversy. My client had obtained a mortgage that he wasn't comfortable with and asked me if it was a good deal. As all two of my regular readers would know, it's something I can't answer. I told him to speak to his mortgage broker, but he didn't trust her. I gave him the name of another broker and said to seek a second opinion from him. He did so and realized that the mortgage his first broker had set up was not right for his situation and decided to go in another direction.

The original broker started trying to prod around and find out what kind of deal he got. She got nowhere. A rep for the original lender then gave me a threatening phone call, saying that he would deny any application that came in to him me as the solicitor.

Just another day in paradise I guess.

I have to ask both of them this: Since when did I become a partner in the mortgage?

The lawyer's role in a mortgage transaction is to ensure that clear title is given and that there is nothing else affecting the lender's interest. I was not responsible for "selling" my client the mortgage, especially if he was not comfortable with it. The lender even sent me life insurance forms, once again, to try to up-sell my client into something he may not have required. If the client doesn't want the mortgage, how can I force him to take it? In speaking with other brokers, it seems that first broker is upset that she won't receive her commission and the rep for the lender will not meet his targets for new mortgages. That's still not a reason to force my client to take a mortgage that he felt was unfavourable. I'm not engaged in brokering activities, so I had no power to renegotiate his mortgage.

In reality, I think fault lies with the rep of the original lender. He never wanted me as the solicitor on the file and tried to send it to another lawyer, a friend of his who he probably received a kickback. I gave no objection to this arrangement as it was their choice, But their lawyer never returned the calls of the client. The client got so upset he wanted nothing to do with him and came back to me, where I, *gasp*, actually tried to protect his interest. The rep realizes he messed up and now has to answer to the broker who is out of her commission.

So, I guess I'm sorry I did my job and fulfilled my ethical obligations. It had nothing to do with money or respect, but everything to do with customer satisfaction. I guess that doesn't mean much anymore.

It brings me to the point of this post: Who is really looking out for your interests? If the broker is only after commission, the rep for the lender is only out to ensure he meets his quota, and the lawyer that the lender chooses is loyal to the lender only, how can you be sure that you are being protected? Would you want to deal with a lender that behaves like this?

The only way you can protect yourself is to choose your own lawyer. Don't rely on what your real estate agent or mortgage broker wants you to use. As I have said before, make sure you are comfortable with your lawyer. If the lender won't use a lawyer that you are comfortable with, you need to wonder what the lender is trying to do.

Overall,I'm not worried. That rep is only one of many reps working for the lender, and I have no issues with the other reps. Keep everything rolling!

        

 

What did you think of this article?

Liked
Disliked
No Opinion