Representatives of the Association of Mortgage Intermediaries (AMI) and the Intermediary Mortgage Lenders Association (IMLA) said today they were working on a set of ‘common principles’ which would provide clarity on an appeals process for those brokers who have been ejected by a lender from its panel.

Speaking at an industry debate at yesterday’s Financial Services Expo Manchester, Robert Sinclair of AMI and Charles Haresnape (Aldermore) representing IMLA said the two organisations had been talking about the issue and were not too far away from agreeing the principles.

However, Haresnape said there would be no prescribed universal approach from lenders when it came to how they dealt with brokers who had been ejected from a panel. He said: “We are agreeing common principles but if you want to dispute the decision then come and talk to us. There is always a right of conversation. We are not going to boot people off panels willy-nilly. Lenders will open the door for a conversation if this is the right thing to do. But if there is bang to rights evidence of fraud, it will be cheerio. Some things in the industry you can’t codify; you can have some good principles but that’s as far as you can go.”

Sinclair said that he didn’t feel lenders doors were closed to those lenders who wanted to appeal a lender’s decision and wished to present evidence to change the decision.

James Chidgey of Nationwide Building Society supported Haresnape’s view. He said: “In our experience it’s quite rare [to remove a broker from panel] but it’s important that lenders are allowed to make their own decisions.”

However David Whittaker of advisers Mortgages for Business felt that ‘common principles’ fell too short of what was required. He said: “At the moment brokers can feel that they’re up against judge, jury and executioner in the same person. I don’t think the balance is right – until a broker can go to an independent arbiter [to review the decision] it won’t be right. I feel it’s currently a one-way street.”