A modern mortgage lender should still answer the phone – Blair

For all the innovation we’ve seen in mortgage lending, there’s something rather old-fashioned about one of the frustrations I still hear from brokers.

Trying to get someone on the phone.

We’ve become very good at building faster systems, smarter processes and automated decisions. And now, with artificial intelligence (AI) promising to transform almost every part of the mortgage process, there’s a real sense that the industry is entering another period of significant change.

That’s exciting. There’s plenty about mortgage lending that could be made quicker, simpler and more efficient.

But I do wonder whether, in our enthusiasm to automate everything we can, we are at risk of losing sight of something important.

Sponsored

Your First Home: confidence to build

Sponsored by Halifax Intermediaries

Sometimes, people just need to speak to someone who knows what they’re talking about.

A fast no isn’t always a good answer

Speed matters. Nobody wants an application sitting in a queue for days when technology could provide an answer in seconds.

But speed and good decision-making aren’t necessarily the same thing.

Borrowers don’t always fit neatly into predefined boxes. They might have several sources of income, an unusual employment arrangement or circumstances that need a little more explanation.

An automated system can assess information against a set of rules, but there will always be situations where an experienced underwriter needs to look at the bigger picture.

That doesn’t mean bending lending criteria or taking unnecessary risks. Far from it. Good underwriting is about understanding the circumstances, applying policy properly and making a reasoned decision.

Sometimes that means finding a way forward. Sometimes it means explaining clearly why a case can’t proceed.

Either way, a broker deserves an answer they can understand and act on.

And I’d argue that a quick, unexplained decline isn’t always much more helpful than a slow one. A timely review by an experienced underwriter, with clear reasoning behind the decision, can make all the difference.

Are we making ourselves harder to reach?

One of my concerns about the industry’s increasing focus on automation is that we risk putting more distance between brokers and the people making lending decisions.

We’ve all experienced systems designed to make life easier that somehow end up making it harder to speak to an actual person.

Mortgage lending can’t afford to go down that route.

A broker might have a perfectly reasonable question about a case, but if getting an answer involves navigating several departments, waiting for a callback or exchanging endless emails, something is not working.

I do not believe every question needs a lengthy conversation. Most do not.

But when a conversation is needed, it should be easy to have one.

At April Mortgages, we’ve deliberately challenged the idea that modern lending means putting more technology and more layers between brokers and decision-makers.

Every member of our underwriting team takes calls directly from brokers, with an average answer time of under 30 seconds. Many of our team have worked as brokers themselves, so they understand first-hand the pressures brokers face and just how valuable their time is.

I’m proud of that, but I don’t think it should be considered particularly revolutionary.

Surely being able to speak to someone who understands your case should be a fairly basic expectation of a lender?

AI should give us more time for people, not less

I am certainly not against AI or automation. Used properly, they have enormous potential to improve the way we work.

There are plenty of repetitive tasks in mortgage lending that technology can handle more efficiently than people. Reducing administration, improving the flow of information and identifying issues earlier can all make a real difference.

And if technology can take some of that work away from underwriters, that’s a good thing.

Because it gives us more time to do the things that genuinely require experience and judgement.

What concerns me is the possibility that lenders begin to measure innovation by how many human interactions they can remove from the process.

That’s the wrong measure of success.

We should be asking whether technology is helping us make better decisions, provide clearer answers and deliver a better experience for brokers and their clients.

If it is, fantastic.

If it’s simply making it harder to reach someone when you need help, I’m not sure we can call that progress.

There’s still room for common sense

The mortgage market is changing. People’s working lives, income arrangements and financial circumstances are becoming increasingly varied, and lenders need to keep adapting.

That means better technology, certainly. But it also means more flexible thinking, modern lending criteria and experienced people who can understand the circumstances behind an application rather than simply the information entered into a system.

Being a modern lender isn’t just about offering different mortgage options or introducing new technology. It’s about questioning how things have always been done and finding simpler, more effective ways to support brokers and their clients.

I’ve always believed that common sense is one of the most valuable qualities in underwriting.

Not because it replaces policy or risk management, but because it helps us apply those things properly.

A five-minute conversation can sometimes achieve more than several rounds of emails. An experienced underwriter can spot something that needs clarifying, ask the right question or explain why a particular approach won’t work.

It can also help identify potential issues early, giving brokers the opportunity to address them before they become bigger problems further down the line.

Those conversations aren’t inefficiencies to be eliminated. They’re often what makes the process work.

As an industry, we should absolutely embrace AI and everything it can offer. But we should be equally determined to protect the experience, accessibility and human judgement that good mortgage lending depends on.

Because the future of lending shouldn’t be about choosing between technology and people.

It should be about using one to make the other better.