This is not easy technology to put in place and increasing the number of lenders who offer POSO can only be good for intermediaries and customers.
Paul Hunt covered a number of really good points in his article. However, there is one thing that I don’t agree with. This is where he suggests that POSO’s future role is in a part-manual, part-automated process, where human underwriters are always involved.
get the daily news delivered to your inbox
Not only, in our view, is this a recipe for administration blow-ups, which are all over the market at the moment and which we, with our fully automated system, have avoided for many years, but such an approach also increases costs and lowers underwriting quality, bringing only inconsistency and uncertainty.
For as many applications as would benefit from a human underwriter’s eagle eye, there are 10 times as many that will be subject to human error – 10 underwriters can look at the same case and make five different decisions, influence – introducers calling and asking for the case to be looked at this way or that way, and leverage – introducers asking for a marginal case to be considered on the back of half a dozen good ones. Try any of that with a computer and all it will do is beep, thereby increasing underwriting consistency, quality as well as giving certainty and speed.
download our news ticker
Fast, easy, automated, and binding POSO is the way to maximise cost savings for mortgage intermediaries and lenders, producing better products, efficiency and customer empowerment. Nonetheless, Platform’s offering of POSO is great for the industry and I hope that many other lenders will follow.
Yours faithfully,
Jeff Knight
Director of marketing
GMAC-RFC
