This is an email that I received last night with a bank using the fact that mortgage originators who are employed by a depository bank or credit union are not required to maintain a license. Here’s more from the email:
[Big] Bank has been in the industry for over 100 years. As one of the nation’s top federally Chartered banks, [Big] Bank has the size and depth of the larger banks with the mindset of customer service being our #1 priority!
If you are an experienced loan originator looking for a change, HERE IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY!!!
- Aggressive split
- Stability of a BANK
- NO LICENSE REQUIRED
What more can you ask for? Do NOT miss this opportunity to take your career to the next level.
Am I surprised to see a bank use the fact their mortgage originators are not licensed as a recruiting tool? Not really.
I’m sure they feel it’s a great advantage to not have to be held to the same standards as Licensed Mortgage Originators (passing state and national exams, continuing education, financial stability of the LO, etc). Banks probably believe that consumers don’t care if the mortgage originator has satisfied what is required of a licensed LO per the SAFE Act–because they’re employed by a big bank and somehow, that makes the consumer safe.
I’m wondering what type of mortgage originator would say “Hey, I don’t want to have to take the exams, have my credit history checked or do NMLS certified continuing education…I’m going to work for a bank or credit union!‘
Consumers: Does it matter to you if the person helping you obtain your mortgage is licensed (held to a higher standards per the SAFE Act)? Or if they work for a big bank or credit union, and are merely “registered”, is that good enough for you?
No related posts.