Is a 31 Percent Failure Rate Acceptable?
December 28th, 2009 categories: Market Trends, Real Estate News
“Incompetents invariably make trouble for people other than themselves.”
Larry McMurtry
Did you see the news? Yesterday’s New York Times carried an article detailing the results of recent federal mandated licensing exams for loan officers around the country. The results thus far are anything but encouraging. According the Times article, ”31 percent of the roughly 10,000 people who took the national test from July 30 to Nov 30 failed it, and about 27 percent did not pass the state-specific component.”
While there are those (you can trust that the dissenters aren’t those depending on the expertise of their lender) who question the industry’s testing, many others appreciate the attempt at accountability. Is it odd to expect those who provide you a service, especially one you pay for, to know what they’re doing? One would hope not.
In the effort to clean up the mortgage industry and answer critics’ claims of of its ”poorly qualified” loans officers, the testing mandate includes both a federal and state national exam that covers federal laws, general mortgage knowledge, the loan-origination process and ethics. While I have to applaud the “after the fact” efforts to ”fix” a disfunctional mortgage loan process, why did it take a crisis to prompt such measures?
The question that leadership in any industry or profession needs to ask itself, is, what are the minimal acceptable standards required by those licensed to perform or practice? Would I want them (the practitioner) to provide that service for me? What if had to pay them for their service? Would I trust them to provide me, or a relative or friend, advice? As we’ve all heard, “many people will only do what’s required.” Let’s hope, when it comes to your trusted advisor, you’re getting at least what you’ve paid for. And, if not, who will pay for their neglect?
| Discussion: No Comments »
