CAAMP learns its lesson… sort of?

by |
In this year’s Q&A, part of an annual advertorial on mortgages, Jim Murphy goes to great pains to promote mortgage brokers in general – the effort coming a year after facing a wall of criticism for appearing to snub non-AMP designated players.

Still, for the supplement, sent out in Friday’s Globe, Murphy extolls mortgage professionals holding the AMP designation as having met the “highest standard of education and ethics in the Canadian mortgage industry.”

That point being made in answer to the question “what distinguishes … AMPs [from other brokers]” as part of a special promotional feature in Canada’s national newspaper.

The article was published Friday, a year after a similar Globe piece drew a swell of broker criticism.

“The majority of brokers, including those who are CAAMP members, are not AMP,” Lior Hershkovitz of Mortgage Edge wrote in response to last year’s article. “They refuse to obtain the designation not because they are less professional than someone who does have it, but because it does not add value to their business or customers. The AMP is ridiculously easy to obtain and any monkey can call themselves an AMP after taking a simple exam.”

However, last year’s edition took a much harder line when explaining the benefits of using an AMP-designated broker.

“In this rapidly shifting environment, it is more important than ever to use the services of an AMP, a mortgage professional who is familiar with the implications of these changes and who can provide the best recommendation for your individual needs and circumstances,” Jim Murphy wrote in a column entitled “Expertise essential in shifting mortgage market.”
  • Steve on 2015-04-27 10:37:44 AM

    AMP, no AMP, doesn't make a broker. I agree that saying Brokers without AMP are "not as professional" is slanderous.

  • Jesse D on 2015-04-27 10:49:06 AM

    Funny, I know many AMP agents out there who know 'jack' about mortgages. AMP means nothing, just a money grab from CAAMP. Then again, CAAMP itself like IMBA and FSCO is also just a money grab. Useless!

  • Devon on 2015-04-27 10:51:25 AM

    I am not sure who an AMP is? Are they all the agents who have taken the course since the AMP inception designation or just the one who pay an annual fee? Are the ones who don't pay the annual fee less professional with the same knowledge?

  • Anne on 2015-04-27 12:05:56 PM

    It would seem the difference between an AMP and a non-AMP is essentially whether the person has paid CAAMP the fee (this is consistent with CAAMP's overall profit-making model). On one hand, this is really just a designation for purchase. On the other hand, a person buying it has to be a sucker if having it is without merit. Of course, a broker who is not a sucker is a better broker.

  • exAMP on 2015-04-27 12:43:51 PM

    Still amazed that I can be a member of the Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals without being an AMP (Accredited Mortgage Professional)??? So the main difference I guess between the two is that an AMP is willing to write that second cheque?

  • Devon on 2015-04-27 9:03:38 PM

    I think there are some legal ramifications as we are all paying a membership fee to CAAMP to represent us as a group but on their website they advocate and promote only AMP's who pay an annual fee. Whether a member is an AMP or not ALL members pay CAAMP membership fee to represent them. Advocating for a sub group while pretending to represent the group as a whole is a gross misrepresentation of the services that CAAMP provide and I would suggest that CAAMP and Mr. Murphy should wake up, retract those comments and cease and desist from those practices before someone initiate a class action suit against him and CAAMP.

  • Jeremy on 2015-04-28 12:06:13 PM

    The following could cover part of the CAAMP business model for the past 20 years.

    Estimated average number of members - 10,000 per year

    Membership fees - $200 per year per member

    Total membership fees collected - $40 million dollars

    Fairness to mortgage broker by giving them the opportunity to be aware of secretive arrangements - ZERO!

    The look on brokers faces when they think about these numbers and arrangements - PRICELESS!

    Business plan - provide incentive (kickback) to the brokerages that force their underlings (brokers) to be members of CAAMP

    Everbody wins? No, brokers lose.

    No harm, no foul? Plenty of harm, it is all foul when kickbacks are not disclosed to brokers forced to pay for their memberships.

    You have to wonder what CAAMP profit numbers would popup by looking at brokerages who earn even bigger kickbacks by requiring their members to "buy" an AMP designation (no real value in the membership) and sponsorships.

    Some basic principals of the above business model. One, it is financially more efficient to gain memberships by paying kickbacks to brokerages than providing meaningful services to brokers. Two, it is even more financially efficient to provide bigger kickbacks to brokerages that requires members to pay more for useless add-ons such as an AMP designation.

    In dealing with brokers, CAAMP should have followed a basic rule of brokering - fairness requires proper disclosure. Secretive payments are unethical and people who paid or received them might feel the long arm of the law. You have to think at least one broker in each province will complain to their regulator. Will fees be ordered by regulators and courts to be returned? Were law broken by anyone who paid or received kickbacks?

  • Larry on 2015-04-28 1:02:17 PM

    I look forward to seeing what CMBA actually does. As a commercial broker, I dropped my CAAMP membership & AMP designation last year, after having been a charter member since the inception of CIMBL. I took this decision because there was no real benefit to me in my business from the membership or designation.

  • Barb on 2015-05-04 1:07:21 PM

    I saw this article in the paper but was unable to pull it up electronically. I'd like to see a link to this globe article

  • Unidentified Broker on 2015-05-04 3:02:40 PM

    I would join the class action suit. I have been trying to get reimbursed for a conference I never attended 5 years ago. I have yet to see a refund. They keep saying it was the responsibility of the event company and I have to deal with them, but I never gave the event company access to my credit card, I gave it to CAAMP. Now they have a new event company for the annual conference and was basically told, sor4ry, but nothing can be done. CAAMP is a bunch of people feeding off agents and providing NO service to brokers. Get rid of CAAMP and lets move on. I do NOT see why any broker would support this ludicrous organization. There is NO substance to CAAMP other than group E&) insurance. But now that we can obtain this elsewhere, I do not see why brokers don't stop using CAAMP. They do NOTHING for us as brokers.

  • Ottawa Broker on 2015-05-04 3:04:42 PM


  • Steve on 2015-05-04 3:51:54 PM

    I appreciate the value of a national lobby group. I appreciate industry updates and access to insider knowledge. I appreciate planning and organizing of tradeshows. However, I would appreciate it if CAAMP increased my competitive edge vs banks etc, instead of broker VS broker. I am not an AMP and see no value in it. If CAAMP has to undermine me to give "value" to the designation, then I need a new national organization.
    Perhaps caamp activities need to be more member driven and therefore members polled for opinion more often.

Broker news forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Name (required)
Comment (required)
By submitting, I agree to the Terms & Conditions