However, before we all get carried away on a sentimental journey let’s be honest, it was always going to happen, probably before the ink was even dry on the Lloyds / HBOS deal.

Of course my thoughts are with those who have lost their jobs after a tortuous period of uncertainty and I hope they all find something soon, but let’s not get too carried away with casting LBG as the pariah many of those leaving comments on websites seem to be doing.

If any of us were in charge of LBG from a pure business perspective the first decision to look at is the brand one. How many brands does one institution actually need? Where are the crossovers and where can we increase efficiency and make further savings?

Of course another brand missing effects consumer choice, but where all these brands are ultimately owned by one institution this is not as marked as it may once have been. Much depends on whether some of the underwriting “quirks” are merged into the remaining brands, more likely Halifax.

Actually there may be a business upside for brokers as more business with Halifax means potentially more opportunity to be paid on product transfers in a couple of year’s time!

Then there is the whole LBG hate brokers’ debate and the question of dual pricing. Whilst we should, as good brokers, continue to support excellent lenders such as Woolwich, Coventry and Nationwide who have in effect put their money where their mouths were as far as intermediaries are concerned, we all know the issues that LBG had and the problems of trying to keep those in branch from twiddling their fingers and, in any case, that was the last regime.

Since Antonio Horta-Osorio took over there has been a marked change in the intermediary sales staff both in terms of their optimistic outlook and engagement. This is not, or does not seem to be, a Chief Executive who is anti-intermediaries, in fact far from it. It is early days, but I believe the right man is now in charge and for brokers this will be a positive, which in turn will benefit the general public as they will be able to obtain the advice they need rather than being forced into a potentially non-advised branch network.

Choice and competition will increase again, as it slowly seems to be doing and we all want Halifax, BM etc back to their fighting weight.

In fact, there is actually one comment I read that really stands out and should give us all a little bit of sensitivity before we go around bemoaning the state of the world – “As a Lloyds Banking group employee who is affected by the announcement, it is really disappointing that all the intermediaries think of is themselves. I really don’t know why I’m shocked by this!!!”

As intermediaries we need to work hard to change our perception in both the eyes of the lenders and the public. We do not have a divine right to have all the best products and get paid inflated fees as we did pre-credit crunch. What we do demand, however, is that everyone who takes out a mortgage has access to proper advice and that lenders treat us with respect.

Respect, however, is a two way thing. Whilst we may not like or agree with decisions made, a little empathy and engagement is always preferable to throwing a strop and claiming “it’s my ball and I’m going home”.

In any case, today we should not be sorry for ourselves, but the hundreds who will lose their jobs and the passing of a great brand.

Whilst there has been some tentative positive news emerging from the housing market in recent days, these latest figures reflect more of a seasonal jump than a long-term improvement. There is still no doubt that lenders are not lending enough to meet consumer demand and where lending is taking place, this is often at seemingly expensive levels. A sustained increase in lenders willingness to lend is vital to help provide the boost to the economy that is sorely needed.

Whilst we know that there are more complex issues around lending and pricing, the CML should be doing more to help to explain these issues to a wider audience. The press is full of commentators accusing lenders of simply inflating their margins without explaining the other side of the argument. It is easy to see why this happens, however, especially as 3 month LIBOR, the high cost of which was blamed for all the issues in the first place, has dipped under the 1% mark for the first time ever.

Whilst lender bashing is good fun, and, as I mentioned in the Independent yesterday, there does seem to be some bumping up of margins and repairing of balance sheets going on, let’s face it they are not charities; it is a little too simplistic just to look at the low cost of Libor and falling SWAP Rates, then point at the mortgage rates on offer and say that lenders are simply making a killing.

As ever brokers could be assisting lenders, but willingness to help explain the issues faced starts to reduce as some lenders seem to be having too much fun broker bashing themselves, almost to the point of seemingly trying to help many out of the market! Make no mistake, a world with diminishing professional independent advice will be a very dangerous place, of no use to anyone.

Meanwhile, MP’s are still trying to rein in the excessive bonuses banking institutions pay. It is ironic that those very same MP’s willing to claim expenses for all manner of things to bump up their own pay then turn round and suggest, for example, taxing bonuses at 90% !

This misses the point. It is not the idea of the bonus itself that is the issue, it is the way that bonuses are earned if they are linked to taking excessive risk. We have seen that, like it or loathe it, a vibrant financial sector is crucial to our economic wellbeing, so more time should be taken to tackle the main issues at root level rather than just taking Draconian methods that show a lack of understanding.

As with the aftermath of many a major issue, just throwing more rules and regulations at a problem can often create more of an issue for the future, and whilst the Government may demand lenders lend more on one hand, they are making it harder to do so with the other.

This issue looks set to run and run as the backdrop to the next election but so far the major parties cannot even agree on who should be regulating let alone what form this regulation should take.

If there is one subject that guarantees to raise blood boiling levels for brokers and lenders alike it is the subject of dual pricing. This type of pricing is nothing new, it has been around for years, although mainly it had been in the brokers favour.

The arguments were simple. By offering better rates to brokers’ lenders, in theory at least, got pre-checked thus better quality clients, did not have to market the products themselves or take the advice risk on. The clients won because they got, on the whole, better quality advice and a much better quality of service than going direct to a lender and not dealing with a decision maker day 1.

Now the boot is on the other foot and we, the brokers, don’t like it.

The lenders argument is as follows. “In a limited market we have a big branch network who cost us money and we can’t have them sitting there twiddling their thumbs. We need to attract clients into the branches to keep them busy and once they are there we need to sell ancillary products such as savings accounts which are desperately needed as we are short of dosh to lend out again.

We can’t just close all our branches, that would not be fair to the local communities or the employees and would be a PR disaster. If we offer brokers the same rates we know that more people would go through a broker, and you would be more successful in selling these products and it would negate our aims.”

Although I do actually empathise with lenders more than the majority of brokers and really do understand their, often good arguments, basically though, what they are saying is that brokers are too successful and people would rather go through a broker to transact!

Getting back to the L&G story then, Ben Thompson, a fine individual and director of mortgages at L&G, stated that dual pricing “is like treating them, (brokers), as second-class citizens. Brokers have long memories and will remember those lenders which have stood by them in difficult times.”

Whether or not the vote was actually a pointless one, (beaks up which Turkeys want Christmas this year), or it was just poor reporting of an important discussion lost in translation, is open to debate. However, Mr Thompson’s comments are interesting and I do agree…in theory.

Brokers do have long memories, I managed to avoid using the Woolwich for a long time as I refused to subject my clients to poor service levels, and now they finally seem to have re-elited themselves and I have had an excellent service from them recently. Really top-draw actually.

If I am not mistaken there are only a couple of lenders who do not dual price, the aforementioned Woolwich, Coventry and Nationwide,who now provide good products and an excellent service. If brokers do have long memories, why are we not all singing their praises, voting for them at all the awards do’s and using them as much as possible?

Let’s face it, some of their dual-pricing competitors’ service is extremely poor at the moment, yet poor old Nationwide and the fabulous Mortgage Works don’t seem to get a look in when awards time comes round. Should they not be feeling a little bit aggrieved after committing themselves to the intermediary market wholeheartedly?

The problem is that lenders know that we have a duty of care to our clients to recommend the best product for them. They know that when things return to normal brokers may find it difficult to steer clients away from market-leading products from providers who were happy to screw brokers when we needed them most. Arguably, they are also screwing the clients when they most need professional and independent advice by forcing them to traipse into a branch.

I do, however, share Ben’s views. What will happen when certain lenders need our love and affection again, in a market where competition is back and rates between lenders are much of a muchness, is that larger groups of brokers, clubs and networks will develop products with and assist those lenders who supported us now.

Now then, is it too early for a Turkey sandwich?