Lumefinancial Opiniões 

After dealing with Emily, I was dismissed and not given the opportunity to explain my situation before being turned away. As this was my first time and I assumed I was dealing with a professional, I was apprehensive to get a second opinion.

After going to another local broker, I explained my situation and received a formal approval shortly after.

If you want quality and simplicity in a brokerage, this team is not for you.

I engaged Lume Financial for an initial discussion regarding my individual borrowing capacity, including use of my trust. From the outset, I stated in writing that the initial meeting was with me only. Despite this, there was ongoing confusion as to whether the enquiry was being treated as individual or joint, and repeated requests were made for information and availability relating to another adult party who was not included in correspondence.

When I challenged this approach and clarified that I was not acting as an intermediary for another person, this was treated as a conduct issue rather than a communication matter. The engagement was ended before any attempt was made to formally clarify scope or resolve the issue.

Director-level correspondence misidentified me by name, relied on assumptions about relationship status that were not relevant at this stage of engagement, and reframed a procedural clarification as a behaviour issue. These errors diverted attention away from resolving the underlying communication and scope problems. No meeting occurred and no scenario analysis or advice was provided.

Others may wish to ensure that scope, parties to the engagement, and communication protocols are clearly agreed in writing at the outset, and that professional challenge or clarification is not misconstrued as disrespect.