Adding my own 2 cents to this thread, I have to fully agree with RichardH.
There used to be a time whereby integrated was always the preferred training route - I honestly believe those times have now changed; or rather, the playing field has been levelled.
For the most part, modular vs integrated just comes down to cost, timing and the level of guidance you want throughout your training.
Integrated schools are often seen as the 'one-stop shop' for training - Enter the door with a fat cheque and zero experience whatsoever, and following 2 yrs of mollycoddling you will leave with wet ink in both your logbook and licence.
I did my training through a major UK integrated school and really enjoyed my time there, but it was very much so a 'teacher/pupil' culture. You are just there to learn, will follow the schools timetable, and those who had a few difficulties were those who adopted more of the 'im a customer' mentality.
The modular route allows you to embrace the 'im a customer' mentality fully - you can train in your own time, and migrate between providors and instructors at a rate which suits you.
As far as training is concerned, I do not believe there is -any- difference in training provided by either integrated or modular schools. The difference comes down to statistics and money.
Throw enough money at the industry, and you can train anyone to fly, even a dog. Whether they are a good pilot or not is something completely different. Integrated providors base alot of their reputation on the statistics of first time passes at CPL/IR level, and number of students placed in airlines - this is one of many reasons behind having aptitude tests at the school administration days - it does filter out or atleast highlight a training risk factor and allows schools to be a little more selective when the times are good. Ask yourself this... if a school has an excess of potential students with money to spend, would they pick those were likely to have issues, or those who statistically make the school look better?
As a direct analysis to the above, the school I trained with had both modular and integrated students; the aptitude pass mark for modular was lower than that of the integrated course as the time. This was not a reflection against those who chose the modular route; but rather those who joined the integrated route were deemed more likely to pass through the system easier. Of my course of ~20 guys, roughly 70% are in full airline employment - of the course of ~30 modular students who started at the same time, roughly 60% of the course completed, and of those I believe only 3 were in employment.
Realitically though, the above is all false statistics. If you are a good pilot then it shouldnt make any difference where you train, how long it takes, nor the route you take once you have qualified. Whether modular or integrated, you really are on your own once you finish anyway...
Some providors do have agreements with certain airlines (easyjet is a prime example) - if you dont train through the approved providor, you won't be elligible for interview with low hours, simple as. But this doesnt imply it will be this way when you complete your training.
If you look through this forum, theres alot of opinions thrown around, and rightly so - there are so many ways you can qualify and still end up with the same piece of paper at the end of it. Good grades and a positive attitude will put you in good stead for airline placement. Just be proactive about it... as richard mentioned before, just get out there and visit the schools. He really isn't fibbing when he mentions glossy sales brochures.