Trigger warning. People of a nervous disposition who lost tracker mortgages please read no further.
In the 2000s the banks offered tracker mortgages, which with the benefit of hindsight were excellent products for the customer, indeed I would suggest they were guaranteed to be good for the customer.
Some people took these mortgages, often remortgaging to avail of the opportunity to get a tracker, because they understood that they offered a guarantee against rate hikes at the lender's discretion. Some people took these mortgages because that is what a broker or bank offered, without really understanding the nature of the tracker.
Roll on a few years and the banks began to realise what a good deal the customer had got at their expense. The banks tried by different means to get the customers off those trackers. Any one who understood what they had got ignored these offers and kept their tracker. Only people who thought they could do even better by fixing or whatever came off their tracker.
Many people fixed for a set period. The banks then refused to put them back on the trackers, some by getting them to sign away their rights to a tracker, some by not offering a tracker again when the fix period expired.
Where people gave up their tracker because they accepted what they thought was a better offer, I don't see why they are automatically entitled to get the tracker back.
If they had kept the tracker in the first place this situation would not have arisen. Now they expect the taxpayer supported banks to compensate them for their poor judgement.
In the 2000s the banks offered tracker mortgages, which with the benefit of hindsight were excellent products for the customer, indeed I would suggest they were guaranteed to be good for the customer.
Some people took these mortgages, often remortgaging to avail of the opportunity to get a tracker, because they understood that they offered a guarantee against rate hikes at the lender's discretion. Some people took these mortgages because that is what a broker or bank offered, without really understanding the nature of the tracker.
Roll on a few years and the banks began to realise what a good deal the customer had got at their expense. The banks tried by different means to get the customers off those trackers. Any one who understood what they had got ignored these offers and kept their tracker. Only people who thought they could do even better by fixing or whatever came off their tracker.
Many people fixed for a set period. The banks then refused to put them back on the trackers, some by getting them to sign away their rights to a tracker, some by not offering a tracker again when the fix period expired.
Where people gave up their tracker because they accepted what they thought was a better offer, I don't see why they are automatically entitled to get the tracker back.
If they had kept the tracker in the first place this situation would not have arisen. Now they expect the taxpayer supported banks to compensate them for their poor judgement.