Continued fleecing of variable mortgage holders

With central bank rates at an all-time low, variable mortgage borrowers are still being punished with massive margins being taken by the banks.
I'm surprised that there has been no fuss about this. We seem to have been abandoned by politicians and by the media, who rely on easy tracker rate stories and read out press releases from the banks' PR departments. All of a sudden, it has become normal for media to report increases as us deserving what we get, where heretofore variable rate hikes were widely reported and quite controversial.
I understand that when we took out a variable-rate loan that that meant the rate could be changed, but I think we are entitled to expect the rate to relate in some reasonable way to the general cost of credit.
I wonder to what degree this divide-and-conquer policy of sacrificing one group, which seems to have been adopted by the establishment, is contributing to mortgage difficulties generally.

I couldn't agree more with you. I often look around when I see all the deals being made for the benefit of those already on a great tracker rate - moving home etc. and I feel so hard done by. I don't think the government cares one bit about us and isn't going to do a thing to help us. Reading the paper lately seeing all the positive talk about mortgages and the TV adds I wonder am I living in the same world at all? I don't see anything positive anywhere around me. Houses where I live aren't selling, They are totally dropped in price all around this area, my home is not worth even half what I bought it for. AND i live in fear of mortgage interest rates going up because with all the new bills coming in it would take very little to push me over the edge.

I agree with a lot of the points in your post but my understanding that there is still a lot more money loaned out in mortgages at the tracker rates than at the SVR rates. I understand that there has been no Tracker Mortgages since 2008 approximately.
I understand the frustration of mortgage holders on SVR rates who have been continually repaying their mortgages without fail but see no let up in interest hikes. The Banks are in the business of making profit and would at a moments notice hike Trackers but for the fact that they legally cannot do so.

I am not a defender of bank policy but as I have stated before that one of the reasons that SVR Mortgage Rates are higher is because of what I would describe as "the cost of repossessing properties in Ireland". It is much more difficult and costly to repossess a property here in Ireland than in a lot of other countries. Someone has to pay for this cost and the sad fact of the matter is that the SVR customer is a victim of this.

There are consequences for actions and inactions.

People need to start looking at their variable rate mortgage contracts and in particular to the wording of the variable rate clause. In a recent case of Donna and Robert Millar v Danske bank, the High Court ruled in favour of the Millars and concluded that the term " in response to market conditions " in the variable rate mortgage clause was too ambigious. This case has subsequently been appealed to the new appeals court as it poses significant financial liabilities to the bank. However looking at the judgment in its entirety I believe Judge Gerard Hogan has made a valid point (see MCA 422/2013 issued on the 30/09/2014) .

Mortgagors need to look carefully at their respective mortgage contracts and if they believe they have a valid case, take the case to court.

That's excellent advice FC for those in that position. It's a pity that the ruling relies on specific wording, since it is objectively reasonable that everyone on a variable rate is entitled to expect that rate to be varied not arbitrarily but in relation to the cost of wholesale borrowing needed to fund their type of loan.

As it is, the individual legal route, even if it is upheld, will only apply to those who can uncover the specific wordings, can afford the risk of costs in the most eye-wateringly expensive courts system in Europe (or was it the world?), are sufficiently informed, and have the stomach for a fight. In a more open and liberal regime, no doubt mortgage holders would have recourse to the powerful weapon of a class action, but if I am right our courts don't allow such a solution. That surely would be too radical an enfranchisement to be tolerated by our ultra-conservative and extraordinarily cosseted banking and legal establishment.

What is needed here is simply what was missing when the banking crisis occurred in the first place, and that is effective regulation in the interests of consumers and of wider society, with an appropriate response to the gouging of those trapped in SVR mortgages. The Central Bank has attempted to wash its hands of the problem, and we are left with sporadic media interest and some ineffectual venting from an exiled Government MEP aimed at Government-owned and/or rescued banks.

Just the other day, KBC's chief economist was blithely blaming the lack of consumer confidence and flat retail figures on the continued austerity imposed through the USC, pension levies and so forth. I am sure many KBC SVR customers would have a lot more money for patriotic consumption in the economy if they were not paying this arbitrary tithe to support his and other bankers' salaries. Needless to say, no one in our lazy, lazy media has called him on that.