It's not fair to keep hitting the SVR customers. Is there no way trackers can be touched? Is there not a "special circumstances" clause with trackers which means banks could share the burden between the SVR and tracker customers?
+1why should i, as a tracker holder, be forced to pay any more than i am contracted to? I can sympathise with svr holders, who are getting fleeced, but i should not be penalised for getting myself the best deal i could.
Why should I, as a tracker holder, be forced to pay any more than I am contracted to? I can sympathise with SVR holders, who are getting fleeced, but I should not be penalised for getting myself the best deal I could.
I'm SVR with AIB. I presume there's no point in looking elsewhere, is there?
Thanks.
D.
It's not fair to keep hitting the SVR customers. Is there no way trackers can be touched? Is there not a "special circumstances" clause with trackers which means banks could share the burden between the SVR and tracker customers?
The only chink is that a lot of these mortgages were given on a LTV basis as you can gather given the crash these LTVs are in the toilet,no lender that I am aware of has attempted to remove the Tracker because of this though.
SVR customers are now carrying the Banks mortgage book and they will be made to cover the losses incurred by their bullet proof,Tracker mortgage holding cousins,be in no doubt about that.
What I don't understand is why they don't invoke that LTV clause?
It's really sad that people, although squeezed I understand, start looking for other people to feel pain. Our tracker is one of the things keeping us on track (no pun intended), thank god.
I totally agree it has nothing to do wit trackers . If you have one fair play. I heard on the news this morning that the ECB are meeting today and the rate will remain the same but there will be a definite rate cut of 0.25% by the end of the year .
Will the banks follow suit?
I'm SVR with AIB. I presume there's no point in looking elsewhere, is there?
Thanks.
D.
As a tracker mortgage holder I agree with the sentiments of many posters above.
I agreed a contract that I believe is irrevocable with my mortgage provider - unless I break or they break the terms.
If they break, my contract with them terminates and I owe them nothing.
I have a tracker. I have kept my side of the bargain. They insisted that I pay a specified amount for house insurance. I pay that, regardless of the fact that my house value might now be less than the amount they requested. But, I continue with my contract as specified and agreed and which is documented.
I' m sorry that some people feel hard done by and they might might direct their ire at tracker mortgage holders.
But, I have a contract and I am sticking to it and I am prepared to challenge any attempt to change it unilaterally.
Marion