A review of those deemed "not impacted".

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
54,806
In its update yesterday, the Central Bank made the following welcome comments

"The Central Bank, with the assistance of its panel of experts, is evaluating the Phase 2 Reports
submitted by lenders. The primary focus of this ongoing assurance work is on customers
whom lenders have deemed not impacted and involves challenging the findings of lenders’
reviews through robust engagement in the form of on-site inspections, the review of relevant
materials and a substantial number of meetings with lenders.

While assurance work is ongoing in a number of lenders, from the assurance work completed
to date, the Central Bank is concerned that two lenders may have failed to identify
populations of impacted customer or failed to recognise that certain customers have been
impacted by their failures. The Central Bank is of the view that certain of these customers are
in fact impacted and accordingly entitled to redress and compensation. As a result of the
Central Bank’s challenges, the two lenders are reconsidering certain outcomes from their
reviews and are due to revert to the Central Bank by end October 2017. As the Central Bank
progresses its assurance work, other lenders will be similarly challenged."

I think it would be useful to list out all the cases we know of where the lenders deem some customers not impacted.

Off the top of my head...

1) Bank of Ireland staff mortgages
2) BoI switched from SVR to tracker and later fixed. Not given tracker back at end of fixed rate period.
3) AIB customers who had their mortgage rate set retrospectively at 3.67%
4) AIB customers with the pre-2006 mortgages and then fixed
5) EBS customers who fixed but were denied trackers on conclusion of fixed rate period
6) KBC customers (and others) where KBC claims that the Fixed Rate Agreement made it clear that they would lose their trackers
7) KBC customers in arrears whose mortgage restructuring was made conditional on giving up their tracker.
8) ptsb customers who took out a discounted tracker for one year and were put on 2.25% on expiry of that year. They got a tracker, so ptsb deems that they are not impacted.
9)First Active customers (now Ulster Bank) who moved from tracker to fixed and tracker was not offered at the end of the fixed rate period?
 
Last edited:
I think it would be useful to ask the Central Bank the following

1) List out all the cases where the lender says customers were not impacted and you disagree
2) Have you persuaded any lenders to change their minds and deem some customers as impacted whom they had considered not impacted - (presumably the 1,000 Ulster Bank customers who had switched to another lender.)
3) What happens if the lender sticks to their guns?
4) Give examples of cases where the lender says "not impacted" and you agree.
5) What can the borrower do if they are deemed not impacted?
6) Will borrowers who have been deemed "not impacted" be able to appeal that decision to the independent appeals panels?
6) Will you be directing the lenders to write to all those whom they deem not impacted?
 
Last edited:
Brendan,
I would add this cohort to your list (and I believe a large cohort involved)
6) BOI (and probably other banks) who tricked their "customers" off trackers through deliberately confusing documentation.
 
Thanks Skinny

But you would need to be more specific. Most of the banks had confusing documentation.

Brendan
 
...can I add former First Active customers who moved from tracker to fixed and “prevailing tracker rate” was not offered at the end of the fixed rate period?
Some customers (eg poster Corktim) seem to have had their tracker restored, but not others like myself and poster Milo? (Hard to gauge how many have been restored or not as only a few posters on here)
 
Brendan,
Why should I as the consumer need to be more specific? The whole problem with yours (and the banks) argument is that it puts the onus on the consumer to prove there was confusion.
Simply put, if a contract or documentation causes confusion then the "failure" lies with the bank.
 
Brendan

Great initiative

Personally,

  • Aib pre 2006 mortgage , then fixed.
  • BOI switched to tracker, then fixed.
 
Hi Brendan. On point 2 "0ff the top of your head" do you mean BOI staff who switched from Tracker to variable for a short period and then moved to fixed and were denied a tracker at the end of the fixed period
 
That's saying switched TO tracker then fixed. There are cases where we switched from TRACKER to VARIABLE for a short period then fixed and were denied a tracker at the end
 
Sadhbs said:
There are cases where we switched from TRACKER to VARIABLE for a short period then fixed and were denied a tracker at the end
Click to expand...

I see.

I suppose I was trying to document the main cohorts and not every single case.

Is your particular case picked up by no. 1) above - BoI staff trackers?

Brendan
 
Hi Brendan,

Can we add the EBS Cohort (currently deemed not impacted) who switched to fixed but were then denied tracker upon completion of fixed term. Even though their EBS Mortgage contract stipulates they could change once during lifetime of mortgage without penalty.

Many thanks,
BW
 
Yes it is a BOI Staff Tracker but I don't think all staff switched from tracker to variable for a short while and then fixed rather than going straight from tracker to fixed
 
Hi Brendan,

My cohort would be - Ulster Bank. Started main mortgage as variable, 2006 got Top Up Mortgage ( which began as Tracker ) and ADVISED that i should change the main mortgage to Tracker as well, new contract issued and signed for both main and top up mortage, containing the infamous lines "For the lifetime of the loan" etc. Super, both now on Tracker, 2007 interest rates start to go up, maybe I should fix for a while, into the branch, do you think I should fix for a while? Yes, of course..sure the only way the rate can go is up. Three years later, Can I have my Tracker back please? No, we don't do them anymore... So complaint, complaint... discover Padraic Kissane...off to Ombudsman, back and forth with bank who eventually decide out of the goodness of their heart i can have the Tracker back on the Top Up but not Main. Frozen by FSO to go into the CB Review.. Ulster Bank will not even acknowledge if they are reviewing it never mind deeming as impacted. Despite bank telling me that this was a unique case I know of at least one other with same scenario, and anecdotally of others in different banks with similar who have been deemed impacted.
 
Ptsb customers with 12 month "discounted tracker period to revert to the then prevailing tracker rate". Then subsequently written to on an unsolicitated basis 11 months into mortgage with a whole host of options including inflated tracker rate and deliberately low variable rate.
 
Hi PFS

They are included in cohort no. 8

8) ptsb customers who took out a discounted tracker for one year and were put on 2.25% on expiry of that year. They got a tracker, so ptsb deems that they are not impacted.

It is good practice writing to customers before the discounted period expires.

Not sure why you think that the tracker rate was "inflated" or that the variable rate was "low"?

If you were offered a non-tracker rate of 3% today, or a tracker rate of 3.5%, which would you take?

Brendan
 
Let me clarify. The contract makes no reference to any options after the 12 month "discounted margin". It specifically states "the then prevailing tracker rate will apply".

To issue the options letter stating "your current rate option will expire on x/x/x" was a deliberate and misleading action by the bank to lure the customer off the tracker product.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register