Dear All,
I'm a newly registered for the purposes of this thread. My specific line of thought is one of confusion. I have been offered a sum of compensation just over 3k, and a refund of just over 3k. The sum overpaid by me was 28k and this is going to be set against the warehoused portion of the mortgage. This is where the confusion sets in. Posters here seem to be relatively satiated by the proposal that overpayments will be set against the warehoused portion as opposed to being refunded, but I cannot understand why more people do not want this money back.
I am not a financial expert at all, but it seems to me that this was money which was paid by me to PTSB as a result of PTSB's negligent omission (we'll call it negligence). They now propose to deny us of the utility of that money, but we did not pay this money with fully informed consent as a result of their omission. I cannot understand why this seems like an acceptable course of events. I suppose the necessity for a split mortgage may have to be reassessed by PTSB in the light of repayments were they to be made, but that is another story.
In short, I have difficulty accepting that PTSB are proscribing where our money is to be applied when it is money which they procured wrongfully (by a negligent omission) in the first place. Secondly, I don't understand why this doesn't seem to bother more people.
I would be extremely grateful to hear anybodies thoughts or feedback on this.