AIB Aib ex staff - getting €1,650 compensation

Zero123

Registered User
Messages
20
Oh yes and I wasn’t on higher rate of tax in 2009 , so should peoples tax circumstances have been considered in 2009 switch. I don’t think this switch was a conspiracy theory but I’m not convinced it was looked into individually. Did we benefit from the switch? I didn’t.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
41,819
It's not hard to comprehend at all.

If you and many others have developed a bee in your bonnet about various irrelevant things , especially things which did not happen 5 years earlier, you will make a mess of your Ombudsman or court submission and lose your case.

It was probably the hardest thing in the general Prevailing Rate case, keeping everyone on the one simple argument and not going down rabbit holes such as " AIB deliberately omitted the page with the clause from my SARS request".

I have seen it time and time again. People wreck good complaints by going off topic.

Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
41,819
Did we benefit from the switch? I didn’t.
If you were exempt from tax you did not benefit.

So you should have opted out as it was clear that you could do.

If you paid tax at either 20% or 40%, you benefited from the switch.

Again, don't go off on a tangent though.

Brendan
 

MrCat

Registered User
Messages
14
at 10:50 PM

Add bookmark#140

Brendan, how come they did not do an “en masse” switch In 2003 when the SVR was 3.30%, was the BIK criteria different then?

Embolden wouldnt work for me to show the above line is quoting somebody else
.............
Changes that Brian Cowen made to BIK in the 2007 budget was what prompted the switch.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
41,819
Mr Cat

I have repeatedly said that you should not be distracting yourselves with irrelevancies.

If you want to pursue a High Court case and bring in every irrelevant issue, by all means do so.

I will not explain it again. I have better things to do.

Brendan
 

MrCat

Registered User
Messages
14
Mr Cat

I have repeatedly said that you should not be distracting yourselves with irrelevancies.

If you want to pursue a High Court case and bring in every irrelevant issue, by all means do so.

I will not explain it again. I have better things to do.

Brendan
I'm not distracting myself at all.
That was replying to a post by Zero123,but trying to quote him came out strangely.
 

Iolani

New Member
Messages
5
Hi Brendan

If the ombudsman decides the staff rate is fixed, with no expiry date, should those people not now be offered the tracker at +1.45%? Those people should be treated the same as those in the 12 weeks period, as they we not afforded the opportunity to switch to tracker as their fixed rate has no expiry date.
Regards
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
41,819
First of all the Ombudsman has to uphold the complaint.

The notice was sent out on 19th January 2009
And the switch was made on 30th January 2009

So well outside the 3 months window.

Brendan
 

Iolani

New Member
Messages
5
I don’t think it’s a case of being outside the 3 month window, it was impossible for them to fall within any timeframe window as the staff rate does not have an expiry date.
 

Emmalouf

New Member
Messages
6
Hi Brendan just wanted to ask your opinion, i have my case currently under adjudication with the ombudsman regarding staff fixed rate since early May. Do you think it would be worthwhile me contacting them for an update or do you generally have to wait for them to contact you. Thanks
 

Gigi07

Registered User
Messages
16
Not all staff had the 3.2 clause in their contract. There was 2 contracts in Staff Business,

1. Letter of Sanction ( pre 2007) no clause
2. Letter of Offer ( post 2007) it has
I drew down my mortgage in June 2004 and it has clause 3.2. I would advise everyone to check their contracts
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
41,819
I drew down my mortgage in June 2004 and it has clause 3.2.
Hi Gigi

These conditions are referred to as the "2006 to 2009 conditions" as they were introduced in 2006 and terminated in 2009.

You probably have a Clause 3.2 but is it the same one?

Can you reproduce the wording here please?

Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
41,819
That is a completely separate issue.

Please read this thread:


Brendan
 

ANNEOB

New Member
Messages
3
I got a copy of letter of sanction in 2002 so I know well before tracker issue but it refers to interest rate as "3% per annum fixed compound interest provided that if you resign......", so at that time they were calling it a fixed rate,
 
Top