AIB AIB paying 7.5% compensation on Buy to Lets

M

mister32

Guest
Not at all. In fact the Ombudsman has tended to uphold their interpretation. I disagree with their interpretation, and the Ombudsman's decision, but it's not cheating.

Brendan
In the case of 2600 Aib customers returned to tracker?
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,956
Hi mister

We don't know why the 2,600 customers of AIB are getting their trackers back.

In the one case reported on askaboutmoney it's because a couple split up. I am really surprised that they are giving her back her tracker. They were under no legal obligation whatsoever to do so. I don't think that they were under any moral obligation either.

In contrast,

In other cases,there was a dispute about wording. Where the FSO agreed with the borrower's complaint, they got their tracker back. Where the FSO did not agree, they didn't get their trackers back. I understand that these are being reviewed and some will be getting their trackers back.

AIB is entitled to use the wording of its contracts to decide whether or not to give someone a tracker. That person has the right to appeal to the Ombudsman or the High Court.

I strongly disagree with AIB's decisions in these cases:
AIB restoring my tracker - but at 3.67%!
I think that they deserve a fairly priced tracker more than the people who took out new mortgages when splitting up. But, that is a question of judgement. I don't think that AIB is cheating.

There appears to be something different going on in ptsb and Ulster Bank. My guess is that it was not just a matter of arguing over the interpretation.

In ptsb, it might be because they took an appeal to the Supreme Court knowing it was destined to fail, because by dragging it out, other borrowers would become time barred. If that is the case, then they deserve a severe penalty.

In Ulster Bank's case, I think it's because they knew that the wording in some FSO complaints meant that they would have to return the tracker. But they defended the complaints because they knew that some borrowers would just give up. Again, if that it the case, the people involved should probably be barred from working in financial services.

If AIB or any other lender has been involved in not returning trackers to people where they knew that they were entitled to those trackers, then those staff should also be barred from working in financial services. This may be the case, but I have seen no evidence of it yet.

Brendan
 
M

mister32

Guest
Brendan

You seem to be in denial about the facts of this tracker scandal.

Aib are returning people to tracker because there was an option that entitled them to tracker. It's because Aib are obliged to return them to tracker.

And until now Aib has been knowingly cheating those customers.
 

seamus m

Registered User
Messages
17
This again stinks ,who made this call to fiddle people how did one bank follow the other .Where does secrecy stop is it just from middle management up ? Has even one person so far lost their job directly from this scandal .
 
M

mister32

Guest
Wasn't there a clause 3.2 c which said customer could return to tracker?

Those customers are being returned.

Should have happened years ago.

Maybe someone can confirm?

Also, has the central bank published the grounds on which banks should base their decisions?
 
Top