Appeals on grounds of margin above 3%

T

tom bonass

Registered User
Messages
16
Hello , could anyone advise if they have lodged an appeal yet in relation to the margin issue . I mean someone who has gone on the ECB plus 3.25 for example ?
 
Surely @ ECB + 3.25% you are still within VRM Variable Rate Mortgage rates , so what would be the grounds for appeal?
Am I missing something or not understanding ?
 
Highchair,

I still don,t get it ?

Mr Bank gives loan @ ECB + 3.25% . Customer agrees to that.
I cannot see why there should be an entitlement for any business to give a determination of why people are charged a mutually agreed amount?

In Banking ,eg, you can have higher rates on LTV (loan to value) .

If what you are saying is that customer is being screwed @ ECB +3.25% , then I agree, but still can,t see how a case to query and hopefully reduce rate can be successfully pursued, unless Government apply pressure and they only want to protect Banks not Joe Soap.
 
I think the question is where did ptsb arrive at 3.25

We might look at it and say it's good compared to SVR

But prior to 2008 trackers were in the region of ecb +1%

What gives PTSB the right to suddenly hike this margin?
 
The tracker rate of 3.25% must be contractual in some fashion and in many cases contracts have no specified rate. So the question of how the bank determined the rate is what is key and they dont seem to want to say how the came up with the figure
 
A good point was made in another thread recently

Aib and PTSB claimed these were the "prevailing" rates.

Now if trackers were discontinued at this time then I believe we need to go back to the previous offered tracker. In 2007.

A genuine tracker offer and acceptance thereof could make it "prevailing".

Personally I believe when banks used the expression "prevailing" they meant the ecb rate. And the margin would remain fixed.
 
The notes in this previous post may be help full when making an appeal
Brendan Burgess said:
Hi pp

There is no mention of trackers in the Consumer Credit Act.

View attachment 817

These notes simply refer to Housing Loans as defined by the Consumer Credit Act. And maybe they contain the information which is required to be disclosed by the Consumer Credit Act.

View attachment 818

But this note is interesting. "The amount of the percentage over the ECB rate...will not be exceeded during the term of the loan". I wonder if that note is on the back of the mortgages which do not have a rate specified.
Click to expand...
 
rodger said:
A good point was made in another thread recently

Aib and PTSB claimed these were the "prevailing" rates.

Now if trackers were discontinued at this time then I believe we need to go back to the previous offered tracker. In 2007.

A genuine tracker offer and acceptance thereof could make it "prevailing".

Personally I believe when banks used the expression "prevailing" they meant the ecb rate. And the margin would remain fixed.
Click to expand...
Rodger,
Was (prevailing) not the legal case a customer used on an old Danske case and customer lost?
I agree margin should remain fixed at % over ICB or ECB .
But still if customer signed for ECB + 3.25% on tracker or variable mortgage and that is what he is being charged , he has I think a poor case in looking for any explanation or indeed reduction.. Sorry !
 
Gerry I think you are missing the point here.

I speak for myself only. I am one of the people on the 3.3% rate. I didn't sign any agreement for it. Nor am I on a variable mortgage. What I signed for, was that after my fixed rate period, I would automatically revert to a tracker rate but that rate was not specified on the contract. So while majority of people on tracker mortgages pay a rate of 1+%, those of us who are part of the redress scheme who didn't have a rate specified on contract, are basically being shafted with this extortionate tracker rate. That is the issue.
 
I am in the same boat as Wardy and hundreds of others.

The purpose of my question was to try to ascertain if anyone in our position participating on this forum has actually lodged an appeal so far on this issue regardless of the rights and wrongs and the varying opinions on the issue. What matters is what the appeals panels holds up or perhaps if it goes to the High court most likely. Unless Central Bank decides to intervene which seems unlikely but it is possible.
 
Tom, I haven't appealed but I did lodge a formal complaint with PTSB regarding the rate. After a couple of months of " we are still investigating", they finally decided that they were right with the 3.3%.

I'm with Padraic Kissane now!
 
ok thanks..I am thinking of going same route myself.

I asked you a question on another thread just about the wording on your loan offer .Mine did not use the word 'prevailing' at all ( not saying this is important ) just interesting to see if yours/others use same wording as mine.
 
No, mine says "the then current PTSB tracker mortgage rate".
 
Wardy7 said:
Gerry I think you are missing the point here.

I speak for myself only. I am one of the people on the 3.3% rate. I didn't sign any agreement for it. Nor am I on a variable mortgage. What I signed for, was that after my fixed rate period, I would automatically revert to a tracker rate but that rate was not specified on the contract. So while majority of people on tracker mortgages pay a rate of 1+%, those of us who are part of the redress scheme who didn't have a rate specified on contract, are basically being shafted with this extortionate tracker rate. That is the issue.
Click to expand...
You are right Wardy,I wasn,t clear on your point.
I see your issue is that once you finished on a Fixed rate you understood you would be on a Fair Tracker rate .
Therefore (as an opinion) you have a case that needs answering ,and you are being screwed !
So good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top