Bank of Ireland Bank of Ireland paying me only 220 compensation

joe351980

Frequent Poster
Messages
94
Totally agree James j. Banks are not bowing to pressure from the CB, they're only fear is of a high court ruling. Remember they totally disregarded both the CB and FSO rullings and it was only at the steps of court that they finally gave in.
 

MrEarl

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,725
The flip side of that coin James, is that we own most of AIB, EBS, PTSB and a bit of BoI too....

so your are essentially proposing that we fine ourselves here, taking from the population of the state to give sizeable payouts to the few, that doesn't seem fair to me tbh.

We need these Banks to be making big profits, so we can sell them back into the private sector and recover the BILLIONS that we had to invest in them - that benefits all of us equally.

People should be compensated, but at an appropriate level. As I think I mentioned above, this isn't going to a lottery win for those effected, but it should put things right.

Fix the real problems here so we can ensure things like this can't happen again in the future, that's what really needs to be done. The concept of going looking for individuals to punish is great in theory, but not practical given the time that has elapsed since many of these decisions were made. If we really tried, all we would end up with is another costly tribunal or something similar !
 

james j

Frequent Poster
Messages
42
It's the banks dishonesty and silence that should be punished and all individuals associated. To say it happened a long time ago is not close to good enough. It's a cartel of silence, shake the tree and the apples will fall. I have sat in a branch with three employees in 2011 two mid management of local branch and one brought down from Dublin all telling me that at the time this was first they had heard of tracker mortgages been wrongly taken off people (an article in Independent at time which I brought to their attention). The guilt in their faces as they sat there and lied harded my resolve that one I will have my tracker back and two someone will pay
 

james j

Frequent Poster
Messages
42
It's also not about winning the lottery although with their executive wages they win it every year. Where is the value put in my time God knows they highly value there own who can take the grey out of my hair. Who can bring back that chance to pay what you were due to pay instead of the looks of the local staff in our communities who know you have missed payments. Nominal payment is not close to good enough I don't even want across the board but I want people let out of their hardship and arrears because if even 1 person would have kept there home due to this slips through net then that is one to many.
 

MrEarl

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,725
OK James,

Not being funny here, but take a few minutes if you would to consider these questions please....

What's the definition of who was responsible for the tracker scandal ?

...It appears to have been an industry wide decision so does it stem back to some sort of suggest solution from the Central Bank to help manage the funding problems associated with the tracker mortgages at the time, or perhaps the Banking and Payments Federation and how do we evidence this ?

How exactly do you identify the people specifically responsible given many of the decisions were taken over seven years ago, as documentation may well have been destroyed at this stage ?

Let's assume you've got a way to find the people who made and then implemented the decisions, what happens to them when they are identified ? Do they have the right to an independent and fair hearing, or a right of appeal after a decision has been taken and if so, how does that work ?

... many of the directors at the different Banks have been changed, so odds are they are already gone. How do you deal with them, given past experience with dealing with the likes of Michael Fingleton etc. to date ?

...Then you've got the people who did what they were told (because if they didn't, then they faced disciplinary proceedings and may well have lost their jobs), what do you propose to do with them ?

Next up, it's obvious that we can quantify costs incurred by people such as penal interest rates, unpaid direct debit fees etc. so that's something we can calculate and put a figure on. Then there's the horrific cases of people who clearly lost their homes as a result of the overcharging, the duress it caused and so on. That's not as easily quantified but there's probably some form of compensation can be figured out for it. But thereafter, what about the rest of the people - people who still paid the rest of the bills throughout the period, didn't fall into arrears etc. What's the method for calculating compensation for them (and please don't come out with something ridiculous, it's a real problem that needs a genuine solution) ?

What's the likely timeframe and cost to deal with all of the above ? Why pays for it and who is entrusted to manage it correctly ?

I am far from saying that things should just be swept under the rug and forgotten about, but what I am saying is that some of what you want simply cannot be achieved, or at least not without costing the state an absolute fortune with no guarantees of any preferable end result.

We've needed regulatory change and that's come about (albeit, it could still be further improved to properly address consumer protection for example), but we also need massive cultural change across the banking industry - so that there is a genuine appreciation of the industry's social function and its importance to society. Society needs banks, but banks also need people to generate their profits. As such, I would rather now see a genuine focus on and investment in changing the culture of the banks permanently, then waste hundreds of millions of euro on a pointless investigation that will achieve nothing other than fatten a few wallets and give the government something to refer to when asked what they've done about the issue.
 
Last edited:

Foxy007

Registered User
Messages
22
Does no one actually realise that if this is mismanaged and swept under the carpet without holding the banks accountable and conducting a fair review of all trackers regardless, we will be the laughing stock of Europe...if we are not already? Isn't this investigation the function of the regulator..as I believe it is in other countries. People have suffered in real tangible terms because of whatever we want to call this. Is it really going to cost the banks that much to hold their hands up and say we were wrong on this and set a fair refund and compensation amount? I don't think so. This is money that belongs back in people pockets. In terms of compensation I think a set amount per year should be given or a % of the the total over payment. The highest amount I've seen here is 65K...so 10% of that is not huge for compensation.
 

tigger45

Registered User
Messages
15
A few things need to be stressed here:

  • 90% of people who are getting redress wouldn't have a chance of getting it if they went to court. The Central Bank has persuaded the banks to go beyond their contractual liability.
  • Even if you went to court and won your case, you would probably just get a refund and interest. You would not get compensation.
  • The amount of compensation paid is only a down payment. It's not an offer as such. It will be paid automatically and you can appeal for more.
  • Only 25% of ptsb customers appealed the 10% paid to them in the last scheme.

And, by the way, I do think it's fair that people who were impacted should get compensation in proportion to the impact, whether they have a legal entitlement to it or not.

Brendan
Why do you say the 90% would not win if they went to court? if you should have been offered a tracker option and you werent, isnt that clearcut?
 

lukas888

Frequent Poster
Messages
117
No it's not clearcut,large cohorts are getting trackers because of central bank pressure.In the forensic examination of a lot of the arguments posted in this and other threads it's not at all certain that the courts would agree.
 

Foxy007

Registered User
Messages
22
If a tracker option was available for the life of the loan in their initial mortgage contract then legally they are entitled to a tracker for that loans lifetime unless a new contract is issued and signed. I don't believe offer letters are exactly the same as a a new contract unless specifically stated that it was a change to the existing loan contract. Most people ended up making decisions based on what they were told in those letters. People unfortunately were led to believe there was no other option but to go with the offers the bank was making.
 
Top