KBC KBC told brokers" all fixed rate loans will roll onto trackers on expiry"

Status
Not open for further replies.

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
And the fact that we fixed from the start doesn't automatically rule out the possibility of being entitled to a tracker?
 

peemac

Frequent Poster
Messages
682
And the fact that we fixed from the start doesn't automatically rule out the possibility of being entitled to a tracker?
No - it depends on what roll off rate was stated and any other info. The flyer certainly gives some hope.

If you don't have the paperwork you can request it - this includes all communication regarding your mortgage.
 

peemac

Frequent Poster
Messages
682
Had a look at the flyer on this thread again

It shows further proof that a "standard variable rate" did not exist at IIB at the time.

The ONLY rates available were trackers and fixed - even the flyer says the discounted variable was discontinued.

Therefore, iib were not transparent as there was not a product called "standard variable rate" available to the market either directly or through brokers.

As most people know, it is the meaning / understanding at the time of contract signing that matters. At signing of fixed rates there was no "standard variable rate" available.


As such, I would suggest that you might be better advised to focus your arguments on whether or not your lender breached any regulatory requirements regarding disclosure and transparency of information.
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,828
It shows further proof that a "standard variable rate" did not exist at IIB at the time.
The flyer says that "all IIB Homeloan fixed rates will now roll onto tracker rate on expiry". What would be point of making this statement if a tracker rate and a standard variable rate are one and the same?

The flyer also shows three different tracker rates - there was no "standard" tracker rate.
 

peemac

Frequent Poster
Messages
682
The flyer says that "all IIB Homeloan fixed rates will now roll onto tracker rate on expiry". What would be point of making this statement if a tracker rate and a standard variable rate are one and the same?

The flyer also shows three different tracker rates - there was no "standard" tracker rate.
It shows that there was obvious confusion with some brokers and iib decided to clarify.

It also shows that the only rates iib had available to the market as per the second part, was fixed and tracker.

That would confirm what many people have said, that if you were new to the mortgage market at the time, then you would not know that there was a specific rate called a standard variable rate. Iib did not publicise this rate, nor had they got it in any glossary at the time. It was non existent to the general market.
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,828
I'm sorry but I just don't buy the argument that anybody would have understood a reference to a standard variable rate to mean a tracker rate. Ultimately, of course, it doesn't matter what I think but in my opinion this argument is simply untenable.
 

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
No - it depends on what roll off rate was stated and any other info. The flyer certainly gives some hope.

If you don't have the paperwork you can request it - this includes all communication regarding your mortgage.
I have most paperwork and have requested others.
In the loan offer it states that at the end of a fixed term it will revert to 'prevailing variable rate'

I presume by that they mean SVR, and I have no case?
 

todo

Frequent Poster
Messages
260
If they have not clearly defined what 'prevailing variable rate' is in the documentation, then my belief is that you have a case.
 

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
If they have not clearly defined what 'prevailing variable rate' is in the documentation, then my belief is that you have a case.
They havent defined this, but is there any precendent where trackers have been awarded in this case?

I would be amazed if I had any case, others have stated they had an REFI rate which was Tracker of sorts?

That is mentioned in my contract, but because we fixed immediately I dont believe I ever had such a rate.

Confusion seems to be the order of the day, little wonder we hadnt a clue 10 years ago..
 
W

Wardy7

Guest
DamC82, we immediately fixed too. However, our contract states that we would roll onto "prevailing tracker rate" at end of fixed period. We have been given the tracker back, albeit at a stupid rate, but that's another fight!
 

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
DamC82, we immediately fixed too. However, our contract states that we would roll onto "prevailing tracker rate" at end of fixed period. We have been given the tracker back, albeit at a stupid rate, but that's another fight!
Wardy, does your contract use that exact wording? Im just looking for indicators, what is the stupid rate?
Did you have to go to higher authority to get the tracker back?
 
W

Wardy7

Guest
Yes, that's the exact wording. We were automatically put on tracker last July when PTSB news broke.

Our rate is 3.25% + ECB. We are engaging with Padraic Kissane about the rate and will most likely be going to Court!
 

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
Yes, that's the exact wording. We were automatically put on tracker last July when PTSB news broke.

Our rate is 3.25% + ECB. We are engaging with Padraic Kissane about the rate and will most likely be going to Court!
Wow that seems outrageous , am i right in saying that leaves you at a higher rate than the current SVR?
Where do they come at the 3.25 figure ?
 
W

Wardy7

Guest
I'm not sure what the current SVR is. 3.25% is crazy for a tracker rate so hopefully that will be rectified in the near future! (that's the hope anyway!!)
 

peemac

Frequent Poster
Messages
682
I'm sorry but I just don't buy the argument that anybody would have understood a reference to a standard variable rate to mean a tracker rate. Ultimately, of course, it doesn't matter what I think but in my opinion this argument is simply untenable.
I beg to differ - I would guess you work in a financial or similar field where such terminoly is part of everyday language, but the ordinary punter would not know.

In any case, you are twisting the argument. What I and many others have said is that the wording "revert to company's standard variable rate" meant to them (and I) that it reverted to the standard variable rate of the main mortgage document - which was the "standard variable rate" that IIB offered at the time. As in posts above, there was no other "standard variable rate" available. A tracker WAS the standard variable rate in the mortgage market in 2005-2007. Also remember, there is no phrase "tracker rate" used in the mortgage document either. The rate was a "Variable Rate mortgage" and in the special conditions it stated that such variable rate would be X% above the ECB rate.

Even a report out today confirms the illiteracy amongst people regarding mortgages and interest rates - "Mortgage Brain managing director Michael Quinn said the research has highlighted "surprisingly low levels of mortgage literacy" in this country. More education was needed, he said."

And as you probably know, where there is ambiguity, the argument will side with the consumer. There is absolutley no doubt that people did not know that a standard variable rate was a very specific rate - and one that did not appear in a glossary of terms or in any correspondance, advertising or mortgage offer at the time.
 
Last edited:

PJDCol

Frequent Poster
Messages
134
Peemac I wish I shared your optimism about the Central Bank agreeing with this and forcing the bank to take action. I am in the exact same circumstance and KBC have already wrote me a definitive letter saying they were "clear and concise". That is their stance. The FSO also rejected similar cases to us. So if it was as simple as that then the review of the documentation would not take this long and the banks would not be spending so much money and putting so much resources into the investigation. KBC will stand their ground till the end. I of course hope like you do but I will be in total shock if the Central Bank actually take action, and if they do I fully expect KBC will challenge it.
 

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
I beg to differ - I would guess you work in a financial or similar field where such terminoly is part of everyday language, but the ordinary punter would not know.

In any case, you are twisting the argument. What I and many others have said is that the wording "revert to company's standard variable rate" meant to them (and I) that it reverted to the standard rate of the main mortgage document - which was the "standard variable rate" that IIB offered at the time. As in posts above, there was no other "standard variable rate" available. A tracker WAS the standard variable rate in the mortgage market in 2005-2007.

Even a report out today confirms the illiteracy amongst people regarding mortgages and interest rates - "Mortgage Brain managing director Michael Quinn said the research has highlighted "surprisingly low levels of mortgage literacy" in this country. More education was needed, he said."

And as you probably know, where there is ambiguity, the argument will side with the consumer. There is absolutley no doubt that people did not know that a standard variable rate was a very specific rate - and one that did not appear in a glossary of terms or in any correspondance, advertising or mortgage offer at the time.

I have studied in detail my loan offer , and it clearly states that the loan will end end of fixed period go on to prevailing variable interest rate.

I take it by this they meant SVR, but had it suited them at the time perhaps it would have been otherwise.

There is certainly no definition of prevailing variable intrest rate on the loan offer, in comparison to subsequent letters circa 2010-2013 where every rate and option is clearly outlined.

One thing im curious about is the letter from the underwriter which makes reference to a 'capped tracker', that said that might have absoultely no relevance,
Id very much agree that it is a minefield, and the banks pulled strokes all over the shop because of the low levels of mortgage literacy as you state.
The period of 2004-2007 when the clamber for property was at its height, people were almost grateful to banks for granting them these mortgages and the finer details were often overlooked.
 

DamC82

Frequent Poster
Messages
155
Peemac I wish I shared your optimism about the Central Bank agreeing with this and forcing the bank to take action. I am in the exact same circumstance and KBC have already wrote me a definitive letter saying they were "clear and concise". That is their stance. The FSO also rejected similar cases to us. So if it was as simple as that then the review of the documentation would not take this long and the banks would not be spending so much money and putting so much resources into the investigation. KBC will stand their ground till the end. I of course hope like you do but I will be in total shock if the Central Bank actually take action, and if they do I fully expect KBC will challenge it.
Your case sounds very similar to mine, what differenciates KBC in these cases form AIB & PTSB, their paperwork & wording are obviously acceptable to the FSO & CB thus far?
 

PJDCol

Frequent Poster
Messages
134
Your case sounds very similar to mine, what differenciates KBC in these cases form AIB & PTSB, their paperwork & wording are obviously acceptable to the FSO & CB thus far?
I sorry I don't have the details of the AIB or PTSB cases and only what I read in the paper. Yes exactly KBC wording was acceptable to the FSO. This CB investigation is separate but as I said above I think it is a long shot.
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,828
As in posts above, there was no other "standard variable rate" available.
To be honest, I think you are reading words into your contract that simply aren't there. Your contract simply says you will default to the bank's standard variable rate - it doesn't say you will default to a standard variable rate that is widely marketed or otherwise generally offered or made available to new borrowers when your fixed term expires.

And as you probably know, where there is ambiguity, the argument will side with the consumer. There is absolutley no doubt that people did not know that a standard variable rate was a very specific rate - and one that did not appear in a glossary of terms or in any correspondance, advertising or mortgage offer at the time.
I don't agree that there is any ambiguity in the contract wording - it looks perfectly clear to me. I also disagree that a reasonably observant and prudent borrower in 2005-2007 would have thought that a standard variable rate referred to a tracker - what tracker rate could they have thought was the standard variable rate? There was no standard tracker rate.

I appreciate that you are convinced that your argument will be successful. That's obviously fair enough but, frankly, I don't think there is even a remote chance that your argument will succeed and that is why I would be of the view that you would be better advised to try and advance an argument that your lender failed to observe the relevant regulatory disclosure requirements. Clearly you are free to accept or reject this advice as you see fit.

Best of luck.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top