AIB My appeal delayed due to "additional issues which require further consideration"

Elaine Kearns

New Member
Messages
4
Hi Brendan,

I received a couple of updates from BDO re my appeal... it hasn't been looked at yet... blah blah blah...

Today however I got a letter saying... "your appeal is still with the Panel.... the Panel would like to advise that following a review of your appeal form additional issues have come to light that require further consideration by the Panel which may take some time... decision expected 8-10weeks"....

Would you know if this is due to a high court case or something different?

I used your template when submitting my appeal but added in the fact that the rate on the smaller portion of my mortgage was on a tracker rate of ECB+1.25 and so prevailing rate couldn't have been 7.9 as suggested.

Thanks
Elaine
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
That is very interesting.

You submitted the appeal on 12 March. So over three months ago. It should be done and dusted by now.

They rejected all appeals so far apart from one due to extenuating circumstances, but they would not tell us what they were.

Could you give a summary of your case?

Brendan
 

LolaG19

New Member
Messages
6
Hi Elaine

I got the exact same letter today. I also have a small part of my mortgage on Tracker with the balance on SVR. I submitted my appeal mid March. Not sure what to make of the letter don’t want to get my hopes up
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
Trackaib had the same issue but the Appeals Panel rejected her appeal with the standard rejection letter.


I wonder if the Central Bank has told the Appeals Panel that they must actually read the appeals and think about them before rejecting them?

Brendan
 

LolaG19

New Member
Messages
6
Yes perhaps, Brendan. Are the Appeals Panel ultimately answerable to the Central Bank? I wonder if the appeal outcomes are ever sampled for auditing purposes?
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
Are the Appeals Panel ultimately answerable to the Central Bank?
They were set up under the direction of the Central Bank.

They are not answerable as such, but I would imagine that the Central Bank has asked the AIB Panel why they are not reading the complaints and sending the same response to everyone irrespective of the complaint.

Brendan
 

Elaine Kearns

New Member
Messages
4
That is very interesting.

You submitted the appeal on 12 March. So over three months ago. It should be done and dusted by now.

They rejected all appeals so far apart from one due to extenuating circumstances, but they would not tell us what they were.

Could you give a summary of your case?

Brendan
My case, I think, is just the standard AIB staff mortgage rate.

I took a 100% mortgage of 240k. 180k ish on the staff rate and the rest on a variable/tracker. When rates dropped the larger part moved from the staff rate to a fixed as advised by staff business and then after the 2 years fixed I was offered everything BUT the tracker rate. I chose standard variable. I thinking was the cheapest at the time.

When I came off the fixed rate the other portion of the mortgage was on a tracker. It was ECB+1.25 if I remember correctly.

When I bought I was a sole buyer on 33k if that makes any difference.
 

LolaG19

New Member
Messages
6
I’m ex AIB staff, Elaine. My case is very similar to yours. Part staff rate, part SVR and part tracker.
 

Track2019

New Member
Messages
4
Hi Elaine, our mortgage is also staff and we went from a tracker rate on the full amount of our mortgage in 2007 to the staff "fixed" pref rate on c190k of the mortgage and tracker for the remainder. We got a response letter this week but they are still disputing our case. We selected the one year new business fixed rate option on the application form in 2007 but we were given the staff pref rate and AIB argue that as we signed this letter of sanction in the presence of a solr that we must have been satisfied with the offer. We were of the belief that that staff pref was a fixed rate (application form and letter of offer refer to the staff pref as fixed) and that as clause 3.2 was included in the contract that we could revert to tracker.
 

Scruffy1

Registered User
Messages
9
I'm in the same boat too - have raised the definition of fixed rate with Ombudsman and am awaiting their response. When AIB changed the staff contracts in 2011 as the staff fixed rate was subject to BIK on offer of a tracker should have been forthcoming which it wasn't. I remember staff business being very coy about this and only alimails were sent which were not relayed on a SARS request. Staff had to write handwritten letters to Staff business to pick either remain on staff pref rate with BIK or move to variable - there was no mention of option for tracker which there should have been
 

Duckit

New Member
Messages
2
I'm in the same boat too - have raised the definition of fixed rate with Ombudsman and am awaiting their response. When AIB changed the staff contracts in 2011 as the staff fixed rate was subject to BIK on offer of a tracker should have been forthcoming which it wasn't. I remember staff business being very coy about this and only alimails were sent which were not relayed on a SARS request. Staff had to write handwritten letters to Staff business to pick either remain on staff pref rate with BIK or move to variable - there was no mention of option for tracker which there should have been
Hi Scruffy1

I would be very interested in the Ombudsman’s response on the definition of a fixed rate.

Did you have any success in getting details of the alimails sent by Staff Business?

Thanks
 

Mehaul

Registered User
Messages
14
I expect anyone with a split mortgage will be put in a single bucket - staff or otherwise. One of the Appeal responses may have hit the nail on the head and gotten some proper attention, hence everyone in that subset of prevailing rate borrowers will probably be offered the same outcome (which could well be further rejection of the case).
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
It is all speculation at this stage.
The Appeals Panel has probably twigged that they should have actually read the complaints and not just rejected them with a standard letter. It's possible that the Central Bank asked them to explain themselves.

Or maybe one of the complainants managed to get their attention in some way, and they have to come up with a revised wording for the split mortgage group to justify their rejection of them.

Maybe one of those rejected has had a ruling from the Ombudsman, which means that AIB will have to review their strategy.

The Ombudsman may reject the complaint, but they will read the complaint and explain their reasons.

As I say, it's all speculation.

Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
OK, so that is the standard rejection letter, or a version of it anyway.

They made no amendments for your specific circumstances.

Yes, hold off to see if the Ombudsman publishes a ruling on other similar cases.

Brendan
 

verywhys

Frequent Poster
Messages
107
3922


This paragraph in the tracker panel rejection letter does not make much sense to me.

The standard variable rate on 5th July 2012 was 3%. If Elaine had been given a tracker rate of 3% which would have equaled the variable rate, the tracker rate would now be 2.25% so she would have been at a loss as a result of not been offered this tracker rate. The current variable rate is 3.15%.

Why did they not just say it would have exceeded the standard variable rate?
 

October2019

Registered User
Messages
42
but the tracker rate would have not been 3%, it would have been 7.9% according to the people from AIB who live in Narnia and still believe in Santa Clause!
 
Top