Ombudsman publishes latest batch of decisions

Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
54,789
[broken link removed]

I have extracted the tracker cases which he has summarised and attached them to this post.


  • A direction to write down 12% of the capital balance on a mortgage, backdated to 2010, following the failure to offer a customer the option to convert to a tracker interest rate mortgage loan in line with the bank’s contractual obligations. The bank was also directed to repay the difference between the interest paid and what would have been paid on the reduced balance. :)

  • Compensation of €22,000 due to particularly difficult circumstances suffered as a result of significant overcharging resulting from the denial of tracker mortgage interest rate.

  • Compensation of €8,000 for overcharging where a tracker interest rate was not applied and a mortgage was restructured.
 

Attachments

  • Ombudsmans summaries of Tracker decisions in Digest published October 2020.pdf
    884 KB · Views: 397
Last edited:
I have provided a link to all the decisions in the following two posts.

The database is a bit awkward to navigate, so if you see any decisions which I have not included please post a reply with a link and in particular the decision number.
 
Last edited:
Complaints upheld

It appears that, so far, the Ombudsman has upheld only one systemic issue - the AIB Prevailing Rate issue. I don't think he has rejected any other systemic issues yet but it's hard to know.

Decision Reference 2020 -0103 - AIB Prevailing Rate case which resulted in 5,900 cases getting a 12% write down

Decision Reference 2019-0028 Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress,

Decision Reference 2019-0045 Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress,

Decision Reference 2020 -012 Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress,


Partially upheld

Decision Reference 2020 -0095 Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress,

Decision Reference 2020-0025 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0116 Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product, Refusal to grant mortgage

Decision Reference 2020-0151 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

Decision Reference 2020-0199 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2019-0341 Failure to apply a tracker rate at a point in time, Failure to apply the correct tracker rate

Decision Reference 2019-0374 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2019-0380 Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale, Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

Decision Reference 2020-0003 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,
 
Last edited:
Rejected

Decision Reference 2020-0043

Decision Reference 2020-0005 Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale, Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

Decision Reference 2020-0007 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0023 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0028 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0034 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0036 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0040 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0048 Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale, Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

Decision Reference 2020-0053 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0061 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

Decision Reference 2020-0064 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0077 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product

Decision Reference 2020-0094 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0096 Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale,

Decision Reference 2020-0106 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Application of interest rate

Decision Reference 2020-0123 Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale,

Decision Reference 2020-0138 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0150 Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale, Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

Decision Reference 2020-0157 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

Decision Reference 2020-0168 Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product,

Decision Reference 2020-0171 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0177 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Application of interest rate

Decision Reference 2020-0180 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

Decision Reference 2020-0196 Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,
 
Last edited:
Brendan, thank you for providing the relevant judgements above. I'm curious as I read in one decision that an appeals panel upped the compensation from the initial level by 5 k and this was paid to the complainant. I understood that if you accepted the comp awarded by the appeal panel you didn't have the opportunity to use the ombudsman process, have I got that wrong?
 
Hi Banquo

If you accept the Appeals Panel decision, you can't go to the Ombudsman.

In which case did something else happen?

Brendan
 
On page 12 the following paragraph reads

The Provider submits that the Complainant has
not made out a reasonable claim for additional compensation beyond what the Provider
and the Appeals Panel has already provided for and was paid by the Provider to the
Complainant.

I read this as the complainant received the additional compensation arising fron the appeals process and now the ombudsman is reviewing the case?
 
Hi Banquo

We are correct in our understanding.

In this unusual case, the Financial Services Provider had paid the €5,000 awarded by the Appeals Panel and had not made it clear that it was in full and final settlement, so the guy complained to the Ombudsman anyway.

Brendan
 
In my Appeal I was awarded additional monies and accepted them ‘without prejudice’.

The Irish Ombudsman confirmed in writing to me last week , having accepted additional compensation from the Appeal Panel, they would accept a complaint from me for up to 6 years from date of first redress letter. Only caveat raised was that I must be deemed ‘impacted’ by the Tracker issue.

The Appeal Panel decision letter stated I could accept monies offered, have expenses paid and still refer the case to the Ombudsman or the High Court.
 
It was Bank of Ireland Brendan

If a customer is unhappy with the decision of the Appeal Panel, they appear to have recourse to the High Court or Ombudsman.

This recourse was confirmed by my solicitor.

I cant see why this would be BoI specific and surely must apply to all 'impacted' cases in Ireland.
 
Hi Tom

I had since discovered it was BoI and have discussed it here

Bank of Ireland - With Bank of Ireland, you can accept the Appeals Panel decision and go to the Ombudsman

In another thread, Banquo pointed out that the Appeals Panel had awarded the borrower an additional €5,000 compensation, which he got and still went to the Ombudsman where he got another €12,000. https://www.fspo.ie/decisions/documents/2020-0102.pdf I thought that this was a mistake, but...
askaboutmoney.com

I don't see why the borrower is allowed multiple bites at the cherry.

The other banks are right to use the Appeals Panel as a settlement offer which the borrower can reject or accept in full and final settlement.

BoI's behaviour is a bit strange, but then again they have limited what the panel can award.

Brendan
 
I understand that the Ombudsman considers the Appeal Decision to be the equivalent to a 'Final Response' from a bank when a complaint is made.

The Ombudsman requires a 'Final Response' or equivalent before they will take on the case.

Bank of Ireland Terms of Reference for the Appeal Panel does state that compensation levels have 'no limit'. I believe AIB have limited it to 300kEUR, but have no direct reference for that.
 
Thanks for researching further.

What's your estimate of costs if going down the High Court route?



Brendan Burgess said:
Hi Banquo

We are correct in our understanding.

In this unusual case, the Financial Services Provider had paid the €5,000 awarded by the Appeals Panel and had not made it clear that it was in full and final settlement, so the guy complained to the Ombudsman anyway.

Brendan
Click to expand...
 
TomTron said:
Bank of Ireland Terms of Reference for the Appeal Panel does state that compensation levels have 'no limit'. I believe AIB have limited it to 300kEUR, but have no direct reference for that.
Click to expand...

My understanding is the very opposite of yours.

AIB's limit is €300k. Anything over that must be approved by the AIB board.

BoI has a table of limits e.g. €5,000 in additional compensation if there were no arrears. €10,000 if the borrower was in arrears and €20k if there was court action.

Brendan
 
Bank of Ireland Terms of Reference here

Relevant text is on page 6, (emphasis is my own):
"While there is no upper limit on the level of compensation which can be awarded, any additional payments by the Panels may vary, depending
on what category the relevant issue falls under and on the specific circumstances of the mortgage account. The Appeals Panels must refer to the Steering Committee Group for decision on any payments greater than the amounts set out in the table on page 13."
 
There is no upper limit on the level of additional compensation which
can be awarded, but the Appeals Panels must refer to the Steering
Committee Group for decision on any payments greater than the
amounts set out below.

4863


Hi Tom

Thanks for that link. This is the table I was speaking about.

So the Appeals Panel has a limit of €5,000 on ordinary non-arrears cases.

Incidentally, that was the amount awarded by the Appeals Panel in the Ombudsman Case where the Ombudsman increased the award to €22k.

Brendan
 
I thought the appeals panel was independent of the bank ( paid for by the bank but decision making is independent) if so how come the panel have to get approval from a steering committee? Who is on the steering committee, does it say?

Separately I would have thought the CBI would insist on uniformity of approach amongst the lenders. If some lenders allow further recourse to the FSPO after the appeal and others don't ? It's not not a level playing field.
 
Am I right in saying that if you were never in arrears you'll get €5000 compensation in addition to the interest owed on the write down amount? Sorry if I've picked this up wrong. There are a lot of threads to go through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top