Ombudsman puts case on hold due to appeal by Ulster Bank in similar case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi John

I don't even know which issues are being challenged.

If there are three different issues the case could take a few days and it usually takes the Judge a few months to issue a decision.

Brendan
Main issue seems that these are mortgages that were taken out before trackers arrived on the market. The customers then requested a move o a tracker, then they requested a move to a fixed rate and then they did not take up any of the options and reverted back to the standard rate that the original mortgage was on.

UB's argument is that you don't revert to the immediate previous rate. I can see some merit in their argument, but can't see it succeeding as a customer would have seen the move to a tracker as a permanent rate change whereas a move to a fixed rate is a change for just that period and that should then revert to the rate of the most recent permanent change when that period is up.

My money is on a win for the Ombudsman
 
Main issue seems that these are mortgages that were taken out before trackers arrived on the market. The customers then requested a move o a tracker, then they requested a move to a fixed rate and then they did not take up any of the options and reverted back to the standard rate that the original mortgage was on.

UB's argument is that you don't revert to the immediate previous rate. I can see some merit in their argument, but can't see it succeeding as a customer would have seen the move to a tracker as a permanent rate change whereas a move to a fixed rate is a change for just that period and that should then revert to the rate of the most recent permanent change when that period is up.

My money is on a win for the Ombudsman
If that is the issue with these cases I am not sure how it would relate to mine as my mortgage was taken out as a tracker rate originally so may be not related to my case either way hopefully the Ombudsman gets the result.
 
Interesting that Ulster Bank say that they want to rely on previous rulings. The FSPO maintains that they assess each case individually. It's going to be interesting to read the transcripts!
 
I have summarised the case in a new thread here:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top