Padraig Kissane presenting to the Oireachtas Finance Committee next Tuesday, 21st

MAX01 said:
I missed it so am in shock when I read his comments re BOI staff. Why would he make this statement at this hearing? Why do it in such a public manner instead of advising the staff themselves? Did he give any reasons for making this statement?
Click to expand...

Padraic said he is not taking BOI staff as clients for the simple reason that it may affect their employment. He said the cases were on his shoulders. I got the impression he is fighting the case without paying clients.

He did go on to explain how he was dealing with a staff tracker issue and that the bank were arguing in one situation an MFA superseded the original contract but in a non bank staff case they were using the opposite logic.

I do hope that in the event trackers are returned that Padraic will be fairly compensated for his work. I certainly will be making a voluntary contribution.
 
If that's the case, i would have thought it was up to the potential clients concerned to decide whether or not they wanted to proceed with their compaint/action - no?

In any event, I gather that a significant number of the borrowers concerned are no longer BOI employees.

Any valid contract amendment always supersedes the original contract - parties can't subsequently pick and choose what terms they want to apply.

Padraic's fee arrangements are obviously a private matter between himself and his clients. Personally, I don't think it's appropriate to speculate on these arrangements on a public forum.
 
Sarenco said:
A few quick observations:-
  • I was very surprised at Padraic's reluctance to criticise the Central Bank's failure to put in place a transparent, time-bound review process and I sensed a number of Committee members shared my surprise in this regard.
  • I was, frankly, stunned when Pádraig said that he now advises BOI borrowers that switched from trackers to avail of the discounted staff products not to engage him.
  • While I think the relevant banks are on very shaky legal ground (to put it mildly) regarding the "prevailing" tracker issue, I wouldn't necessarily agree with Padraic's view that the phrase simply refers to the variable nature of the underlying reference rate.
  • I struggled to follow the logic of the response to the question posed by Peter Burke TD (Fine Gael) towards the end of the session (although I suspect fatigue was an issue by that stage).
Click to expand...

Is everything down to Pádraic Kissane?

Providing meaningful remedies and doing the right thing for those wronged is often a thankless, frustrating and lonely path.

It is easy to be a critic - nothing easier.

But there is nothing to prevent critics with appropriate knowledge or who imagine they have superior knowledge from taking up the gauntlet and doing a better job in this matter.

Bravo Pádraic.
 
Last edited:
Good job overall.

The Central Bank as a unit has done poor job - too little too late.

PadraicKissane probably thinks that they are doing a good job now. They have not published their guidelines, so it's hard for people to challenge the banks e.g. The AIB 3.67% issue. It's very cumbersome which is why it's taking so long. They have learnt fro the Ptsb process, but not enough.

I strongly disagree with PadraicKissane suggesting that 2,000 people lost their homes as a result of losing their trackers.

I have come across hundreds of cases of people losing their trackers. None lost their homes as a result.

I have come across hundreds who have lost their homes. None lost them due to the loss of their tracker.

They lost them because they were paying nothing. If they paid anything, they kept their homes.

There may have been an isolated case or two but not more than. A handful.

Brendan
 
Brendan

The 2000 approx figure includes indirect loss of the home I.e. Those that had to sell the family home as the mortgage was no longer sustainable and move miles away and purchase somewhere else where a home was cheaper.

We too "temporarily" lost our home for several years. We were faced with handing back the keys or emigrate. We chose the latter and rented out the house. Luckily we could return years later but many would have sold and never come back.

I am sure there are many scenarios that cover the 2000 approx figure. It's another figure that we will never know exactly.

So I would agree with Padraic on this.
 
Sophrosyne said:
Is everything down to Pádraic Kissane?
Click to expand...

It certainly shouldn't be.

Our Central Bank is the body with primary statutory responsibility in this matter and I have been highly critical of their failure to put in place a timely, transparent review process.

I don't know how you could possibly read my post as being in any way critical of Padraic's representation of his clients.
 
I think you have to differentiate between a house and a home. We are in a similar scenario to Lightening. We never lost our house but we did lose our home as we had to rent it out and now rent elsewhere ourselves.
 
This should not become an issue about people losing the homes or not. Many people stayed in their homes and really suffered to do so. If we start differentiating between the suffering caused by the the banks then we are distracting from the issue. We have all suffered in one way or another due to the behaviour of the banks.

The Issue is that we are contractually entitled to something and the banks have reneged on that contract.
 
I think to speed the process up the central bank should order that all mortgages still under investigation be put on a tracker rate until the review is complete. This should be at the banks expense even if the mortgage is subsequently denied a tracker and returned to another rate.

You would be surprised how quick this review can be done then.
 
Thanks Hogmeister for the clarification and I absolutely agree with you re voluntary contribution to Padraig Kissane . Only for Padraig, this review would never have happened and countless people would never have got their trackers returned. He has spent years working on this issue probably at great personal cost to himself.
Our banks and the Central Bank should hang their heads in shame.
 
Hogmeister55 said:
I think to speed the process up the central bank should order that all mortgages still under investigation be put on a tracker rate until the review is complete. This should be at the banks expense even if the mortgage is subsequently denied a tracker and returned to another rate.

You would be surprised how quick this review can be done then.
Click to expand...

I am guessing that most of the delay is due to the central bank being too slow to review the scheme.

As discussed in another thread, they should make their decisions and put people on the right rate as. A priority. The refund and compensation can follow later.
 
I thought Padraic spoke brilliantly all the way through . Glad to see the cathaoirleach following up on the CB points towards the end as well. They all seemed quite well informed and taking an interest.
 
Excellent Padraic - well done.

RE. your point at 2:26 about grouping people by bank and attacking them en masse, I think this is a great idea.

I'm on board - UB customer.
 
I too watched the full piece. It's amazing to see how horrified the Oireachtas Finance Committee is at the details presented by Padraic. It's as if the scale and extent of this has only finally started to dawn on people in power. Padraic continues in his brave and unrelenting battle against the banks on behalf of us. But it seems that the Central Bank doesn't have this firmly by the reigns. Why have they not set a definitive deadline and made the banks stick to it? Why has this dragged on past the completion date time and time again? Can we really expect to hear anything conclusive in 2017? My case is in the tracker review. A 'certain bank' made me give it up because I asked for a further 12 month extension of interest only on my home loan. I was very clear with them that I couldn't pay the full capital - my hours had been greatly cut back in the recession - but I wanted to keep the tracker rate. They refused. They persistently sent me mandates to sign to give it up. Loads of pressure to sign. That was the beginning of 2009. Yes, I believe they had made a plan within the banks to find anyway - any loophole - to get people off trackers, even though I have in writing that mine was "for the full term of the loan." I rang for an update last week and of course they said they are waiting on the Central Bank. So who really is waiting of who....?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top