Central Bank fines PTSB €21m.
Permanent TSB has been fined €21m by the Central Bank in respect of "serious failings" which affected 2,007 of its tracker mortgage customer accounts.
4. Funds collected from penalties are included in the Central Bank’s Surplus Income, which is payable directly to the Exchequer, following approval of the Statement of Accounts. The penalties are not included in general Central Bank revenue.The fine goes to the Central Bank and any surplus from the Central Bank at the rest of the year goes to the Exchequer.
So therefore the distribution of the fine to affected customers is at the discretion of the C&AG/Minister for Finance?4. Funds collected from penalties are included in the Central Bank’s Surplus Income, which is payable directly to the Exchequer, following approval of the Statement of Accounts. The penalties are not included in general Central Bank revenue.
Anyone got the recoding of Brendan on Matt Cooper today?I will be talking about this at 5 pm on Matt Cooper . These are my initial thoughts.
Ragdal - I will add that to the list.
This is a big fine, so it’s very welcome on the face of it
€32m for 2,007 customers
A total of 40,000 were affected.
Does that mean that the total fines will be €600m?
Was there a deliberate and systematic attempt to deprive people of their trackers e.g. a system error which charged no break fee?
If so the fine is justified.
But , why is no one being fined personally?
Someone made these decisions or errors. Some committee did that plan. So, why is there no one named? There were a lot of bad things done, but why has no individual been sanctioned?
Who will pay the fine and who will benefit?
The cost will be just passed on to customers in terms of higher mortgage rates
What did ptsb do wrong?
43. This, undoubtedly, is a sophisticated and clever argument which, for example, had it been advanced in an undergraduate law examination would have attracted high praise from the examiners as an original demonstration of legal craft and skill.
- When the Ombudsman and High Court found against them, they went to the Supreme Court. That was outrageous. Particularly since the High Court judge , Mr Justice Hogan had said
But this type of argument should really have no place in the construction of financial documents involving retail customers
What did they do right?
- Did they engineer an error to encourage people to break out of their fixed rate early so that they would lose their rights to a tracker?
- This Special Condition 706 issue. They conceded the lower tracker rate only to those customers who complained. They should have given it to everyone affected by the issue.
What about people who are still in dispute with ptsb?
- They were the most efficient at doing the redress scheme. They finished first.
Incorrect legal interpretation of contractual terms and conditions: PTSB denied certain customers their enduring contractual right to a tracker mortgage as a result of PTSB’s incorrect interpretation of the extent of certain customers’ contractual entitlements.
- There are thousands of customers who were put on a tracker rate of 3.25% . They dispute that rate.
Is that the basis for a fine? The Ombudsman rules every day against Financial Institutions. That doesn’t mean that they should be given a fine?
I agree with you. €21m is not a meaningful monetary sum to an organisation turning over so much gross profit and able to shield profit by legacy losses.I actually work for a bank and I think they should put the fines at the amount it cost to redress....... It needs to be punitive and mean that if a bank does it knowingly there needs to be dire consequences. I don't think its enough.
You could be forgiven for thinking this kind of behaviour was any other bank in Ireland. It's indicative of the banking culture we have. The fine imposed isn't going to change it either.I agree with you. €21m is not a meaningful monetary sum to an organisation turning over so much gross profit and able to shield profit by legacy losses.
PTSB are really bad when it comes to systems and accurate information. They made an error with some of my accounts meaning they took a higher than agreed payment. This caused me to miss payments due to insufficient funds. They then chased me for the shortfall in money (which they had no right or authority to take from my account). When their mistake was resolved (through my solicitor) they did not apply it correctly and at the same time I was being hassled by another part of the company for money I did not owe. In fact, they owed me money. They were not interested – computer said I owed the money and I had to pay it. I told them to stop calling me, not to call me between 9 and 5, but they kept calling seeking money. They would not listen. They did not care. The calls became more and more aggressive. It was their systems that caused all this. I got no apology for any of this.
A fine of €210m would be more punatitive and a higher form external supervision order imposed on them. So what if it's onerous They need external supervision. Even then, I would never trust them again. I am sure my experience is mild compared to many others.
PTSB is a shocking institutional systems failure. A fine of €21m won't change that.