The amount of compensation is a disgrace!

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,499
Please feel free to report any of my posts that you feel breach any forum posting guidelines.

Like many here, I have huge regard for Pádraig Kissane's work on behalf of borrowers. However, he has yet to post any evidence, as far as I know, to justify his claim that a bank has systematically been changing the terms and conditions of any existing loan documentation. I don't doubt that he has such evidence but it has not, as far as I am aware, been published to date.

I do not doubt your motivation but, frankly, I do not consider the various legal arguments and theories that you have posted here to be convincing or even credible and I have no desire to enter into any futile debates with you in this regard.
 
D

Descart

Guest
Sarenco,

Why on earth would Mr Kissane post this evidence on an open forum for the bank's to view and try to come up with legal defences ? You are even more naive than I thought. Ever hear of the phrase " Keep your powder dry." From taking to other posters it appears, not many take note of your waffle and attempt to keep the scales firmly balanced in favour of the banks. Yourself, Brendan44, Delboy and Andy836 should get together for coffee to come up with another strategy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Descart

Guest
Sarenco,

Not personal abuse, just stating fact. Let's not get off thread though. What do you regard as adequate compensation for PTSB to offer those borrowers whom had their homes or buy to let's repossessed by the bank ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kelmcc

Registered User
Messages
16
Don't know!!! I was saying to @Sarenco - have you been ripped off by ptsb because by your tone/posts I'm confused... are we not all after the same thing, a proper offer from Ptsb for THEIR wrongdoing and theft from their trusting customers.
 
D

Descart

Guest
Kelmcc,

No he hasn't. Probably doesn't even have a mortgage. He likes commenting and giving his "opinion" on most threads. Usually weighted in favour of the banks and or the establishment's position. Far from a consumer advocate in my view.

Again I'll ask him a specific question. Sarenco, what do you believe is a equitable offer from PTSB for compensation for a borrower whom has lost his home or his buy to let property, due to PTSB actions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,499
Don't know!!! I was saying to @Sarenco - have you been ripped off by ptsb because by your tone/posts I'm confused... are we not all after the same thing, a proper offer from Ptsb for THEIR wrongdoing and theft from their trusting customers.
Theft?! If you have any evidence of theft you should report it to the Gardai.

For what it's worth, I am of the opinion that the current management of PTSB were right to abandon their appeal of the High Court decision to the Supreme Court in what were effectively four test cases on this issue. In my opinion, there was a low probability that the Supreme Court would have upheld the construction that PTSB were seeking to place on the relevant clause in the respective loan contracts and, accordingly, would have overturned the decision of the FSO in the four test cases that formed part of the High Court appeal.

Are PTSB right, in principle, to offer compensation to borrowers over and above the amount of interest that would have been charged if a borrower had been permitted to chose a tracker rate and had chosen this rate when breaking their fixed rate? While the FSO adjudications did not envisage any such additional compensation, I am of the opinion that it is appropriate to offer affected borrowers an ex gratia payment in the circumstances.

To be honest, I don't really know the detail of the compensation being offered by PTSB in each individual case so am not in a position to comment. I gather from other posters that the compensation amount appears to be averaging at around 10% of the interest payments that would have been saved if a tracker rate had been available and accepted at the time that each individual borrower broke out of the fixed rate. That average amount doesn't sound unreasonable to me but I don't know whether this figure varies according to individual circumstances.
 
D

Descart

Guest
Sarenco,

again, can you put a rough figure for the compensation for a borrower losing their home due to PTSB's interpretation of the construction of the tracker clause in the respective mortgage contract. Don't forget to include the monies that were put into the house by the borrower, prior to the receiver selling it at a depressed price. The costs associated with moving. The increase in market value of the house since the receiver sale. ( Restitutional loss ) The emotional, mental and physical stress associated with losing one's home for both the borrower(s) and their children (if applicable).

Needless to say, if the said borrower ( injured party ) took an action down the High Court to receive adequate compensation, the legal fees of both parties will probably be in access of 100,000 euro ( which PTSB would bear ), that is before the Judge even awards a compensation figure. So Sarenco, what ball park figure would you put on adequate compensation in this situation !
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,499
I wouldn't presume that it would ever be possible to assess a general figure that takes no account of individual circumstances.

However, I note that the Sunday Business Post is reporting today that PTSB is offering compensation of "at least €50,000 to those who lost their homes directly as a result of the bank's failure to inform them of the cost of moving interest rates".

Apparently PTSB has already agreed "to write off debt or offer customers mortgages as part of its redress scheme, and there is no ceiling in the sums they will be offered". The report states that PTSB still has a small number of the properties and these will be handed back to the affected customers if they want them.

In addition, PTSB has apparently agreed to set up an independent appeals panel that will be completely independent of the bank and the PTSB CEO has said that "the appeals body can set awards without limit, and the bank is bound by it".

I am obviously simply relying on a press report but, on the face of it, the PTSB response does not appear to me to be half-hearted or particularly ungenerous.
 
Last edited:
D

Descart

Guest
Sarenco,

You have still not answered the question. You are like a poitican trying to defend the undefendable. Deflect and avoid ! The question was directed at you, your opinion as to what a fair amount would be in terms of overall compensation for the loss of the borrower's home due to PTSB errors. I do not want to know what a journalist in the Sunday Business Post has said. You post your opinion about lot of matters posted in threads on this forum, so step up to the plate and, for the 3rd time, put a rough ballpark figure on the amount of compensation PTSB should offer borrowers whom have lost their homes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,499
Could you possibly engage in a discussion without constantly resorting to personal invective?

As pointed out above, I simply don't think it is possible or appropriate to put a "rough ballpark figure" on the amount of compensation that should be offered without taking account of the particular circumstances of each individual case.

If you do think it is possible and appropriate, then perhaps you could give us your own "rough ballpark figure" with your justification as to how you have arrived at that figure?
 
D

Descart

Guest
Sarenco,

Said like a true politican.( avoid and deflect )

I think other posters on this forum now get which side of the fence your " opinions lie " you are far from a consumer advocate. I will step up to the plate. The minimum compensation that should be awarded by PTSB to a borrower whom has lost their "home" , due to this debacle, has to be at least 170,000 euro. Anything less is derisory. In a tortious ( law of torts ) action, a Judge is obliged to seek to put the person back into the original position he/she would have been in, if the tort had never occurred, and to adequately compensate the injured party in this regard. This figure could still be conservative, having regard to the significant increase in property prices in the recent times.

PTSB legal risk assessors, will also have borne in mind, the high legal costs associated in defending any High Court action, when liability has already been admitted by the Bank ! ( ie, the bank will have to pay the borrowers legal costs in any court action as well as their own. )
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,499
I am not and have never held myself out to be a consumer advocate. Or a representative of any financial institution for that matter.

I am simply an ordinary taxpayer, that happens to have a mortgage, and will therefore indirectly bear a proportionate amount of any compensation payment. I don't have a problem with that.

The PTSB redress scheme, as I understand, is intended to provide a level of compensation over and above the lower interest payments that would have been made if the borrower had been offered and opted for a tracker rate when they broke out of their fixed rate mortgage. In other words, the scheme is actually designed to put a borrower in a better position than they would have been in if PTSB simply had not appealed the relevant FSO decisions.

Is your figure of €170,000 in any way related to the outstanding value of the mortgage, including arrears? Does it include, or is it in addition to, the amount of any mortgage debt written down? Would specific individual facts, such as marital breakdown or health issues, have a bearing?

Why €170,000 in the first place? Why not €1,000,000 or €50,000?
 
D

Descart

Guest
Then why post on AAM.

In relation to your other questions, I will try to explain my reasoning for arriving at this figure, which I might add is only a ball park figure ( and only relates to borrowers who have lost their homes ) and, as you correctly stated in your previous posts, every claim should be individually assessed.

Firstly, if the borrower does not accept PTSB's amount offered, then the likely legal cost for PTSB will be in the 100,000 euro range, as PTSB will have to pay for all legal costs in any court action.

Secondly, will be the possibility of the Judge awarding aggravated damages ( C.B.I. report will have a bearing on same ) which will significantly increase any likely court awards.

That, aside, the personal trauma and stigma associated with losing ones home, coupled with the likely affect on personality, psyche, mood, personal relationships etc ( safety, Maslows theory of hierarchy refers )

Finally, PTSB need to do the right thing ( ie Government owned ). The costs politically, of dragging this matter out, with an election looming, needs to be quantified and assessed by Government. A quick resolution, with generous compensation amounts to those affected, are the order of the day.

If the other matters to which you refer are pertinent to a particular case, then these matters will add to the amount of the award.
 

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,368
Matan, search me on this site. I had a tracker with Ulster Bank that I had to fight tooth and nail to get back. Tell me how your fight was different to mine?
I wonder Peteb if there are other customers like you who ought to get their trackers back but who don't even realise it. On another thread Burgess pointed out in his Sunday Times article that only a few customers complained about the PTSB.

In relation to Ulster, my brother has a tracker but they applied an incorrect rate from the beginning but he spoted it and got the correct rate backdated.
 

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,368
Sarenco,


You are even more naive than I thought.

." From taking to other posters it appears, not many take note of your waffle and attempt to keep the scales firmly balanced in favour of the banks. Yourself, Brendan44, Delboy and Andy836 should get together for coffee to come up with another strategy.
This is a riduculous comment about posters that are very well known on here and give great advice and you quite clearly need to stop posting like this when there is no need for it. This forum is for debate and all views are welcome as we all seek to understand what happened and why it happened and what should happen now.
 

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,368
In addition, PTSB has apparently agreed to set up an independent appeals panel that will be completely independent of the bank and the PTSB CEO has said that "the appeals body can set awards without limit, and the bank is bound by it".

.
I would worry about this being independent if PTSB pay them and appoint them. Time will tell. Let's see if independent consumer advocates are appointed for starters.
 
D

Descart

Guest
Bronte,

I stand over all posts I make. I like open debate, even from posters who obviously post from a bankers perspective, this all adds to the mix of the forum. I will not, however, take a scolding from you, when you have neglected to read all the posts in relation to the matter referred to by you and do not know the context in which I posted the above. Look before you leap!

In relation to tracker mortgages shenanigans of the banks, I believe the C.B.I. are broadening their probe to look at every financial institution that offered trackers at this time. I believe Ulster bank will be included as well as the other banksters.

The thread reads " amount of compensation is a disgrace. " any views Bronte ?
 
Top