Ulster before Oireachtas Finance Committee this morning

Pearse Doherty

It's not acceptable that the CEO is not before the committee. We are dealing only with trackers today but we will have another meeting on CRG

The CB is clearly in dispute about the final numbers

Stanley: I don't accept that. They are looking for additional information relating to cohorts. There are 5 areas , not so much cohorts.

Pearse: How many?

Stanley: We are not going into the numbers today. We just look at the policy. Whether it is 2 or 200,000 shouldn't determine whether they are impacted or not.

Pearse: Has the CB said that there are additional customers which they consider impacted

Stanley: That is their view.

Pearse: So you don't expect that there will be 3,000

Stanley: That is excessive. I am not discussing the figures. We may accept the CB's view or we may challenge it. We don't want to end up in dispute with the CB.
 
Pearse: Did any of the people lose their homes after the CB review began in Dec 2015?

Stanley: We will check and revert.

Pearse: Please also check if you sought voluntary surrender from anyone who lost a tracker since Dec 2015.

Pearse: There are two legal challenges at the moment. and you are going to defend them robustly?

Stanley: We need to look at them - they have just come in.

Pearse: Did you bank break the law?

Stanley: Contractually - we used ambiguous terms. The contractual view is that it was not broken. But that is not the issue. We are putting a customer lens on this. The legal advice is that we did not break the law.
 
It's got very dull - nothing new for the last 30 minutes.

Ciarán O'Donnell is repeating questions which were asked earlier while he was absent.

Brendan
 
Very telling that the PR expert is now informing the Finance Committee about Ulster Bank's handling of the Tracker Issue.
 
SaySomething said:
Paul Murphy mentions that staff did object to being asked to not return customers to trackers.
Click to expand...

I switch off when he comes on. I heard that, but placed no credence on it.

If that is what actually happened, and it may have done, then he should have referred it to the Central Bank, which I don't think he has done. Had he done this, then the guys would not have denied it.

Brendan
 
What a shambles from UB.

From what Ms Arnett said to John McGuiness in response to him challenging her about the subsequent management of a particular case that she was following up for him, even the Head of Corporate Affairs can’t get things done!

While it was good to hear First Active customers mentioned specifically by different Committee members, I don’t think UB’s replies were anywhere near enough; if we (former First Active customers) are not being treated any differently, why are so many of us still waiting for confirmation as to whether or not we are impacted?

And on a related note, have I picked it up correctly that UB stated that 3,500 customers have been “identified”, but of these 2,500 have been restored to the correct rate?
If so, what about the balance??
 
The overall response and level of detail from Ulster is indeed appalling. After 2 years and 200 staff no final numbers no timescale and no commitment.

They have consistently misled this Committee for 2 years and show no respect whatsoever as evidenced today. The time for apologies has long passed. Clearly Ulster have a policy of delay and resistance and both the Fin Committee and Central Bank are powerless to compel them.

Perhaps only option now is public pressure on Finance Minister ❓
 
Last edited:
Miakk said:
have I picked it up correctly that UB stated that 3,500 customers have been “identified”, but of these 2,500 have been restored to the correct rate?
Click to expand...

I found the numbers confusing, but as I understand them.

UB was the quickest to restore identified people to the correct rate. This is the easy part.
Calculating the overcharge is very complicated for everyone and particularly so for UB as they have 5 legacy systems.

2,500 are still current customers.
1,000 have switched to another lender or redeemed their mortgage. These are much more difficult to deal with, so they are prioritising the 2,500

Of the 3,500 a total of 1,200 have been paid redress so far. That includes current and ex-customers.

Brendan
 
Thanks for clarifying that Brendan.

I can only hope that the First Active cases like mine are amongst those under discussion/dispute with the Central Bank in Phase 2 of the investigation.

But poster Corktim seems to have signed the same fixed rate documents as me and had his FA tracker restored in July 2017, so it’s impossible to ascertain how they are managing these cases.
 
Brendan, i am one of the 2,500.,
Do you think i have a greater chance of receiving my redress in this quarter ?

Thanks

Joanne
 
I find it hard to understand the lack of disquiet and anger Towards Ulster following another disastrous appearance yesterday.

Here we appear to have perhaps a dozen customers debating amongst ourselves for 2 years on this issue. How can we mobilise hundreds to put political pressure and embarrassment on the Finance Minister ❓
 
Banking17 said:
I find it hard to understand the lack of disquiet and anger Towards Ulster following another disastrous appearance yesterday.

Here we appear to have perhaps a dozen customers debating amongst ourselves for 2 years on this issue. How can we mobilise hundreds to put political pressure and embarrassment on the Finance Minister ❓
Click to expand...

It was a complete disgrace and the fact mallon never even turned up. Pretty pretty poor in my opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top