"where banks deliberately encouraged people to give up trackers, they should give them back."

[Andy836]

There were many more issues I wanted to discuss

• Where there was a deliberate attempt to take people off their trackers, these people should get them back irrespective of the contractual position

Why?

I really don't get this argument. If people gave up their tracker either by omission, ignorance or confusion, I don't see why they should get them back. Why isn't everyone entitled to a tracker in that case?

Lets not forget that 99% of people on trackers are on them out of pure dumb luck - it was the main mortgage product in the market at the time they took out a mortgage.

I don't understand why contract law applies to a lender, but not to a borrower.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Hi Andy

Let's say Mary has a tracker of ECB +1%
She fixes for two years with ptsb and has a right to return to the tracker at the end of the fixed rate period.
But if she breaks out of the fixed rate, she loses her right to a tracker.
ptsb rings her and tells her "Great news, the SVR is lower than the fixed rate and we have a special sale this month that you can break out of the fixed rate without any break fee."

Mary signs up and then finds herself paying 6.25% SVR instead of 2.25%.

To me they used their greater knowledge and skill to encourage her to give up her tracker. And they should not be allowed to do so.

Likewise, Bank of Ireland wrote to people a couple of years ago, warning them of the expected increases in the ECB rate and noted that they had some very attractive fixed rates. Anyone who surrendered their tracker based on that, should get it back.

Brendan

 

[todo]

Hi Andy

Let's say Mary has a tracker of ECB +1%
She fixes for two years with ptsb and has a right to return to the tracker at the end of the fixed rate period.
But if she breaks out of the fixed rate, she loses her right to a tracker.
ptsb rings her and tells her "Great news, the SVR is lower than the fixed rate and we have a special sale this month that you can break out of the fixed rate without any break fee."

Mary signs up and then finds herself paying 6.25% SVR instead of 2.25%.

To me they used their greater knowledge and skill to encourage her to give up her tracker. And they should not be allowed to do so.

Likewise, Bank of Ireland wrote to people a couple of years ago, warning them of the expected increases in the ECB rate and noted that they had some very attractive fixed rates. Anyone who surrendered their tracker based on that, should get it back.

Brendan

Couldn't agree more, the bank is required todo what is in the customers best interest, this is one of the principles of the CPC.

Unfortunately the Banks have not complied with the CPC in many cases. It will be interesting to see if the central bank can force them to comply now.

I believe the ones with a contractual right to a tracker will get them returned with time, but it remains to be seen if the ones which breach the CPC will be put right.

 

[Sarenco]

Bank of Ireland wrote to people a couple of years ago, warning them of the expected increases in the ECB rate and noted that they had some very attractive fixed rates. Anyone who surrendered their tracker based on that, should get it back.

To be fair, BOI subsequently apologised for sending that letter to borrowers on trackers and confirmed that no borrower on a tracker had in fact fixed.

But I certainly agree with the general principle that if a borrower was induced to give up a tracker on foot of some misrepresentation or deception on the part of a bank then that contract should be set aside.

However, I suspect the number of cases that could potentially fall within that bracket is relatively small.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I suspect the number of cases that could potentially fall within that bracket is relatively small.

Agree fully.

And someone made a related point to me today about fraud and trackers. Although no one has produced any evidence, there may have been fraud. But if there has been, it has affected only a few cases. It's still wrong, but it's not the cause of 20,000 people getting their trackers back.

Brendan