BoI staff member lost tracker switching to staff rate!

M

MAX01

Registered User
Messages
39
I am an employee of Bank of Ireland

I had an investment property on a tracker rate.

But in 2006, BoI brought out a special mortgage for staff for their investment properties. Apparently, 1,800 of us switched.

I don't work in lending and I didn't know the ins and outs.

I now realise that we are being charged around 4% more than people who didn't switch.

I have complained but I got nowhere.

Is there any other Bank of Ireland employee in the same situation? Did you take it to the Ombudsman? How did you get on?

As far as I remember we got an internal memo telling us about this great rate. But we weren't told it wasn't a tracker. Has anyone kept a copy of this memo?
 
Hi Max

a few points.

If you made the switch back in 2006, you are outside the time limit for taking a case to the courts or to the Ombudsman.

The best you can do is to try to get your union - IBOA - involved. If there were 1800 other borrowers involved, it sounds like a systematic effort to get people off tracker rates.

The CB told the BoI to review cases and 1,000 were given back their trackers. Not sure what the particular case was though.
 
@Maxo1

Scenario - need facts

This sounds to me like there was a problem with Revenue where some technical Revenue rockstar assumed that the rates the staff were on were 'special' and not generally available and perhaps mentioned the specified rate in relation to non PPR - 12%

This would then have gone into overdrive - and BoI would probably not have challenged Revenue.

Then it died down - many of your colleagues apparently did not transfer.

What you need to establish is the trail on this. The Bank must according to CPC provide you with relevant documentation about your loan.

You need to do some work on this ..as the letter you refer to could be that Bank of Ireland voluntarily assumed liability which could be the basis to sue them
 
X is an employee of Y Bank.

H has borrowed from Y Bank on a 'staff loan(s)' which he has used for the purchase of a BTL. As it happens this is a 'tracker rate'.

Some Revenue official contacts X and its indicated that the loan from Y because it is a 'staff loan' that the 'Prescribed' rate of 12% applies.

Y Bank then issues staff with a loan product that apparently cures the Revenue problem,
but crucially its not a tracker.

Revenue actually never pursue the issue and so those that stayed on the original loan remained on trackers.

Here it could be argued that Y Bank got involved directly in providing a solution to a problem ('voluntarily assuming responsibility') and therefore it could be argued that when the Bank discovered that there was no longer a problem, those that moved products (and crucially lost a tracker), should be able to restore them.

Is that not the issue here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top