I was never induced to give up my tracker mortgage!

E

emeralds

Registered User
Messages
672
Reading all these posts about lenders inducing customers off tracker rates makes me wonder if I am the only one who was never asked to do this??
We took out a tracker with ICS back in 2005 (at a rate of less than 1% over ECB). In the last 10 years we have never once received any communication about switching to fixed. I have every single piece of correspondence about the mortgage and was looking through it last night and not one word about switching.
Are we unusual?
 
I've mine since 2003 and never received any correspondence regarding giving up my tracker until BOI recent offer of attractive fixed rate and subsequent apology letter.
 
I've had a tracker with KBC since 2007. I've never been asked about switching rates etc.
 
Never a word, not a dickiebird, and we were with NIB - with an ecb +.05% tracker. So you would think either they, or pepper would have been plaguing us.

I feel left-out now. But maybe I'm part of the silent majority :)
 
Sarenco said:
Well, that's not strictly accurate, is it?

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/boi-accepted-tracker-then-called-about-new-fixed-rate.186124/
Click to expand...

Hi Sarenco,
In my view it is 100% accurate.
I signed up for a tracker mortgage and sent all the details back to the bank.
Nine days later they had a policy change, (they were no longer selling trackers)
Two days after this they call me up and push a fixed rate offer on me, without explaining that it did not revert to tracker rate, when previous fixed rate offers did.

Two issues, the bank knew at this point that tracker business was bad for them, and they also knew I had not yet drawn down on the offer I had signed up for.

Now the code of conduct states that a financial institution "does not recklessly, negligently or deliberately mislead a customer as to the real or perceived advantages or disadvantages of any product or service;"

Getting me on off the tracker was strictly to the banks advantage, they knew rates were going to fall and they done all in their power to get customers off tracker products by any means necessary, this is my opinion.

It was a dirty trick by a financial institution.

I brought my case to the FSO and lost. I have to accept this as the cost of appealing it essentially excludes me from the right to justice.

Its my opinion that I was helped off my tracker, Sarenco you may feel differently about this, I don't want to drag the original posters post off topic.

If you feel its something you want to discuss further, please pm me and I will send you my contact number, I would be delighted to converse on it.
 
With Ulster Bank, 0.75% above ECB for 8 years and never once did the bank ask or attempt to move us off the tracker
 
I'm not trying to have a go todo but you were never actually on a tracker rate so you obviously couldn't be helped off something you were never on.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's obviously a pity that you accepted the subsequent, cheaper fixed rate offer. Unfortunately, we don't have the benefit of hindsight when we make our decisions and I can certainly see that the cheaper fixed rate option may well have looked like the better choice back in August 2008.

As a matter of interest, did you file a complaint with the Ombudsman in the end?

More than happy to discuss off-line if you prefer.
 
Sarenco said:
you were never actually on a tracker rate so you obviously couldn't be helped off something you were never on.
Click to expand...

I disagree I had signed, accepted and returned my side of the agreement, so from my point of view I was on a tracker.

The benefit of hindsight would be nice, but we all have to remember that the bank had the benefit of foresight, they knew what was going to happen with the trackers, why else would they have a policy change and why would they contact me about a great new fixed rate which omitted the special condition that existed in all previous fixed rate offers.

The bank knew exactly what it was doing.

In my view its a clear breach of the consumer protection code.

"acts honestly, fairly and professionally in the best interests of its customers"

The bank had the foresight to know that trackers were bad business, they contact me to sell me a different product and didn't have the decency to point out that once the fixed period ended, a tracker would be off the cards. No mention that the special condition was not in the agreement as it had been before their policy change.

It was not fair and far from professional.

"makes full disclosure of all relevant material information"
Surely quietly removing special conditions from mortgage offers is not making a full disclosure. Particularly when its clearly to the banks advantage.





 
todo said:
I disagree I had signed, accepted and returned my side of the agreement, so from my point of view I was on a tracker.
Click to expand...

Yes but you were never actually on a tracker rate and the agreement that you initially signed in this regard was never put into effect and in any event was superseded by the fixed rate agreement that you subsequently signed a few days later.

I am not trying to argue the merits of your complaint - I can see why you feel that the terms of the fixed rate offer were unfair.

Did you ever bring your complaint to the ombudsman?
 
I was on tracker for 11 days then :)

Its a great example of a complete and utter disregard for the Consumer Protection Code.

I am certain their are many others who were deceived in the same way during this period.

I brought my case to the FSO and lost. I have to accept this as the cost of appealing it essentially prohibits me from getting justice.
 
Well, you were only on a tracker rate if you actually drew down your loan on the basis of that loan offer.

I understood that you drew down your loan on the basis of the subsequent (fixed rate) loan offer but please correct me if that's not what happened.

I'm sorry to hear that your complaint to the FSO was unsuccessful.

Playing devil's advocate, you could argue that you backed the wrong horse in opting for a fixed rate mortgage and it was your own fault for not reading the terms of the loan offer. However, when you take account of the sequence of events, and in particular the fact that the earlier (higher margin) fixed rate offer would have allowed you to default to a tracker rate, I thought you had reasonable grounds for complaint. Not a slam dunk perhaps but certainly a stateable case.

I suppose the lesson for the rest of us is to always read, and fully understand, any document we are asked to sign. Cold comfort for you obviously.:(
 
Sarenco said:
I suppose the lesson for the rest of us is to always read, and fully understand, any document we are asked to sign. Cold comfort for you obviously.:(
Click to expand...

The consumer protection code is their for a reason, its to protect consumers like me from the trickery of financial institutions.

Would you agree that their is a breach in this case?
 
todo said:
Would you agree that their is a breach in this case?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm sure the bank would argue that you were not deliberately misled and that the terms of the loan offer that you ultimately accepted were clear and unambiguous. I'm also equally sure that you would dispute that version of events! Fairness, like beauty, I'm afraid, is very much in the eye of the beholder.

In any event, the Code is effectively a matter between the bank and its regulator - the Code doesn't give you any individual rights that you can actually enforce.

There is an inherent contradiction, in my opinion, between the Central Bank's twin objectives of enhancing financial stability and promoting consumer protection. Of course, endeavoring to prevent banks from actually going bust and defaulting on their obligations to depositors is the ultimate form of consumer protection but at a micro level (such as considering whether a bank has acted "fairly" or in the "best interests of a customer"), the conflicting objectives become apparent. Banking regulators in the States, for example, have no similar dual mandate.

Anyway, I think I've dragged this thread way of topic at this stage...
 
Last edited:
13 years with UB and on a tracker from the very start. No communication ever regarding our tracker with a view to switching.
 
todo, are you saying the BOI offered a tracker in August 2008? todo, In another thread I queried other people (incl Sarenco) on this forum as to why the BOI in July 2008 told me that a tracker was no longer available. Even though trackers were officially pulled in October 2008 only as I know now. A person who worked for the BOI then said it was because new tracker loans were pulled in July and remained available to October only on offers made earlier. But todo you are saying you were offered a tracker in August, i.e., after it was "unavailable" to me in July. Really weird.

Probably means all was at the discretion of loan officers and probably the bank encouraged them not to offer trackers but some did and some did not. Now we try to make sense of it all and read the small font but it was all a lottery.
 
visigoth said:
todo, are you saying the BOI offered a tracker in August 2008? todo, In another thread I queried other people (incl Sarenco) on this forum as to why the BOI in July 2008 told me that a tracker was no longer available. Even though trackers were officially pulled in October 2008 only as I know now. A person who worked for the BOI then said it was because new tracker loans were pulled in July and remained available to October only on offers made earlier. But todo you are saying you were offered a tracker in August, i.e., after it was "unavailable" to me in July. Really weird.

Probably means all was at the discretion of loan officers and probably the bank encouraged them not to offer trackers but some did and some did not. Now we try to make sense of it all and read the small font but it was all a lottery.
Click to expand...

Visigoth, to answer your questions

I was offered a fixed rate that returned to a tracker on the 1st of Aug,
On the 22nd Aug I was offered a tracker (which I signed up for).
On the 15th of Sept I was called up and offered a fixed rate. No mention or indication that the tracker special condition was not included..
 
What was the tracker rate you were offered on 22nd August? And the fixed rate you signed up to on 15th September?
 
emeralds said:
What was the tracker rate you were offered on 22nd August? And the fixed rate you signed up to on 15th September?
Click to expand...

I signed up to both, but the latter supersedes the original.

Tracker was ecb + 1.20% = 5.4% at the time
Fixed was 5.2%

Bank had the foresight to know the trackers were bad business on the 11th Sept (policy change), so they sold me up the river on the 15th.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top