# AIB Appeals Panel putting all cases on hold to see if they are prevailing rate cases?



## tnegun

Wasn't sure what thread to post this in, we received another letter from the BDO today with no real update other than to make us aware of the recent AIB press release in response to the FSPO finding. It goes on to say they do not know if our appeal falls into this cohort and are urgently seeking information from AIB regarding it and they have no alternative but to put the appeal on hold for now. I suppose they are acknowledging its on hold so can stop sending the monthly letters saying its actively receiving attention!


----------



## Megafan

tnegun said:


> Wasn't sure what thread to post this in, we received another letter from the BDO today with no real update other than to make us aware of the recent AIB press release in response to the FSPO finding. It goes on to say they do not know if our appeal falls into this cohort and are urgently seeking information from AIB regarding it and they have no alternative but to put the appeal on hold for now. I suppose they are acknowledging its on hold so can stop sending the monthly letters saying its actively receiving attention!



Snap. Same for us this morning.

It places the Tracker Panel, discredited or otherwise, in an interesting position. FSPO made its judgement, AIB claims still no-one was disadvantaged but allowing €300m to protect its stakeholders, the tracker panel conceivably have to make a decision now on the legitimacy of AIB claiming no-one was disadvantaged. That would be some card to play at this stage but they were supposed to be independent. 

Though more likely, they will wait for AIB to say we are included or will be dealt with somehow, close the case and have done absolutely nothing ultimately.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

tnegun said:


> It goes on to say they do not know if our appeal falls into this cohort



Again, this suggests to me that they are not reading the appeals.

Of course, your case falls into this cohort as a brief reading of it would show. 

Brendan


----------



## tnegun

Yeah very disappointing they're just sending blanket replies, I confirmed in a couple of minutes with AIB that we were included. I can't imagine they have so many appeals regarding the prevailing rate that there wasn't enough time since the announcement to confirm this even with the covid disruption.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

This probably means that they have put the other non-prevailing rate cases on hold as well. 

I don't know how many appeals there are. But surely it would be very clear which ones are affected and which are not.

Brendan


----------



## tnegun

Just read it again and the last line "If you have any queries about this letter please contact AIB" Is this appeal process not supposed to be completely independent of AIB? Why would I be contacting them directly in relation to my appeal?


----------



## Physioro

Just got the Same Letter


----------



## Physioro

I thought it strange too why they put we should contact AIB re. Queries.


----------



## Tdress2020

Why would they suggest we contact AIB? I thought they were independent?


----------



## tnegun

The more I think about it the more annoying it is, surely they know exactly who the prevailing rate cohort are and what accounts are affected as Brendan mentioned above more evidence they didn't read or understand our case/complaint.


----------



## Tdress2020

Can we report this to the CBI? How would I go about it? I’m 17 months into appeal with a letter from the Secretary every few months saying my appeal is still receiving attention. I have go no correspondence from the AIB nor have I been asked for any additional information throughout this appeal so to me (I could be very wrong here) my appeal has just sat on the desks of the appeal panel for 17 months...


----------



## tnegun

You probably could I think its just poorly worded/sloppy what they should of said was to contact AIB to determine if you are included in the Prevailing Rate cohort and given a the helpline phone no. I'm sure thats what they would claim was intended. It's so bad in fact I'm surprised they didn't just give a link to these threads on AAB


----------



## Brendan Burgess

tnegun said:


> I'm surprised they didn't just give a link to these threads on AAB



Good one!


----------



## Dan_D1

Got the same letter, really surprised they advised contacting AIB, would agree with Brendan they are not reading appeals at all. Very poor from an “independent panel”


----------



## Tdress2020

AIB have updated their website to include the prevailing rate issue. They say each account is being looked at. As my appeal is on hold (As is the case for many others) & the appeals panel have written to AIB for an update will our cases be prioritised? Will the appeals panel have to make a decision? I have written to the CB on this & I’m still waiting on the email others seem to have got. What I’m wondering is,will we have to face another appeal when the original appeal isn’t finished. My original appeal is now ongoing 18 months, are we facing a second appeal that will drag this out for another two years.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

I think that they will look at all 5,907 accounts together. I doubt that they will prioritise any.  It will take only two months, so it's not as if prioritising would be helpful in any way.

I presume that there will have to be an appeals mechanism but the current Appeals Panels have been totally discredited.  They should appoint new ones, but they probably won't. 

Your appeal would have been rejected had AIB decided not to roll out the Ombudsman's decision. 
Now the Appeals Panel will have to accept that decision and decide the following:

Should you get a tracker? :  I can't see the Appeals Panel going beyond the Ombudsman decision as they rejected all such appeals to date. 

Should you get compensation as well as redress?  At one end of the spectrum, most people will be delighted with the redress and won't want any compensation.  But at the other end, you have people who lost their homes and they will have to get some serious compensation. 

My own view is that the Appeals Panel should be disbanded.  People who think that they should get extra compensation should go directly to AIB.  AIB should be generous and settle these quickly.  ( ptsb, for example, were far more generous than their Appeals Panel.).  If anyone is not happy with the offer from AIB , they can go to the Ombudsman.

Brendan


----------



## tnegun

When you say go direct to AIB do you mean via a solicitor?


----------



## Brendan Burgess

No, I mean going directly to AIB. 

In the ordinary course of events, if someone has a complaint they go directly to the service provider and most service providers resolve complaints fairly quickly.

When Ulster Bank's systems crashed some years ago, they set up a group of staff to deal with complaints generously.  If I recall correctly, they had one complaint to the Ombudsman. 

AIB should do the same.  It would be far cheaper and quicker than the Appeals Panel.

Most people can make such a complaint themselves. They don't need a solicitor.  

Brendan


----------



## tnegun

Received the monthly letter today from the BDO to say the appeal was currently on hold as the panel is seeking further information from the Bank regarding the FSPOs decision it's dated yesterday so I guess they didn't check the AIB website for this information!


----------



## tnegun

Called the BDO today for an update on our appeal to see what they said. They explained they were very much in the dark on this too had had little/no information from AIB often learning about progress in the media. They did say that there was a letter issuing this week that had an update beyond regular your appeal is on hold we've been getting. I suspect it might just be to confirm what we already know re-implementing the FSPOs discussion.


----------



## Megafan

tnegun said:


> Called the BDO today for an update on our appeal to see what they said. They explained they were very much in the dark on this too had had little/no information from AIB often learning about progress in the media. They did say that there was a letter issuing this week that had an update beyond regular your appeal is on hold we've been getting. I suspect it might just be to confirm what we already know re-implementing the FSPOs discussion.



I had forgotten about this thread. You are very proactive with BDO so fair play. I don't know if there are legs in this appeal process, it would be interesting if there was but this week might tell a lot. Based on Brendan's advise to the Group, we put lots around consumer protection not to mention noting a compensation amount and extra bits and pieces. I expect AIB just wants this to go away but the Panel in theory is independent. 

It seems like a lifetime ago when we all were sending our responses to the panel via BDO, a lot has happened for sure in the meantime. If for instance the panel issue a blanket response to everyone whose appeal hasn't been rejected saying AIB is rolling out the redress to everyone so this means case closed, contact FSPO if not happy, then thats that I expect but who knows. 

I wonder if the CBI are interested in how this panel has operated if x proportion of similar appeals have been rejected while y proportion of similar appeals will have been upheld in effect based on the FSPO decision. Upheld would be the wrong word though because no-one has seen the FSPO judgement in the wider community and even if they had, the redress doesn't look anything like what people were looking for under this appeal process. 

The last part is where I am struggling to make sense of how the processes align to resolution, because of the differences in what was appealed versus what is redressed. I'd imagine 100 times out of 100, the Panel if it was operating effectively would never have come to a similar conclusion as the FSPO on redress in terms of its specifics (which in no way diminishes the FSPO redress).

Apologies for the rambling above, the mechanics of this interest me in terms of coming to an understandable conclusion given the time put into it.


----------



## tnegun

After seeing the other thread re no further redress I thought it was worth a shot to see what appeals panel stance was. I included a claim for additional redress in my initial appeal so thought it best to let them know I didn't consider my claim settled with the FSPOs findings. Will be interesting to see what the post brings this week!


----------



## Megafan

Interesting letter from BDO today. In short AIB have told the Panel that the FSPO judgement/award supersedes the panel. Anyone unhappy with redress can contact bank/FSPO/Courts.

The Panel are referring this to the Central Bank to see how best to proceed and will advise us once the Central Bank advise them via BDO.

(Surely AIB have not given the tracker panel a stick to beat them with if the CBI say the tracker panel must formally go through the appeal process to close out).

Either way, it seems this might have a twist or turn post the letter to us in August from AIB until the CBI decide on the Panel.


----------



## tnegun

Wow, unbelievable that AIB are still trying to have it all their own way!!


----------



## Megafan

Exact wording above so people should expect similar..


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Hi mega

I can't see that attachment. 

Brendan


----------



## Megafan

Brendan Burgess said:


> Hi mega
> 
> I can't see that attachment.
> 
> Brendan


Sorry Brendan, probably just the way I am adding.

In short the key paragraphs are as below, transcribed.


The bank has responded to the Panel and has advised that it will be issuing a letter to you in due course with details of the relevant account(s) adjustments and payments. The Bank have also advised the Panel that this payment of additional compensation supersedes the Tracker Mortgage Redress compensation of €1,615 previously issued to you and should you not be satisfied with the payments made to date, the appropriate course of action would be to complain to the Bank, the FSPO or the courts.

The Panel are seeking clarification from the Central Bank of Ireland on this position and will provide a further update to you once the position has been clarified.
______________________________________________________________________________


----------



## Brianios

Hi,

Would this be the case for someone who has had their mortgage written down by the 12% and is awaiting the interest cheque but is still not satisfied that a tracker mortgage rate of the current rate other tracker customers are on has not been offered to us? Sorry if I am totally mixing this up.


----------



## Megafan

Brianios said:


> Hi,
> 
> Would this be the case for someone who has had their mortgage written down by the 12% and is awaiting the interest cheque but is still not satisfied that a tracker mortgage rate of the current rate other tracker customers are on has not been offered to us? Sorry if I am totally mixing this up.



Way way back when, after the initial €1,615 refund was received, there was the opportunity for those in receipt to make an appeal to the Independent Tracker Panel making a case that you were entitled to a tracker and compensation etc.

Those of us lucky enough to be members of the forum at the time had Brendan basically quarterbacking our appeals giving us wording outlines for us to include in our appeals which we made relevant to ourselves. If you hadn't made your appeal at that time, this might not be relevant to you in terms of communication from BDO, they are separate processes to the FSPO so timelines for appealing to the Panel have long since passed.

Over time, the Tracker Panel dismissed a lot of the appeals without really giving to much thought to the appeals made. In many ways, in the opinions of many, this Panel is discredited because of this.

For reasons unknown, some appeals had not been dismissed by the Tracker Panel, ours included. So now, it is kind of an odd situation in that AIB are rolling out the redress but for some people (I have no idea how many), their appeal to the Tracker Panel is still open. The BDO letter where by the Panel now has referred AIB's action to the CBI on the surface could be significant as it might bring the actions of the Panel into light (being the dismissal of all the other cases), or it also could highlight that AIB has effectively dismissed an independent panel.

It doesn't seem like a very wise approach by AIB, basically assigning a one size fits all redress to everyone when everyone's appeal could be markedly different. Brendan has repeatedly noted Karen's case that won with the FSPO was a vanilla case, some of those who appealed to the panel lost homes, suffered severe stress, etc etc and some people want to take it further be that the Court or the FSPO. AIB dismissing one avenue of appeal could annoy the CBI and possibly strengthen the case some have against AIB. I have absolutely no idea though really, just idle speculation.

It is an interesting tangent that needs to be cleared up..


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Megafan said:


> It doesn't seem like a very wise approach by AIB, basically assigning a one size fits all redress to everyone when everyone's appeal could be markedly different.



Hi Mega

This bit is interesting. 



Megafan said:


> the appropriate course of action would be to complain to the Bank, the FSPO or the courts.



The Appeals Panel has not been fit for purpose.  They just delayed everything.

If someone feels that they should get more compensation, then they can complain directly to AIB. 

If AIB rejects it or does not offer enough,then they can go to the Ombudsman or the Court.

This is much better than the Appeals Panel system.

Brendan


----------



## David_Dublin

Megafan said:


> Way way back when, after the initial €1,615 refund was received, there was the opportunity for those in receipt to make an appeal to the Independent Tracker Panel making a case that you were entitled to a tracker and compensation etc.
> 
> Those of us lucky enough to be members of the forum at the time had Brendan basically quarterbacking our appeals giving us wording outlines for us to include in our appeals which we made relevant to ourselves. If you hadn't made your appeal at that time, this might not be relevant to you in terms of communication from BDO, they are separate processes to the FSPO so timelines for appealing to the Panel have long since passed.
> 
> Over time, the Tracker Panel dismissed a lot of the appeals without really giving to much thought to the appeals made. In many ways, in the opinions of many, this Panel is discredited because of this.
> 
> For reasons unknown, some appeals had not been dismissed by the Tracker Panel, ours included. So now, it is kind of an odd situation in that AIB are rolling out the redress but for some people (I have no idea how many), their appeal to the Tracker Panel is still open. The BDO letter where by the Panel now has referred AIB's action to the CBI on the surface could be significant as it might bring the actions of the Panel into light (being the dismissal of all the other cases), or it also could highlight that AIB has effectively dismissed an independent panel.
> 
> It doesn't seem like a very wise approach by AIB, basically assigning a one size fits all redress to everyone when everyone's appeal could be markedly different. Brendan has repeatedly noted Karen's case that won with the FSPO was a vanilla case, some of those who appealed to the panel lost homes, suffered severe stress, etc etc and some people want to take it further be that the Court or the FSPO. AIB dismissing one avenue of appeal could annoy the CBI and possibly strengthen the case some have against AIB. I have absolutely no idea though really, just idle speculation.
> 
> It is an interesting tangent that needs to be cleared up..



Excellent summary. We're one of the ones whose appeal was rejected. We'd be very much the vanilla type case that Brendan refers to. From what I understand, the Appeals Panel gave all of us a fairly standard cut and paste response, with little or no reference to the specifics of our appeal.

As observed above, its a very strange position the Appeals Panel finds itself in.


----------



## Megafan

Brendan Burgess said:


> The Appeals Panel has not been fit for purpose.  They just delayed everything.
> 
> If someone feels that they should get more compensation, then they can complain directly to AIB.
> 
> If AIB rejects it or does not offer enough,then they can go to the Ombudsman or the Court.
> 
> This is much better than the Appeals Panel system.
> 
> Brendan



I don't disagree with the above Brendan

I suppose I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing the Tracker Panel have brought attention to themselves by referring AIB's actions to the CBI for feedback. I don't know the mechanics of such things but given the FSPO decision on a clean case such as Karen's versus the decisions of the Panel on genuine hardship cases (assumedly), packed with consumer legislation etc, it might bring into question their effectiveness or independence (possibly unfair)/competence given the breath of appeals etc with the CBI. 

An effective considered panel could have cut some of the possible challenges off at the pass and instead the FSPO could end up with a lot more appeals strengthened by the Karen decision (I appreciate you think the FSPO route could be spent to a degree on prevailing cases) but there isn't a line drawn in the sand I suppose for a lot of people (and I don't include ourselves in the aggrieved but I have given the impact of the decision some sideways thinking).

We will see what the CBI think in due course, it is just another angle.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Megafan said:


> An effective considered panel could have cut some of the possible challenges off at the pass



I would expect that dealing directly with AIB will but off far more at the pass and far more quickly.

If AIB has any sense, and that is a big "if", they will settle all reasonable claims fairly quickly and not let them go to the Ombudsman. 

Brendan


----------



## Megafan

Interesting note about the Independent Appeals Panel in the Q&A document (which is well written in fairness).

Q: "Can I make an appeal to the Independent Appeals Panel?"

A: "The Independent Appeals Panel is set up under the Central Banks TME framework. The FSPO payment is being made outside of the remit of this Framework and as such the appeals process does not apply to this payment" 

Its just a curiosity in how this can be wound up for those with open appeals.


----------



## AIB STAFF 2010

@ Magafan
Per the letter from the independent appeal panel - In short AIB have told the Panel that the FSPO judgement/award supersedes the panel. Anyone unhappy with redress can contact bank/FSPO/Courts - now they are saying they the FSPO payment is outside of the model  of the framework??? So am I right in thinking that it now doesn’t supersedes as this payment has nothing go to do with the appeal...


----------



## Megafan

AIB STAFF 2010 said:


> @ Magafan
> Per the letter from the independent appeal panel - In short AIB have told the Panel that the FSPO judgement/award supersedes the panel. Anyone unhappy with redress can contact bank/FSPO/Courts - now they are saying they the FSPO payment is outside of the model  of the framework??? So am I right in thinking that it now doesn’t supersedes as this payment has nothing go to do with the appeal...



Seems to be the case. Maybe they got s slap on the wrist for that by the CBI since the panel referred AIBs stance to the CBI.

Its also interesting in that CBI said the cohort weren't covered under the TME but maybe now that only was in the context of the FSPO judgement.

Anyhoo, for those of us with open cases, the Panel seems like it is going to have to do something of substance in reply. Which might just be to say CBI think we aren't part of TME but it is a bit of a mess to clear up.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

This is what I assume that the position will be. But I am not sure. 

1) It will have no role in the 5,600 prevailing rate cohort - Any cases before it will be terminated.


2) It will be full operational as normal for the 300 cohort who can appeal any aspect of the redress offered


3) It will continue for non prevailing rate tracker cases, although most of those should have been processed by now.


----------



## AIB STAFF 2010

@Megafan,

I wrote to CBI and in a nutshell

The Appeals process of the Tracker Mortgage Examination was set up to be independent of both the lender and the Central Bank. The independence of the appeals process is critical and allows the appeals to be heard on an *unbiased *basis.  As it is an independent process, the Central Bank of Ireland does not have a role in the operation of the appeals process. However, the Central Bank expects that lenders have put in place the necessary processes to ensure the Appeals Panel can operate in line with the Framework and guidance issued.

While the Central Bank does not have a statutory role in investigating individual consumer complaints, we do use information that we receive directly from consumers to guide the scope of our broader supervisory work and your email has been passed to the relevant supervisory team in the Central Bank, to inform their ongoing supervisory work.

Any information relating to the status of your appeal should be sought from the Independent secretariat of the Appeals panel (BDO) directly.

So the appeals panel might have to grow a pair and actually read all our appeals and use their brains for once..


----------



## Megafan

Slightly different wording from BDO letter today.

Last time out they noted they had referred situation to CBI, this time around they have noted "they are seeking further information from the bank with regard to the FSPO decision". Thats all, usual thanks for your patience etc.

I still think they are in a very interesting position now. I wonder if the CBI told them to work through the process. I can't see how they can't but uphold our appeal post FSPO but they may try to make the FSPO award commensurate with the value of them upholding our appeal, all be it entirely different things in effect.

We will give them a bell next week to ask a few pointed questions, there might be legs in this yet.


----------



## AIB STAFF 2010

@ Meghan,
Thank you for your update. I also feel the -fixed rate ended between 10 Oct 08 to 12 january 2009 cohort might also help our cases. This was an arrangement between CBI and AIB,  ombudsman wasn’t involved, had he known this and that a prevailing rate would be found he might have made a different decision. I wonder what the views of the legal people would be on a arrangement between CBI and AIB to restore 300 out of c6000 tracker all with the same 3.2 clause.. are the c5700 not disadvantaged now.. time will tell....


----------



## Megafan

AIB STAFF 2010 said:


> Thank you for your update. I also feel the -fixed rate ended between 10 Oct 08 to 12 january 2009 cohort might also help our cases. This was an arrangement between CBI and AIB,  ombudsman wasn’t involved, had he known this and that a prevailing rate would be found he might have made a different decision. I wonder what the views of the legal people would be on a arrangement between CBI and AIB to restore 300 out of c6000 tracker all with the same 3.2 clause.. are the c5700 not disadvantaged now.. time will tell....



That is an interesting point you make above, in that the FSPO made their decision and post that the CBI stepped in to guarantee the rate to the 12th of Jan. 

Anyway, it is just something interesting that needs to be resolved. Another interesting tangent is that our appeals had a compensation element which wasn't part of the FSPO appeal. As the FSPO has upheld the principal of being entitled to a tracker, then if the appeals panel similarly now has to uphold, if the process isn't just terminated, then they may have to look at the compensation element, since there is specific reference to it in the appeal.

If you were so inclined to make a subsequent appeal to the FSPO, a rejection or otherwise from the tracker panel could help frame that decision.

Best not to hope for too much but needs to be worked through.


----------



## Megafan

Not as interesting an update as the "300" but a BDO letter today notes the panel is waiting for some final information from AIB but hopes to be in a position to "re-consider" appeals shortly.

It was short and sweet, make of the above what you will.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We wrote to them some weeks back and made the following point amongst others..."AIB explicitly acknowledges that both the FSPO and Appeals Panel are separate processes. However to my mind, both processes are absolutely intertwined in that the fundamental principles at issue are the same. In my initial letters to you as part of my appeal, I outlined more comprehensively the issues as I saw them, and what would make right the situation. The FSPO decision certainly has re-assured me that I was on the right track in making my appeal".
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have faith in the process, it will be difficult for the Panel not to uphold remaining appeals post the FSPO judgement. I think the process is worthwhile anyway, though through the prism of having received the FSPO award takes the sting out it not going in our favour should that happen. I have always felt the Panel will have to work their way through this process and the most recent correspondences to my mind anyway, indicate they are on a journey.


----------



## tnegun

Got a letter today to say our appeal was being forwarded to the AIB Independant Appeals Panel IAPA by the Independant Redress Panel. I didn't even know it was with the IRP. I had claimed further loss arising from a BTL so I guess thats factored into it.


----------



## Megafan

This weeks update notes the Panel have re-started reviewing cases such as our own, thanks for patience, update us as soon as they can etc etc.. 

So hopefully in 2021 sometime we might be able to draw a line under this aspect.


----------



## Nailligo

Megafan said:


> This weeks update notes the Panel have re-started reviewing cases such as our own, thanks for patience, update us as soon as they can etc etc..
> 
> So hopefully in 2021 sometime we might be able to draw a line under this aspect.



Would this mean reviewing the appeals from before or based on complaints sent to AIB?
It would be great to get a proper chance this time.


----------



## krockroc

Hi,
FYI...
ours sent to IAPA too. Not sure I like being complex ;-)


----------



## Brendan Burgess

This is my understanding, but I stand to be corrected.

1) If the Panel was reviewing your case when the Ombudsman's decision became public, they put the case on hold.  Now they have resumed their consideration of your case in the light of the Ombudsman's decision.

So it will be taken that AIB did breach the contract. It will be taken that the write down and refund are fair as far as the overcharging goes. If you have made an appeal for compensation, they will hear that. 

If you don't like the decision from the Panel when you eventually get it, you can appeal to the Ombudsman.

2) If the Panel had issued a final decision before AIB agreed to implement the Ombudsman's decision, then your case is finished as far as the Panel is concerned.

You can appeal to AIB directly for compensation or further redress. 

If they don't offer you anything or offer you enough, you can complain to the Ombudsman.  Karen, who took the original Ombudsman case, did not seek compensation as she was not greatly inconvenienced. But if you really struggled with your mortgage or you were in arrears, then you should be looking for compensation.

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Hi kroc

Thanks for posting the lettter. 



krockroc said:


> Not sure I like being complex ;-)




I think that "serious" would be a better word.   This suggests a much bigger mortgage than average or a loss of ownership or legal proceedings. 

Do any or all of those apply to you? 

Brendan


----------



## tnegun

We got the same letters. I suspect that ours is complex as I'm claiming that the loss of an unrelated BTL was due to the breech of contract with AIB and have requested that AIB put that right.


----------



## krockroc

Brendan Burgess said:


> Hi kroc
> 
> Thanks for posting the lettter.
> 
> I think that "serious" would be a better word.   This suggests a much bigger mortgage than average or a loss of ownership or legal proceedings.
> 
> Do any or all of those apply to you?
> 
> Brendan


Hi Brendan,
sorry, very late reply....work....Christmas.

No, mine was not any of those. Average size, no loss of ownership and no legal. On advice of an AIB staff member, I did stop paying the mortgage, just to get them to engage with me. She said it was the only way they would talk to me. But never legal. It worked, in that they spoke to me, but they were horrific to deal with. Threatening and condescending. Up to that point, I used actually think AIB were okay. They had given good financial advice and rates were competitive. After that experience my wife and I laugh when we see their ads on TV now. 

Way back in 2007, I was on a Tracker, moved to 1yr fixed rate (moving house, cheapest rate while moving with 2 mortgages). At the end of the term, they sent a letter with the rate options (including Tracker). I have no recollection of that letter but when I queried before, they sent a copy of the letter. We were going through a lot of stuff at the time so very possible that they sent it and we just missed it. As we did not reply, they reverted us to standard variable. My query was that we were never on a variable rate so why did we 'revert' to that? We should default back to the previous version of our mortgage i.e. a Tracker at whatever rate was being applied at the time.  

Why default us to a version of a mortgage that we never had?

So, not complex really. I'd have thought it's a Yes/No.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

krockroc said:


> Why default us to a version of a mortgage that we never had?



Eh, because that was the wording of the contract? 

*3.2    FURTHER FIXED INTEREST RATE OPTIONS/CHOICE*



At the end of any fixed interest rate period, the Customer may choose between: (a)            a further fixed interest rate period, or

(b)    conversion to a variable interest rate Mortgage Loan, or

(c)      conversion to a tracker interest rate Mortgage Loan,

at the Bank's then prevailing rates appropriate to the Mortgage Loan. If the Customer does not exercise this choice, then the Mortgage Loan will automatically convert to a variable interest rate Mortgage Loan.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

krockroc said:


> Up to that point, I used actually think AIB were okay. They had given good financial advice and rates were competitive. After that experience my wife and I laugh when we see their ads on TV now.



That captures my experience exactly.

They don't exploit inertia by keeping variable rates high and reducing fixed rates.  They have the lowest Standard Variable Rate. They generally treated customers in arrears better than the other lenders - they are the only one to have written down mortgages while leaving the borrower with ownership.

Brendan


----------



## Megafan

Final response from Panel today. Very short, probably no different to earlier responses saying no loss was suffered, but with additional paragraph noting the FSPO award in 2020 outside of TME. 

I am a bit disappointed in that they had the opportunity to uphold post the FSPO award and even make FSPO award commensurate with any award they might have done but they didn't. They stuck to the earlier logic as they saw it. Not sure why it took them an additional year or whatever to send us the same response.

We will reject the findings as a matter of course. Probably will give some thought to go to FSPO as is the right by rejection of the Tracker findings but I don't know by doing this whether it is like a nuisance claim to the FSPO.

Its a shame AIB didn't pay interest as compound. It was just a sting in the tail for those who stayed close to the story in the end.


----------



## Balfour

Megafan said:


> Its a shame AIB didn't pay interest as compound. It was just a sting in the tail for those who stayed close to the story in the end.



Was there anything in your response regarding the above? or was their response on a different matter?


----------



## tnegun

Megafan said:


> no different to earlier responses saying no loss was suffered, but with additional paragraph noting the FSPO award in 2020 outside of TME.


That's very disappointing the panel has learned nothing  


Megafan said:


> Its a shame AIB didn't pay interest as compound. It was just a sting in the tail for those who stayed close to the story in the end.


It is almost as if AIB wanted to goad us into pursuing this to its ultimate end.


----------



## Megafan

Balfour said:


> Was there anything in your response regarding the above? or was their response on a different matter?


No reference I'm afraid. 

We had written to them separately on this matter post AIB calculating simple interest but they made no reference to same. That is probably fair enough as AIB would need right of reply post our letter and everything was in the public domain at this stage.


----------



## Megafan

tnegun said:


> That's very disappointing the panel has learned nothing



I dont know what they thought really. Maybe they never believed we had a case and the FSPO decision was an outlier. Or maybe they believed we had a case but didn't have the conviction to rule against the bank.

Either way a for us at least the avenue is now closed.

The contradiction on their letter is what annoyed me I suppose in effect them saying we suffered no loss while making reference on the same letter to the FSPO award which meant we did suffer a loss that was redressed and compensated.

Hopefully the panel might come good for yourselves..


----------



## tnegun

Received our response today too, it's very short and shows nothing to suggest that they considered or deliberated over it at all, we submitted a copy of our complaint to AIB post the FSPO award detailing our case at the BDOs request but theres no suggestion in this rejection that they considered it at all.


----------

