# Danske appoint receiver on performing mortgage cos a joint borrower in default on unconnected loan



## The Partnership

Bank appoints receiver on a commercial buy to let fully performing 10 year old  capital and interest mortgage because one of the three partners has defaulted on a unconnected loan.The bank refuse to give the partnership any information on the separate default.The partnership has made a complaint to FSO and we are waiting for acceptance of jurisdiction.I would like comments from anyone with helpful knowledge or experience in similar circumstances.


----------



## Jim Stafford

All mortgages have "MAC" clauses, i.e. "Material Adverse Changes", which sets out the bank's definition of what constitutes a loan default, and which would therefore enable the bank to call in a loan and appoint a receiver if the loan is not repaid.  Such a MAC clause might be "if a judgment is obtained against any borrower" etc. Another typical MAC clause would be if any of the borrowers defaults on another loan with the same bank.

Due to the Data Protection Acts and banker confidentiality, Danske would be unable to provide you with any further information on your partner's default.

The only way to remove the Receiver might be to re-finance the property with another bank, and pay off Danske in full.

In the circumstances, you should seek specific legal advice as to whether you can challenge the appointment of a Receiver. You might also seek legal advice as to whether you should take any legal action against your defaulting partner for possibly not disclosing whether he/she had financial issues at the time that the partnership loan was taken out.

Jim Stafford


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Jim

That is amazing. I wonder do people buying property in partnerships know this? 

Although Danske has a right to appoint a Receiver, why would they do it if the loan had been performing fully? 

To get rid of a cheap tracker?  To close down its mortgage book in Ireland? 

The loan is fully performing and the other two are jointly and severally liable anyway. 

Brendan


----------



## Jim Stafford

Brendan Burgess said:


> Although Danske has a right to appoint a Receiver, why would they do it if the loan had been performing fully?



Although the loan might be fully performing, Danske might have formed the view that the defaulting borrower will have significant residual debt remaining on his defaulting loan, and that the defaulting borrower might need to access the "equity" in his partnership loan to pay off Danske.  If the loan was a 10 year Principal & Interest loan, there is likely to be equity in the partnership property at this stage.

Jim Stafford


----------



## Brendan Burgess

That makes good sense. It stops him moving assets away from Danske.

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

The T & C .Structured term loan . To assist with the purchase of commercial and residential property.240 months.interest only 36 months thereafter 204 monthly. Euribor 30 days plus 1.3%.The receiver is trying to sell. Danske demended account and refused to accept any repayments.Two of the three partners who are siblings kept up all repayments until bank demended account .The tenant payed rent without fail to the partnership but when the receiver was appointed they did not pay the receiver. The receiver has been in contact and we put our position to them .
The first contact from the bank was a phone call and an e mail Jan 2014 informing us Danske was exiting ireland and would we consider a discount and to refinance
in april 2014 demanded full payment because we failed to make payments
we sent two letters ,which were ignored
may 2014 demand letter because an event has occured
sent 2 more letters asking what event letters ignored
Sorry this info is a bit sketchy i will spend some time and put the bones of our 2 year experience with Danske and post it at a later date
Regards.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

That is very sketchy.

When did the the bank notify you that there was a default event? 
When did they appoint a Receiver? 

It seems in this case that they were just using that clause to get you off a loan they don't want anymore. A very cheap tracker rate of Euribor +1.3%. 

What did your solicitor say? 

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I will give as near as possible a breakdown of events which proceeded our current predicament.
A partnership of two brothers and a sister ,lets call them Michael  John  and Mary . purchased a commercial / investment property in a Cavan town which cost the partnership € 540,00 including stamp duty. .Michael and John had no other investments ,Mary had a number of investments the details of same were not known.
In Nov 2005 we got a 20 year tracker mortgage with National Irish Bank for € 420,000 @ 1.3% plus Euribor the first three years interest only then 17 of interest and capital
The term in the offer letter which the bank relied on to call in our loan was "(b) if you shall default in the performance of any other term,condition or covenant contained in this agreement or any other facility or agreement with the bank and such default shall continue unremedied for ten days after written notice thereof shall have been given by the bank to you"
Sometime in 2010 we lost our main tenant due to the recession and the building remained empty for a few months so we asked the bank to give us 6 months interest only until we changed PP to a restaurant for which we had a client . We were in contact with our account manager at this time and he seemed happy with our progress. At that time we were struggling and we were 2 to 3 weeks late with our payments on 4 or 5 occasions .We had to pay  €8000 to local council for change of use to a restaurant.
In April 2011 we received notice "from today we have stopped your account", a demand letter from Danske for the full 356,000 in 21 days because "we are not satisfied with the manner in which you have conducted your account".Michael was called into a meeting 2 days later and told to forget about the letter and told there was a miscalculation and in fact the partnership had over payed their mortgage by over € 15,000.We were then told instead of interest only for 6 months the bank would use the over payment to cover the following six months. No interest,compensation or apology.
On January 2014 Michael received a phone call followed by an email  from N o C Danske banks credit manager offering a discounted settlement ,if we would refinance with another bank.
On April 2014 We received a demand letter.  You have failed to make payment to the bank on due dates, we give notice we have stopped accounts, and exercise our right of combination and set off .(we were fully paid and up to date)
  Our solicitor asked all the relevant questions in  reply. He received no reply to 2 letters.
On May 2014 We received a demand letter.  An event has occurred insofar as demand has issued in respect of other facilities you have with the bank .and account closed ,right of combination and set off.
On May and April 2014 we sent two more letters asking the bank all the relevant questions and advising them of the stress they were causing ignoring our letters, No reply.
On June 2014 Receiver appointed to property.
On January 2015 we received a summary summons 
On January 2015 we entered an appearance      
On July 2015 we complained to the FSO about 4 unanswered complaint letters 
On August 2015 FSO accepts our complaint for dealing.
On August 2015 we received our first acknowledgement from Danske of the letters we sent in April 2014, and only because the FSO got involved
We have sent different complaints about wrong addresses on demand letters , overcharging,confidentiality issues and some of the lame excuses Danske made would make you laugh if it was not so serious .
On October 2015 we had a meeting ,Our solicitor, Michael John Mary and two of the banks reps .from the meeting the bank offered two proposals 
1. Forget this all happened ,€ 5000 for our trouble and start paying our tracker over 10 years
2.lump sum of € 225,000
The two options were subject to withdrawal of FSO complaint and further legal action
So we asked the bank to drop this clause , they refused.
We are now waiting for the decision from FSO on adjudication before we progress .  
I would be great-full for any comments and if you need any more info i will forward to the best of my ability.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

They are offering to settle the loan for €225k?  How much is outstanding at the moment - around €350k? 

How much is the property worth? 

That seems like a pretty good deal if two of you are solvent. 

The FSO might uphold you complaint, and award you some compensation, but I would not rely on it. 

The most likely outcome is that the bank will sell the property and you will both be personally liable for the shortfall. 

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

The property was valued at approx €120,000 by local auctioneer

The remaining mortgage is approx € 300,000 

The settlement of € 225,000 is off the table

We were served a summary summons in January 2015 how long do Danske have before they have to send their grounding affidavit or is there a time limit
We feel the receiver was appointed mistakenly .
In a letter dated August 2015 Danske confirmed 

"This debt was not a repayment default but was rather the subject of a cross default"

In a letter dated January 2016 which was a correspondence between Danske and FSO .The bank states,

 "The said default relates to a facility in the name of one of the parties to this loan facility , held jointly with another party who is not party to this loan facility.For this reason we are not able to release details of the facility which is in default as that other party has not given their permission to release information in relation to their account."

This letter goes on to quote the clause in the facility letter it is relying on "Events of default"

(b) "If you shall default in the performance of any other term , condition or covenant contained in this agreement or any other facility or agreement  with the bank and such default shall continue unremedied for ten days after written notice thereof shall have been given by the bank to you "

This would suggest the word "you" relates to the partnership and not a member of the partnership.
How could the Partnership remedy a default in ten days when it was not given written notice and when Danske were not allowed to let the partnership know what the default was and the name of the defaulter.
Please let me know your thoughts 
    Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

I think you should get someone competent to enter into negotiations with Dankse to resolve this for the benefit of both sides. If you can get that offer back on the table, grab it. 

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

Thank you for your advice.
We are waiting for FSO to come back to us before we make any decisions on our next move and we are been advised by our solicitor . 
I would appreciate reply's from anyone  with experience with bringing Danske to the high court ,cost,result,and an overview of their experience.
regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

What I am suggesting is that the legal approach is the wrong approach. A lot of people contact their solicitor and initiate expensive and time-consuming legal action. 

Danske has shown themselves open to resolve these matters through a generous offer and that is by the most practical solution. 

I am not sure what you would consider a "win" from the FSO?  The withdrawal of the Receiver? You will still owe the €300k. 

If the FSO rejects your complaint, which is the most likely outcome, you cannot take a case on the same issue to the High Court.  Of course, you solicitor will have told you that already.

*High Court rules that if the Ombudsman dismisses a case, one can't take legal action*


----------



## The Partnership

Thank you for your suggestions we appreciate your feedback but we did not initiate expensive legal action.
We paid our mortgage in full and up to date for approx 10 years .
We followed all the terms of our loan agreement.
Danske Bank closed our account so we were not able to pay our mortgage ,they appointed a receiver ,they issued a summary summons,we went from being a good compliant customer to "The Defendants" because Danske wanted to scrap our tracker leave Ireland with as little baggage as possible.
We are not going down the legal path lightly, our solicitor pointed out early in this process that we could lose our homes our business our savings and our reputations, and all because Danske want out.
In hindsight we could have done some things differently but we went with advice from solicitors and friends in banking and our gut feelings.
So what way should we have handled this process, considering.

The bank would not answer our solicitors letters.

They would not agree to meet us until the FSO got involved.

Danske treated us with complete contempt until the FSO stepped in , so we got our first reply to our solicitors letters sent April 2014 in August 2015, just 16 months later.
Regards


----------



## llgon

I like many others had/have an offset mortgage that Danske unilaterally withdrew and were forced to restore to borrowers following complaints to FSO.  Like you I think we were treated with contempt by Danske.  However in the end I think we got a reasonably fair settlement (I settled with them prior to an FSO outcome).

I agree with Brendan that even though you have been treated very badly the settlement you were offered sounds like a pretty good deal for you (if it was financially possible for you to avail of it).  By rejecting it I think you have taken a huge risk with the prospect of very little if any improvement in the event you are successful with your complaint to the FSO.  I too would try to get that offer back on the table.

You do need to look at what outcome you ideally hope to achieve and the chances that this will happen.  Have you received advice from your solicitor regarding this specifically?


----------



## Bizzy

An offer to settle for €225K would be a write down of €75k and that seems a very good deal.  Do you have €225K?  Given the account is deemed in Default ha this affected your credit rating?  Have you approached another bank to see if you Three can raise €225K? If so will they issue you Three, or is it One Partnership, a loan. What would the payments be for the next 10 years?  How would this compare with your €300K on tracker rate over 10 years?  Did your tenants make payments to you, the receiver or the bank.  Do you still have the tenants?


----------



## The Partnership

Bizzy said:


> An offer to settle for €225K would be a write down of €75k and that seems a very good deal.  Do you have €225K?  Given the account is deemed in Default ha this affected your credit rating?  Have you approached another bank to see if you Three can raise €225K? If so will they issue you Three, or is it One Partnership, a loan. What would the payments be for the next 10 years?  How would this compare with your €300K on tracker rate over 10 years?  Did your tenants make payments to you, the receiver or the bank.  Do you still have the tenants?


Hi i will answer some of your points 
We do not have € 225K
The partner Mary, who is in default on another unconnected account  will not give up her share in this partnership.
Any banks we approached about refinancing would not consider lending without removing Mary from the partnership.
Our tenant has not paid rent  to anyone since the receiver was appointed. 
Regarding the tenant, they have been in the premises for the last two years rent free ,so are they tenants !
Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

What a mess. I will remember this thread whenever anyone asks for advice about buying a property with others. 

Brendan


----------



## llgon

The Partnership said:


> Hi i will answer some of your points
> We do not have € 225K
> The partner Mary, who is in default on another unconnected account  will not give up her share in this partnership.
> Any banks we approached about refinancing would not consider lending without removing Mary from the partnership.
> Our tenant has not paid rent  to anyone since the receiver was appointed.
> Regarding the tenant, they have been in the premises for the last two years rent free ,so are they tenants !
> Regards


Mary has been offered the opportunity to get out of a mortgage of 300k on a property worth 120k and all the mess along with it and has refused.  Am I missing something?


----------



## Banjaxed

'Mary' is a nightmare ! She might be your sister but someone needs to go bring her to her senses !  She has the opportunity to make things right (she should have informed you guys before this partnership that she was with otherwise partnered) . 
She has nothing to lose by backing out of partnership now ?? How can she live with her herself .. Especially if your family homes are brought under the equation by her not doing the right thing ??


----------



## The Partnership

llgon said:


> Mary has been offered the opportunity to get out of a mortgage of 300k on a property worth 120k and all the mess along with it and has refused.  Am I missing something?



Mary is not in a position to pay the partnership her share of negative equity and walk away. 

Mary is in negotiation with Danske in other troubled loans of a much higher value.

In 2011 Danske refused to release Mary from the partnership mortgage.

In 2005 we were aware Mary had other mortgages ,but we were not aware of the possibility these loans could affect our mortgage in any way.

The offer to resume our mortgage with 10 years remaining of € 300K was made to the partnership.

The offer of € 225K full and final looks good on paper but the property is only worth € 120K how can we go to a bank with this.
Regards


----------



## llgon

So it's a case more that Mary cannot rather than will not give up her share of the partnership.  You're in negative equity of approx 180k now, 60k each. If you could get the offer from Danske back and two of you were able to refinance at 225k and release Mary from the partnership for no (or possibly a small) payment you would be in negative equity of 52,500 each and free of Mary and her financial problems.  This could be of great benefit to the three of you.  Have you looked at this possibility?  I know refinancing is a big problem but there may be some way around this, worth looking at anyhow.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi a few things have happened since my last post
Danske bank have produced a grounding affidavit,which has some factual errors.
 Our barrister has produced a detailed replying affidavit which we are very impressed with,It covers all the main points.
 2 adjournments in  masters court 
We have been sent to the judges list for October.
Danske  contacted us before the last visit to the masters court asking us to consent to an adjournment of 2 or 3 weeks ,but we declined.
Anyone with thoughts or comments gratefully taken on board.
Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

The Partnership said:


> Our barrister has produced a detailed replying affidavit which we are very impressed with,It covers all the main points.





The Partnership said:


> Anyone with thoughts or comments gratefully taken on board.



By all means, get ideas and suggestions from Askaboutmoney, but if you have a good legal team, be very careful about annoying them with anonymous advice. 

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

I take your point .
I hope our legal team understand that for them a day in court is just another day.
A day in court for us can mean the difference between struggling for the next 10 years or getting on with our lives.
So i will try my best to understand the system and the terms so i can make informed choices and try not to annoy to much
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we have been in court lately and Danske asked for an adjournment ,we tried to block it but the judge adjourned to feb
Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Thanks for the update on this very interesting case. 


What is the court case about? 

I presume that the Receiver is in place. Can they not just sell the property? 

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

Brendan Burgess said:


> Thanks for the update on this very interesting case.
> 
> 
> What is the court case about?
> 
> I presume that the Receiver is in place. Can they not just sell the property?
> 
> Brendan


Hi Brendan
Danske are looking for a judgement against the partnership of €300,000
The receiver is in but we have heard he has not collected any rent in 30 months.
Danske did put the property up for auction but removed it prior to auction in 2014
We contacted the receiver in 2016 and asked about the rent and sale of the property, we were told over the phone that they were instructed by the bank not to evict the tennant and hold off on the sale
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi has anyone any ideas on our case ,we are back in court in a few weeks in the judges list 
Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

The Partnership said:


> Hi has anyone any ideas on our case ,we are back in court in a few weeks in the judges list
> Regards



As I said...


Brendan Burgess said:


> By all means, get ideas and suggestions from Askaboutmoney, but if you have a good legal team, be very careful about annoying them with anonymous advice.
> 
> Brendan



What is your barrister advising? 

It would seem clear that you owe €300k + the costs of the Receiver
But the Receiver or Danske must be negligent in not collecting the rent.

Why is the tenant not paying?  Is the tenant a third party or is the tenant related to the owners of the building? 

Brendan


----------



## Lone Star

sounds messy - any approach from Danske to meet yous?


----------



## The Partnership

Brendan Burgess said:


> As I said...
> 
> 
> What is your barrister advising?
> 
> It would seem clear that you owe €300k + the costs of the Receiver
> But the Receiver or Danske must be negligent in not collecting the rent.
> 
> Why is the tenant not paying?  Is the tenant a third party or is the tenant related to the owners of the building?
> 
> Brendan



Hi Brendan 
The barrister is moving ahead with the case. Our legal team believe we have a very strong case.
We have not heard from Danske in months.
Why the tenant is not paying is clear to me ,why should she when no one is asking for the rent.
The tenant is not a third party and has no connection with the partnership.
regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we were in court on Monday,moved to Wednesday on consent, where the Deputy Master gave us a date in May and an agreed ninety minutes to trash out our affidavits .
We are now heading for three years of this constant worry and its taking its toll on our familys health and to be honest we are wondering will this drama ever end.
On another note our tennants buisness  is booming and in May they will be 3 years rent free. The receiver has not collected any rent ,to my knowledge.
Regards


----------



## TLO

An incredible situation.  You're probably aware of another receiver case reported in this weeks media involving bad behaviour by a lender.  In this case, the receiver, Stephen Tennant of Grant Thornton, is at the wrong end of a High Court injunction as borrowers say that the loan is up to date as per the original agreement.  So, another "receiver case" going to a full High Court hearing.  Media coverage here:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...s-injunction-over-135m-property-35441755.html
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crim...ip-gets-injunction-against-receiver-1.2971073 

IMHO, the OPs "receiver" is on very shaky ground for not collecting 3 years rent.  Once Danske told the OPs receiver not to collect any rent, the receiver should have resigned thus giving control back to the borrowers.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we were aware of the media coverage and we were waiting for the results which looks promising .
We got a new bit of info about Mary who is a partner.
Mary did not enter an appearance ,why i dont know.
She has received a letter from banks solicitor notifying her that a judgement for full amount 300k has been made against her.
i am not sure how this will affect our case 
Regards


----------



## MrEarl

Hello,

Pepper are the ones who have most likely convinced Danske to run with this strategy and will ultimately be the ones pushing the paperwork back and forth between Danske and the Receiver (even post appointment of the Receiver).... unfortunitely, they will now be starting to sound like a scratched record, saying it's nothing to do with them and all communications need to be via the Receiver, despite the fact that someone in Pepper will now be doing everything imaginable to defend the strategy they proposed and got Danske to sign up to.



The Partnership said:


> Thank you for your advice.....We are waiting for FSO to come back to us before we make any decisions on our next move and we are been advised by our solicitor...



Does you solicitor have significant experience in dealing with commercial property, insolvency and Banks ?

Is the solicitor proven in commercial negotiaton, alongside litigation ?

.... if not, then this may not be the right person to be guiding you.

Personally, I think it's a brave move to just wait for the Ombudsman to make a decision (not least, because I don't believe that the Ombudsman's office has notable experience in working with commercial banking transactions, despite smaller cases (with T/o below €3m) being within their remit).

If the decision goes against you, you can expect to see the property feature in the Allsop auction after the Ombudsman's decision is made, because while the Ombudsman's decision is pending, preperations are most likely being made behind the sceenes to sell the property.



The Partnership said:


> ....On another note our tennants buisness  is booming and in May they will be 3 years rent free...



That is just crazy - at the very least, the rent shoud be paid on an ongoing basis into an escrow account. If no one has dealt with this already, then they need to deal with it immediately (and ensure historic rent is also lodged, not just rents going forward).  Odds are, the tenant will now be feeling a little opportunistic, so don't be surprised if you've another small battle to face here !



Brendan Burgess said:


> What I am suggesting is that the legal approach is the wrong approach. ...



I agree with you Mr. Burgess and beleive the non-legal strategy is ultimately how this gets resolved.

However, pesonally I would be running legal and non-legal strategies parrallel to each other (but clearly ensuring that one team is not undermining the other etc.).

I have seen this type of strategy implemented by another unconnected Bank in times past. Suffice to say it was a mess from everyones point of view.... the true winners were the legal teams and the receiver, who all ran up plenty of fees as a result !

If I were involved in this case, I would be asking for a meeting "without prejudice" between all parties - you will need to put this request in writting through the Receiver, but if the Bank has any sense they will agree to it - if only to see if you can get them out of this mess, with all sides saving face.

Keep an eye out for updated interest accruals on the sum the Bank is demanding payment for, as they should be undermined on the basis that the rent has not been collected and offset against the daily interest on the debt.  The costs asssociated with the receivership should be undermined on the same basis.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi 


MrEarl said:


> Hello,
> 
> Pepper are the ones who have most likely convinced Danske to run with this strategy and will ultimately be the ones pushing the paperwork back and forth between Danske and the Receiver (even post appointment of the Receiver).... unfortunitely, they will now be starting to sound like a scratched record, saying it's nothing to do with them and all communications need to be via the Receiver, despite the fact that someone in Pepper will now be doing everything imaginable to defend the strategy they proposed and got Danske to sign up to.
> 
> 
> 
> Does you solicitor have significant experience in dealing with commercial property, insolvency and Banks ?
> 
> Is the solicitor proven in commercial negotiaton, alongside litigation ?
> 
> .... if not, then this may not be the right person to be guiding you.
> 
> Personally, I think it's a brave move to just wait for the Ombudsman to make a decision (not least, because I don't believe that the Ombudsman's office has notable experience in working with commercial banking transactions, despite smaller cases (with T/o below €3m) being within their remit).
> 
> If the decision goes against you, you can expect to see the property feature in the Allsop auction after the Ombudsman's decision is made, because while the Ombudsman's decision is pending, preperations are most likely being made behind the sceenes to sell the property.
> 
> 
> 
> That is just crazy - at the very least, the rent shoud be paid on an ongoing basis into an escrow account. If no one has dealt with this already, then they need to deal with it immediately (and ensure historic rent is also lodged, not just rents going forward).  Odds are, the tenant will now be feeling a little opportunistic, so don't be surprised if you've another small battle to face here !
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you Mr. Burgess and beleive the non-legal strategy is ultimately how this gets resolved.
> 
> However, pesonally I would be running legal and non-legal strategies parrallel to each other (but clearly ensuring that one team is not undermining the other etc.).
> 
> I have seen this type of strategy implemented by another unconnected Bank in times past. Suffice to say it was a mess from everyones point of view.... the true winners were the legal teams and the receiver, who all ran up plenty of fees as a result !
> 
> If I were involved in this case, I would be asking for a meeting "without prejudice" between all parties - you will need to put this request in writting through the Receiver, but if the Bank has any sense they will agree to it - if only to see if you can get them out of this mess, with all sides saving face.
> 
> Keep an eye out for updated interest accruals on the sum the Bank is demanding payment for, as they should be undermined on the basis that the rent has not been collected and offset against the daily interest on the debt.  The costs asssociated with the receivership should be undermined on the same basis.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi 
The Ombudsman has not accepted this case ,we received a letter from their office telling us to go to court to settle this.
We are happy with our solicitor for the moment.
We are not going to contact the bank or receiver as we feel that any time the bank comes back to us to talk they are not really interested in solving this mess ,they just want us to cave in.
So we are going to let this run until we get our day in court and hope there is a little justice in our court system.
Remember both the bank and the partnership signed the offer letter and we upheld our side of the bargan.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi an update
We received a call from Mary who is the partner who did not enter an appearance and who has had a judgement of 300k against her under the joint and several rule. 
She wants to go back to court and enter an appearance now 
Wondering can she do this and if so how
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi again for anyone reading the last few posts can i give a shortened storyline
In 2005 a partnership of 3 people got a mortgage for a commerical property from NIB
We fully paid our mortgage until may 2014 when we received a demand letter from Danske telling us an event has accured and they were demanding full payment .
Danske emptied then closed our accounts
Danske would not tell us what the event was , only that it was connected to one of the partners default on a unconnected loan possibly with someone else
In june 2014 a receiver was apointed
And here we are after a lot of visits to the high court and sleepless nights
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi can someone tell me if you dont enter an appearance and ignore letters and receive a letter informing you that a judgement has been made against you ,is there any way back 
Have you a way of re entering an appearance , appart from getting professional legal advice.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we are due to meet up with our legal team before our court date in may can anyone who is familiar with our case suggest any new angles we should consider
Thank you for all the help so far 
regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi has anyone out their had similar dealings with Danske Bank as ours and what was the outcome.The nearst case to ours (in my opinion) is the case which involves Gay Byrne ,but a much smaller scale.
*Injunctions granted to Gay Byrne partnership over 'contrived' default.*


----------



## Lone Star

have you an opportunity to meet them?


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I have an update for anyone interested
We were in court in the judges list .The judge took 90 mins to read the affidavits then the banks barrister stood up and put the banks position forward.The judge questioned the barrister on some of the points .Our barrister then stood up and put numerous points forward ,the judge put questions to our barrister which he answered very well.The judge refused summary judgement and awarded costs to us going forward.
So we are off to plenary court,i dont know when.
Our barrister and solicitor were happy with the outcome.
My thoughts on the day were ,Hats off and respect to people who represent themselves( I would not be able)
 but even if you cant afford it get a good solicitor and barrister or you will be like lambs to the slaughter.
Regards


----------



## TLO

This certainly sounds like good news.  Summary judgement refused!  Costs in your favour going forward!!  It's no surprise that your legal team are happy.  Apart from getting a significant win with the refusal of the summary judgement they can now mount a full defense, and maybe go on the attack, with Dankse and associates footing the bill.  Well done!


----------



## The Partnership

Thank you TLO for the encouragement .We are relying on our legal team for advice but we are open to any other views or observations  anyone would like to add . I visit the high court regularly when im in Dublin and i have found from watching the courts in action that barristers make mistakes on a regular basis,just like everyone else.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Update
I got a call from our solicitor ,the bank have contacted him and asked for a meeting between our team and the bank and their reps.
So fingers crossed something good will come from this meeting.
Our 90 minute court appearance in which we were moved on to plenary  in May has not come up on the courts.ie site under Judgments & Determinations is this unusual or are only chosen cases published.
Regards


----------



## Lone Star

that's good progress......they sound as if they may negotiate with you.....if you do meet and they step out for you to confer with your advisors - just to be aware the room is likely to be recorded and they may be listening live to the conferring...


----------



## Seagull

Hopfully from your perspective, the bank have realised they made an error, and are unlikely to get anything out of continuing the process. Given that you've been awarded costs, they may decide the cheapest option is to fold rather than face legal costs. Ideally, they might even offer you some kind of compensation for wasting your time.


----------



## Lone Star

Seagull; I would think (only my own opinion) that the bank will still play 'hard'; and will gauge you on the day as to how far they can 'negotiate'. Depending on who you meet - they have some very sharp cookies - and very experienced at this game and reading people.


----------



## TLO

The bank will play hard but they're playing with a yellow card.  If they get a red card, and the referee (the Judge) is already less than impressed with them, it's game over.

"The Partnership" needs to be thinking about the end game.  A clear vision of how this mess is going to be cleaned up to the satisfaction of The Partnership.  Okay, so the Receiver steps aside.  But what about the rent that the Receiver never collected?  On the instructions of the bank!!    Maybe the end game is that the property gets sold, Danske write off the shortfall, and pays all The Partnership's legal costs.  Or maybe that is too cheap.  Maybe compensation is warranted.  Maybe The Partnership want to keep the property and be compensated for lost rent, legal fees, time off work, emotional distress and the rest.  Who knows?  But clarity as to the desired end result is needed as a starting point for a successful negotiation.  And the Partnership should not post their strategy here.  This thread has over 8,000 views and chances are that some of them are from Danske and associates.


----------



## The Partnership

We want our day in court, 
We believe Danske Bank were clinical in the way they tried to ruin the members of the partnership and we take it personally. 
The bank did not care how they affected each of our lives.
We know Danske may be monitering this site but we dont care.(Fools thread..........
We dont have a strategy,our aim is to win and see what comes from that.
Regards


----------



## Lone Star

The Partnership; I wish yous all the very best.  Prepare Well and make sure your legal counsel know your case as well as yous do!!!!


----------



## The Partnership

Sorry for being a pain but i cant get the info anywhere .
Are only some cases published in courts.ie " Judgments & Determinations"
 Our case was before a judge in May in the non jury list dublin and i keep checking but no sign , I would be very gratefull if someone in the know would tell me 
Regards.


----------



## Lone Star

HighCourtJudgments@Courts.ie HighCourtCentralOffice@Courts.ie

The Partnership : pop the High Court an email; mention that you are on record for this (your) case, and enquire if the judgement is shortly due to be published. They are usually very quick to respond and you should hear back from them within the day at most. Ask them anything you wish regarding dates etc. 

I have been checking 'Judgements & Determinations' for recent Danske judgements - I haven't seen anything yet. I would imagine they would publish your case and the reasoning for granting a Plenary Hearing. I'm not sure why it takes so long for some to be posted - perhaps it's down to the judge/time/annual leave - who knows.  The courts are also very  clogged; so it could be a while before yous get a date? 

Meanwhile - read this (see link below) and see what opportunity it may bring...I know yous want to have your day in court...but weigh up the length of time it may take. Settling is a bitter pill ... but sometimes no amount of money or the glory from stepping onto the Quays jubilant is worth the years....and this is coming from one very stubborn person! 

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/danske-bank-eyes-2bn-sale-of-retail-loan-book-35876475.html


----------



## Lone Star

Equally - Your Solicitor should be able to access your file in Central Office - to view any determination if it has been written up  (or else await it's publication online) ...it would be rare they would hand a layperson the file..always worth a go though!


----------



## The Partnership

Hi Loan Star
"The Courts Service does not notify people when Judgments are published."
 This was the reply i got from an enquiry e mail ,short and to the point so Ill ask my barrister when we meet next week.
Thanks for the reply
regards


----------



## Lone Star

Some of the staff are more helpful than others...most replies are usually curt. I thought perhaps if they had been in a position to give an indication of when they thought it might be due to be published - it would have been helpful.


----------



## The Partnership

We had a meeting with our legal team this week 
It has been 9 weeks since we were moved on to the plenary system
The judge gave Danskes team 4 weeks to forward their paperwork .
Nothing has happened yet 
Our team dident see this as a problem or a big deal.
We asked about our judgement being posted on courts.ie .It wont
We havent had our meeting with Danske yet 
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Lone Star said:


> that's good progress......they sound as if they may negotiate with you.....if you do meet and they step out for you to confer with your advisors - just to be aware the room is likely to be recorded and they may be listening live to the conferring...



Thanks lonestar
regarding Danske bank recording our meeting ,is this legal,
Last year we had a meeting at Danske HQ with two reps.
Firstly they did not let us know they were recording our meeting
Secondly they left the room so we could discuss our options with our solicitor ,so all of our thoughts and strategies were recorded .
We got an updated freedom of information request from Danske and to our astonishment there were details of minutes of our meeting
some of the diaglog was edited but more or less intact.
If we have another meeting with Danske it wont be in their offices .
The more dealings we have with Danske the more aware we are of the type of people  we are dealing with and what they are capable of
Very Scary.


----------



## Seagull

It was legal for Danske to record anything you said in conversation with their officials. I'm not sure about the legality of their recording the conversation between you and your solicitor without telling you, but I don't think it was legal. You would have a right to expect conversations between yourself and your solicitor to be confidential, even if held in the other party's office. I'd imagine at the very least it's something else to bring up before the judge as further indication of their underhand dealings. Given that you must be in regular conversation with your solicitor, ask him about the legality of the recording, and whether there are any sanctions that can be brought against Danske if it was illegal.


----------



## The Partnership

Danske deny any recording was made 
None of the private discussions  between us were in the minutes Danske produced in the updated info request.
There were two Danske bank reps in the meeting and we were not aware of anyone takeing notes of what was said, but they produced step by step minutes of the meeting.
Regards


----------



## Lone Star

Also likely to be video recording and perhaps even zooming in on where you sit to view notes.....where you sit etc is all pre-thought. Banks employ psychologists too...... they very eagerly step out I bet...and then appear when it seems like yous are near the end of your own conferring....


----------



## Lone Star

Don't take any of this personally - they are there to do a job - and by god they will do it ...some of them are incredibly well paid....they would take the skin off your body if they could!!!


----------



## Andy836

Lone Star said:


> Also likely to be video recording and perhaps even zooming in on where you sit to view notes.....where you sit etc is all pre-thought. Banks employ psychologists too...... they very eagerly step out I bet...and then appear when it seems like yous are near the end of your own conferring....



Seriously? You believe this? 

I don't. It sounds absolutely nuts.


----------



## llgon

Lone Star said:


> Don't take any of this personally - they are there to do a job - and by god they will do it ...



Banks??

Well there's a first time for everything I suppose.


----------



## Seagull

Did the first set of minutes you received include anything of the conversation between you and your solicitor, or was it just of the portion while Danske reps were in the meeting? If it's only the part while Danske reps were present, then there is no wrongdoing. They can record that with no issue. So it doesn't really matter whether the minutes are based on a recording or handwritten notes.


----------



## The Partnership

There were no minutes of the conversation we had with our solicitor.
regards


----------



## Lone Star

regardless of what is to be believed....if you're meeting a bank - one would be wise to step out of their building if you are having a private discussion with your advisor/solicitor who may be present with you....unless of course you use 'being listened to'  to your advantage. nuts perhaps... but so was the moon landing...


----------



## The Partnership

Has anyone read Tommy Tiernans take on banks,
"Banks have become gentrified when they are ,in fact ,just moneylenders---grubby,desperate and greedy-fingered by design"
A bit harsh ?
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we got a company called Bankcheck to go over our Danske mortgage to identify any mistakes .
Danske took over €600 a month to much from our morgage account from 2009 to 2011 and when they discovered the mistake they refunded us by giving us six months off our payments which amounted to €15.000 plus
Bankchecks audit shows Danske should have allowed us nearly € 22,000 which means during the worst recession in decades Danske took  €11,000 a year of us in advance of the T&C
even after the repayment break received from the bank between may 2011 and - dec 2011 the account was still ahead of its repayments by € 5,500
Bankcheck also found an interest overcharge of € 417
So we were never one cent behind in our repayments for over nine years of repayments until they apointed a receiver.
Dont know if this is covered by the banking enquiry,but we never received any compo or even a sorry.
Regards


----------



## Lone Star

That's a 'hot period' of when Danske overcharged some customers on VHL.....they 'renamed' the mortgage products IHL (investment home loans), letter may have issued to you around Feb 2011. I'm not offay anymore with the full ins and outs....it might be worth getting advice or perhaps there is someone on AAM who could PM you more information. Some judges seem very dismissive these days re overcharging and almost treat it as a fly in their eye nuisance...with the refund the customer - end of story - next for the guillotine please! Goodness, I hope you guys come out of this well. Keep her lit.


----------



## The Partnership

We have contacted a well known and respected financial adviser who is no stranger to AAM and he has agreed to help us with our counterclaim if our talks with Danske do not bear fruit.
Has anyone out there had any success in removeing a receiver ?
The receiver on our property has been appointed since June 2014 during that time he has not collected any rent,done any maintainance we are not sure if he has proper insurance cover or if he has checked the tennants cover . I spoke to the tennant this week and even though she has not paid rent for over 3 years she had a moan about a leaky roof and the fact she had to completely re paint the outside of the building and replace some floor covering.If the receiver has not entered and inspected the building in this length of time surely this is gross negligence by him and by Danske who would have to have some duty of care.
If we ever get this property back will it be a ruin and i suppose Danske will find some way of slithering out of that responsibility.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I have just watched some of Danske Bank adds in which they highlight their 145 year history and all that stuff that goes with a fluffy image ,local sponsorship,comunity support .Enough to make me physically sick.
Its hard to imagine Danske are still puting this garbage out to people in Nothern Ireland and pooping over the rest of us in the South.
During a negotiation with a senior Danske bank offical he was asked about the negative publicity ,he smiled and said doesent matter we are out of here .Its a pity we cant let our neighbours know what they are in for if Danske do the same to them.Any suggestions ?


----------



## TLO

The Partnership said:


> Hi I have just watched some of Danske Bank adds in which they highlight their 145 year history and all that stuff that goes with a fluffy image ,local sponsorship,comunity support .Enough to make me physically sick.
> Its hard to imagine Danske are still puting this garbage out to people in Nothern Ireland and pooping over the rest of us in the South.
> During a negotiation with a senior Danske bank offical he was asked about the negative publicity ,he smiled and said doesent matter we are out of here .Its a pity we cant let our neighbours know what they are in for if Danske do the same to them.Any suggestions ?



Buy a few shares and try for a viral soundbite at the AGM in Copenhagen?


----------



## Lone Star

Water of a Duck's back. Good suggestion re shares TLO - however my thoughts would be: They are hard as nails and the shareholders will only be interested in profit - they got rid of their CEO a few years ago and the new man is laser sharp and ruthless. Financial Ombudsman in Denmark won't get involved either as it's a 'concrete' dispute - still worth a shot though. Don't get wrapped up too much in the emotional side - they do not care - they will bull through. Keep your passion of course,  but stick to facts and figures. Meet them and see what they will agree to. No doubt yous have been shafted - but weigh up life in court versus your life back again. that's my two cents worth. As ever, good luck.


----------



## The Partnership

Thanks for the replys .I find I have a level head and a thought out plan of action when we meet with the Danske reps but that goes out the window when the meeting moves on .
When your called into the headmasters office for doing something you dident do and you receive a punishment for a mistake made by the school .
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I was thinking of puting a case study together of the complete history of our problems with Danske.With the help of two friends who are experienced in banking and debt problems,they agreed to spend some time produceing a detailed book with all relevant letters and affidavits attached .
This would be done simply and professionally in a book form with all the facts and Danske mistakes highlighted.
We would then circulate this book to every relevant politician,goverment agency,financial institution,newspaper and social networking websites north and south of ireland and Copenhagen
I know this may not interest many people but if its done right it might cause Danske problems.
This is subject to legal advice and the absence of a deal.
Regards


----------



## Lone Star

Denmark, will just ask Ireland to deal with it. Politicians...5 might reply.....2 might flick through it....save your energy for a meeting with them. Talk if you can to a banker who works in compliance - find out how much they have broken the various codes of conduct etc...There are mediators out there who might be of help. Get your life back - meet them and cut your losses.


----------



## The Partnership

Update
We had a meeting with Danske reps in the hope of a reasonable settlement we had our solicitor with us .
A total waste of time and money 
We are now continuing with the case and our solicitor has advised we need a senior council on board.
We are getting an estimate for costs but the ball park figure is frightening  
Regards


----------



## Lone Star

Darn, I really hoped yous had a chance to sort this all out. I hope Court proceedings go well. senior counsel will be pricey.


----------



## Bronte

I've read this thread and I don't see how a court case can be won. Maybe I'm missing something.  Ultimately the money is owed, the terms and conditions broken by one partner, meaning the loan can legally be called in. 

What is the all park figure? 30 K? More?


----------



## TLO

Bronte said:


> I've read this thread and I don't see how a court case can be won. Maybe I'm missing something. Ultimately the money is owed, the terms and conditions broken by one partner, meaning the loan can legally be called in.



Hi Bronte, calling the loan in was legal although morally and commercially questionable as the loan was performing.  The real issue would appear to be the subsequent inaction on the part of the receiver that was appointed by Danske, who hasn't collected rent in years, and has allowed the condition of the secured property to deteriorate.  It would seem that actions and in-actions on the part of Danske and the Danske appointed receiver have turned a performing loan into a non-performing loan and materially disadvantaged The Partnership.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I would like to answer Bronte first
The money was owed and fully paid up to date and in advance.
We were told a partner defaulted but never shown the default.
We know the partner has never defaulted in her own name.
We have independent opinions from 3 barristers on our case and each one has come to the conclusion that it's not a black and white case and that it will come down to the judge on the day
We are not relying on one defence there are at least six ways which may if not win the case force Danske to run the case from scratch again.
We have a detailed paper trail of all our dealings and we have accounts of numerous mistakes Danske made from the first overcharging in 2009 to the present date


----------



## The Partnership

Hi TLO thank you for your response
When we looked for second opinions from two different barristers one of them said over the phone you are either in default or not ,there is no middle ground.So we sent him all the relevant paperwork paid him three hundred euro and had a thirty minute meetng with him.
He made a couple of suggestions ,one was to go after the receiver as he was totally out of order .But on the question of default he said it would come down to the judge on the day.
During our summary hearing the judge was not impressed with the Danske bank arguments  he actually rubbished some of them.
This was not a judge who was anti bank ,in fact in a meeting a week before our summary court appearance our barrister gave us copies of a similar case  where he judged in favour of the bank.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi during this week someone posted to this chat but i did not get a chance to answer before their post was removed.
It was in relation to  Mary causeing a default in the partnerships mortgage by defaulting with someone else on a seperate loan.The question was 
If Mary was paid in advance by thousands on the partnership mortgage by an overchargeing mistake of Danske bank how could Danske bank call in her unconnected loan.I will mention this to our barrister 
If you have any more bright ideas send me a private message
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

I have gone over Banchecks report it shows on 03/05/2011 the partnership was paid €22,000 in advance of t&c because of a Danske bank mistake.
When was Marys default ?who were her partners in default.
How much of a default was it?
Could her share of € 22,000 have remedied the default.
Could her share of €22,000 left her in a better position to refinance .
Could the partnership have agreed to lend her €22,000 to stableise her position if it had known the result of her default.
All we know is Marys default on an unconnected loan caused an event which triggered a default on a loan that was paid in advance by thousands of euros.
The Partnership was never given notice of a default by Mary or given a chance to remedy the default.We were sent demand letters for immediate payment for the full ammount of the mortgage.Danske dident even send these letters to our propper adresses.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi it was early in May 2017 when we were in court on a summary summons .
The judge ruled in our favour and gave Danske four weeks to produce a statement of claim and proceed to plenary .
Four and half months later we have not got any paperwork.
Is this normal practice 
We had a meeting with Danske but nothing came of it would this have put a hold on the paperwork.
Regards


----------



## Seagull

Surely it's time to let the judge know that the order has not been complied with? A contempt finding might just put a candle under Danske.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi Seagull we have just received an e-mail from our solicitor 
Danske want us to formally reject their offer.
If I was paranoid id say someone in Danske read your post 
Regards


----------



## Seagull

I'd be somewhat surprised if they were unaware of this thread. You'd think there has to be at least one staff member there who is a member of AAM.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I counted the rent arrears from the property from the appointment of the receiver to Oct 2017 as requested by my solicitor.

€ 60,000 exactly

40 months by € 1500 a month

Its a long time rent free.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi i have been watching the tracker scam unfolding over the past few months and i am hopefull this wont blow over like so many bank scandalls have in the past .I hope the goverment put down some lasting changes that wont go away as soon as a bigger story comes up.
Im afraid the banks are bideing their time in their mansions waiting for it all to blow over.

In the mean time im waiting for Danske Bank to forward their statement of claim and explain why they called in a fully performing tracker loan with no risk and paid in advance by over €5000 
Ethics my This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we have received an estimate from our junior and senior council for our upcoming court proceedings
Approx:  € 60,000
Does this figure seem par for the course .
I would like some feedback from some people who have experience in the procedure please.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi can someone let me know if Danske has contacted anyone about the tracker redress and compensation issue.
We were overcharged on our mortgage between 2009 and 2011 for 2 years to the sum of €22000 and € 5500 was taken in advance of contract to 2014. We would like some acknowledgement and compensation from Danske,


----------



## IdesofMarch

Did the Bank take you off or vary the interest rate you had originally contracted into to pay between these years? If the answer is in the affirmative, then my advice is to write a registered letter (keep post office receipt and a photocopy of the letter) to Danske Bank stating that your case qualifies to be included in the framework for their mortgage tracker examination. They are obliged to include you in this examination, if your mortgage tracked a publicly quoted index like the ECB Rate, EURIBOR, EONIA etc.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi has any Danske tracker mortgage customers heard from the bank and what have they said regarding redress and compo.We have had no contact 
regards


----------



## Bronte

The Partnership said:


> Hi Seagull we have just received an e-mail from our solicitor
> Danske want us to formally reject their offer.
> If I was paranoid id say someone in Danske read your post
> Regards



Banks, the revenue and the Central Bank read AAM.

They have reacted in the past to things written on here. 

Best of luck, can't believe the legal fees for you going to court. You're very brave.


----------



## IdesofMarch

EU Commission currently investigating the exhorbitant legal fees charged in Ireland, to determine whether it is a bar to access to a court remedy.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi calling any Danske Bank customers who have heard from the bank regarding tracker redress and compensation .

We are rarely mentioned and i have a feeling we are been forgotten about

Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I sent a letter to Danske asking for an update on our tracker examination
Danske Reply
Your accounts relate to commercial lending and are outside the scope of this examination
Has anyone else got this letter back 
Regards


----------



## IdesofMarch

The Partnership,

According to the Central Bank of Ireland, the in scope mortgage accounts affected include:

3.2 IN-SCOPE MORTGAGE ACCOUNTS

3.2.1 In the course of the Examination the lender is to review all mortgage accounts in respect of

both Private Dwelling Houses and Buy-to-Let properties:

  that originated on Tracker Interest Rates1;


  that had Tracker Interest Rates applied at any stage during the term of the underlying

mortgage agreements; and/or


  where the underlying mortgage agreements provided for contractual rights to or

options2 for Tracker Interest Rates at any stage during the term of the agreements.

For the avoidance of doubt, this includes all mortgage accounts that have been redeemed, sold or transferred to another entity by the lender, together with mortgage accounts where the customer has lost possession of the secured property for any reason (including by way of voluntary and involuntary sale). 

I suppose you can argue that your commercial loan is technically a buy to let property and therefore is within scope of the current examination, after all it is a tracker mortgage loan.


----------



## The Partnership

IdesofMarch said:


> The Partnership,
> 
> According to the Central Bank of Ireland, the in scope mortgage accounts affected include:
> 
> 3.2 IN-SCOPE MORTGAGE ACCOUNTS
> 
> 3.2.1 In the course of the Examination the lender is to review all mortgage accounts in respect of
> 
> both Private Dwelling Houses and Buy-to-Let properties:
> 
>   that originated on Tracker Interest Rates1;
> 
> 
>   that had Tracker Interest Rates applied at any stage during the term of the underlying
> 
> mortgage agreements; and/or
> 
> 
>   where the underlying mortgage agreements provided for contractual rights to or
> 
> options2 for Tracker Interest Rates at any stage during the term of the agreements.
> 
> For the avoidance of doubt, this includes all mortgage accounts that have been redeemed, sold or transferred to another entity by the lender, together with mortgage accounts where the customer has lost possession of the secured property for any reason (including by way of voluntary and involuntary sale).
> 
> I suppose you can argue that your commercial loan is technically a buy to let property and therefore is within scope of the current examination, after all it is a tracker mortgage loan.


Hi 
How is a commercial loan defined compared to a buy to let
Regards


----------



## IdesofMarch

The CBI mortgage tracker framework for conducting a mortgage examination takes no cognisance of whether the loan is commercial or not. The only stipulation for an account to be classed as "in scope" is that the account must be a tracker mortgage product on a PDH or a BTL property. If the mortgage that your partnership took out, was a tracker product and the property was let; then, as per the CBI's own framework, the mortgage account is in scope for review by the lender, commercial or not.


----------



## IdesofMarch

The Partnership,

Here is the link to the framework document,



https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/def...ing-tracker-mortgage-examination.pdf?sfvrsn=4


----------



## Duggie

Haven’t read any of this thread bar the posts on this page.

I forced (through unusual channels) a letter from Danske a few weeks ago looking for an update. 

They said the CBI is still in the process of reviewing Danske’s Examination. When it concludes, and if the CBI force them to admit their fault, “they will contact me”.

My local TD has tried to get an update from the CBI, but to no avail. 

We are very much the “runt of the litter”. Unfortunately, the general public and media following this are only interested in the Big 5 banks and don’t really give a fiddlers about the smaller lenders involved. No coverage when our mortgages were sold to the vultures, but public uproar with PTSB and politicians in all sides trying to force through legislation. In fairness Brendan is flying the flag, but nobody else.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi 
Thank you for the replies most helpful
We have put in a complaint to the Ombudsman and we will now wait and see
Im wondering are Danske going to fight every every inch of the way also have CBI any teeth
We have an ongoing case against Danske and I was advised not to post anything on it.
Many Thanks


----------



## The Partnership

Hi has the tracker scandal gone away 
Havent heard anything on the news lately
maybe its all sorted and we can live happily ever after.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I was looking over old paperwork I have on the inital complaint I made to the Ombudsman

Danske did not reply to my letters when they sent their demand letters

Danske admitted they should have answered the letters

The Ombudsman did not fine or sanction Danske they just closed the case .


----------



## The Partnership

Hi has anyone heard if Danske Bank have finished their tracker examination

I would appreciate any update or info that anyone has

regards


----------



## Duggie

As of last Monday, the CBI review is still ongoing. I think the CBI quarterly update is due out this week, not that it will say much..

Danske are obviously at loggerheads with our regulator...


----------



## Webster

The Partnership said:


> Hi has anyone heard if Danske Bank have finished their tracker examination
> 
> I would appreciate any update or info that anyone has
> 
> regards



Did you have a prestige account with Danske ?


----------



## The Partnership

Hi Webster dont know what a prestige account is 
all I know is we had a buy to let mortgage connected to the euribor rate plus 1.3%


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I have not heard any news lately about Danske Banks tracker mortgage review and was wondering has anyone else.
I have been in contact with FSPO and they said they are in contact with Danske in regard to my overchargeing from 2009 to 2011 and they would get back to me 
I got an e mail from CBI regarding my inital complaint saying they could not deal directly with me but that I may be contacted by them as part of their investigation into Danske
Regards


----------



## Bronte

You must be going to hell and backwards with this going on so long.

Your missed rent figure should be higher. Because you surely had a clause that the rent would be reviewed every so often.

I dnt believe your commercial loan could be classified as a buy to let.

Hope one day to read your court case. 

I hope the siblings don't fall out over this. Some things are worth more than money.

Best of luck. You're all very brave.


----------



## The Partnership

The Partnership said:


> Hi I have not heard any news lately about Danske Banks tracker mortgage review and was wondering has anyone else.
> I have been in contact with FSPO and they said they are in contact with Danske in regard to my overchargeing from 2009 to 2011 and they would get back to me
> I got an e mail from CBI regarding my inital complaint saying they could not deal directly with me but that I may be contacted by them as part of their investigation into Danske
> Regards



I have been in contact with FSPO and they are talking to Danske about our overcharging case

 We get the impression from e mails we received that Danske are much more up to talking,but they want to lump our high court case in with our overcharging complaint.

We feel this will only confuse things so we refused this and we asked the FSPO to only consider our overcharging complaint as the other case was subject to ongoing legal action.

Regards


----------



## Humpty Dumpty

Just reading through this thread, hope youre holding up ok? No words.... 

Any updates


----------



## The Partnership

Hi I have put in a complaint to the FSPO about our overchargeing between 2009 and 2011 

As part of their defence Danske maintain the 36 month interest only part of the twenty year mortgage starts the date I signed the offer letter and not the drawdown date

The first interest paid on statement number 1 was 3 months after the offer letter signing and I tought I had another 35 interest payments before C&I kicked in

Danske refused to supply FSPO with copies of bank statements from december 2005 to june 2006 because they were not required to hold statements for that long

I would welcome any feedback 

regards


----------



## The Partnership

Up-date on our case 
Danske appoint receiver on a performing mortgage

A few months ago we had a meeting with Danske staff ,no legals,which resulted in Danske offering to sell our property and write off 80% of the remainder owed .
This would mean we could walk away   if we each paid € 20,000 approx
We Declined their offer 

A few weeks ago we had a settlement meeting ,with legals, which resulted in Danske offering €45,000 to us to sell our property and walk away
We declined their offer.
Regards


----------



## Duggie

Are they going to cover your legal fees as well? They have a lot to lose here - think of the publicity if this gets back to court as they recently won the tender for the governments retail banking. 

That said, and putting aside the heartache and misery bestowed upon you and your partner, there comes a time when you have to call it quits - if they cover legal fees, make a cash settlement and you and your partner walk away, jump at it (put your principles to one side and just take a long holiday and forget about these so called “bankers”.). If they hadn’t appointed a receiver and you still controlled the property and the rent, what would the loan balance be now?


----------



## The Partnership

We were awarded costs at our summary hearing so we have some costs but not a game changer.

We have been told by plenty of people to take what we can and get the hell out of this mess and move on.

We have lived with this for the last 4 and half years and we are not going out without getting a result .

We are very much aware when this goes to court we might lose but at this stage we want our day in court.


----------



## Duggie

I would hold out for more money and run. Think of your health - that’s your wealth! Court cases are horrific experiences as I’m sure you are aware. If you can out financially better off (which the offer as it stands would definitely make you) without having to go through the courts then grab it.


----------



## Seagull

If they're offering you compensation, it's probably because they think they will lose if this goes to court. Suggest they factor the court costs into their offer.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi we have moved on to the investigation process with FSPO regarding our claim.

Danske overcharged us €15,000 over 2 years between 2009 and 2011 and when they discovered their mistake they miscalculated the amount which was paid in advance of contract.This meant we were paid in advance by thousands up to 2014

Danske got the drawdown date wrong which meant we were put on interest and capital 3 months ahead of contract.

I would suggest anyone with a tracker mortgage which has 36 month interest only followed by 204 months interest and capital check their drawdown date as Danske got it wrong with us.In 2011 they were very keen to get their capital back.

We got a company called Bankcheck to go through our accounts and they found numerous mistakes by Danske .Bankcheck were excelent in our dealings with the FSPO .They put together reports and highlighted mistakes by Danske which we forwarded to FSPO .
Greg from Bankcheck done all the work ,he was very easy to talk to and explained everything.I strongly recomend anyone with doubts about any bank issues to contact Greg.

Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi has anyone with a Danske Bank tracker redress claim heard anything from the bank.

We have heard nothing and when I google Danske all I get is Moneylaundering .


----------



## The Partnership

Apologies for repeating myself but I am really annoyed about always  reading about what the CB intends to do about the main banks regarding the tracker fraud.

What about Danske and the other banks that have left the country after making a steaming mess.

We would like to be mentioned every now and then,If for nothing else but to give us some small glimmer of hope of justice.

Regards


----------



## Duggie

Fully agree. The fight continues.....I’m just hoping the CBI has the same level of conviction as some of us consumers they are supposed to protect


----------



## The Partnership

The Partnership said:


> Hi has anyone with a Danske Bank tracker redress claim heard anything from the bank.
> 
> We have heard nothing and when I google Danske all I get is Moneylaundering .



Hi sorry for banging the same old drum in 2019 but has anyone heard back from Danske or the other unmentionables about finishing the Tracker Redress Story

Regards


----------



## Duggie

I heard back from them before Christmas but mine is a different case - trying to get my tracker back. They said the CBI had completed its supervision of the Danske TM Examination so not getting tracker back. With FPSO now. Any progress with you?


----------



## The Partnership

Duggie said:


> I heard back from them before Christmas but mine is a different case - trying to get my tracker back. They said the CBI had completed its supervision of the Danske TM Examination so not getting tracker back. With FPSO now. Any progress with you?



Hi Duggie I havent heard a word directly from Danske
We are in an ongoing high court case as described in our posts.We are at the discovery stage of that and hope to have case heard before the end of 2019
 We have a seperate complaint in with the FSPO since april 2018 about an overchargeing and breach of contract but the FSPO have not agreed to adjudicate and investigate yet.
So we were hoping Danske would have been forced to acknowledge and deal with us because of the ongoing tracker inquiry by the CB.
Unfortunatly its not looking like that will happen . 

Regards


----------



## Seagull

Just wondering whether the article in this thread might be of interest in your case.


----------



## The Partnership

Hi Seagull
I read the article on the Ombudsmans decisions and all relevant cases.

Coincidentally I got a call from the Ombudsmans office yesterday and he informed me they would not start their investigation on the overcharging complaint until after  the high court case is heard and finished.
He explained that he had read our current file and a previous file which documented all our complaints and our dealings with Danske over the past 5 years.
He was positive about our case 
So we will go to the High Court and hopefully win and then we will go back to the Ombudsman and restart that investigation
Regards


----------



## Seagull

Surely someone in danske should be reading articles like that, and thinking it will cost them a lot less to make you an offer than to incur court costs and penalties.


----------



## The Partnership

We have just received a letter from FSPO to say they would not investigate our overchargeing claim,they say it is part of our high court case.We are very dissapointed.
We spent so much time money and energy trying to put forward our case and now because of a technical reason they wont even look at it.
Its hard to win a trick.
One thing this latest dissapointment has done it has made us more determined to see this high court case to the bitter end.
Regards


----------



## The Partnership

Hi can I highlight the Irish Times article on Saturday 25 April about "Bank of Ireland offers compensation after arrears error"
400 Mortgage borrowers impacted
error may cost BOI €10 million
70 borrowers had receivers appointed
50 property's sold by receivers
10 cases went to court
some sold the property to pay off bank
Bank will pay comp for costs and errors

400 cases with real people involved 

I have not seen any follow up on this article on any newspaper 
Brendan Burgess and Askaboutmoney are mentioned in this but i cant find it on this site
Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

This article is here









						Bank of Ireland offers compensation after arrears ‘technical error’
					

Bank started legal proceedings against 400 mortgage holders without first issuing letters




					www.irishtimes.com
				




It shows how farcical the Irish system is.  The Bank made a technical error. These borrowers were in deep arrears and they ended up being compensated because BoI  missed a step in not sending out a letter calling in the loan. 

As you are a Danske customer, I don't think it has any relevance to you. Except that it highlights how hard it is for lenders to pursue defaulters. 

It's why the 95% of compliant customers are paying the highest mortgage rates in the eurozone.

Brendan


----------



## The Partnership

Thanks Brendan

The reason I highlighted this article in relation to our case was to show how quickly banks pull the trigger on receivership's.

The Banks we deal with are in business for generations with huge resources and legal experience, they are the professionals.

Banks have plenty of practice with calling in loans so to say it was a "technical error" is rubbish, we don't believe them.

 How many bank officials and legals have to sign off on appointing a receiver or forced  property sale before it is completed.
 Yet this happened on 400 occasions in error and no one spotted it.

I believe it is pure greed by the banks.

 They just cant wait to get their hands on the cash and move on to  much easier victims.
I acknowledge some people play the system and mess the banks around but this does not give them the right to treat us all as shysters. 
If 5% of the 400 were redeemable they should have had the opportunity to due process. 
Regards


----------



## Brendan Burgess

You can be quite sure that this was a technical error and not a deliberate error.

Why on earth would they try to get away with something.

A borrower can get away without paying anything for years.

If a bank has not crossed every t and dotted every i, then they will not be able to proceed.

I am fully behind borrowers getting due process.  But I have seen far more chancers among the customers than among the banks.  That might not be a moral issue. The customers can get away with it. The banks can't.

Brendan


----------

