# List of all Tracker decisions upheld by Ombudsman



## Brendan Burgess (27 Feb 2020)

The Ombudsman has just published 25 Tracker decisions today

[broken link removed]

I have extracted the three substantially upheld decisions and attached them to this post.


Here is my initial summary of them.

*The Ombudsman’s summary *


Upheld8Dismissed17Total25
* 


Only 3  substantially upheld*


Bank of Scotland  case tracker restored – customer not advised that fixing would lose trackerPtsb  - Additional compensation of   €52kPtsb  -  Additional compensation of €45k
* 

Bank of Scotland case *


Started on a tracker of ECB + 1%
Fixed for 3 years
When fixing the documentation said “at the end of the fixed rate you will go onto the Standard Variable Rate”
Ombudsman held that they should also have spelled out “You will lose your tracker”
Told BoSI to restored the tracker at ECB +1%
Paid the borrower €2,500 compensation on top of the refund of €6,000 overcharged interest
Ombudsman referred the matter to the Central Bank as other customers impacted by the same decision
BoSI will apply the decision to all those affected
In 2018, BoSI sold these mortgages to Pepper and BoSI has agreed with Pepper to put them all on trackers
This is not as huge as it seems.  The BoSI SVR was unusual in that it actually had a price cap of ECB + 1.5%.  So the overcharge was “only” 0.5%.  So the refund was only €6,000 in the actual case.

This is an example of a case, where the borrower would have been laughed out of the High Court if they had taken a case.  The Ombudsman legislation  gives him much wider discretion.

*Compensation case 1 - ptsb*


Two lads owned a house
Their girlfriends lived with them.
They tried to make the house more habitable but could not afford to do so because of the high mortgage rates
They wanted to get married and could not afford to
The automatic compensation was €9,500
The Appeals panel rejected their appeal for more compensation
Despite this, ptsb offered an extra €7,000 which the borrowers rejected
The Ombudsman awarded them an extra €43,000 to bring it to €52,500
*Compensation case 2 – ptsb *


Mother and daughter bought a house together
€6,000 in automatic compensation
They were in arrears which they would not have been if they had been charged correct rate
The credit rating was damaged
The daughter had to go to counselling for stress
Appeals Panel rejected their appeal
Ptsb offered to increase the compensation from €6,000 to €15,000
Ombudsman awarded an extra €30,000 to bring it to €45,000 in total
* 



5   Partially upheld  - the borrowers would conclude that these were losses *


€3,000 additional compensation – had claimed over €50k€3,000 for a delay in moving a mortgage to a new property€3,000  Not entitled to tracker , but typo  -€2,500  Not entitled to trackers, but poor informationNot entitled to a tracker, but bank not adhering to CPC -  Not sure of award or which case this is


It can be seen from the tracker related decisions published with this digest that 17 complaints were not upheld. I believe it is likely that it will continue to be the case that a large number of

complaints relating to tracker interest rates on mortgage loans will not be upheld. This is because some complainants have unrealistic expectations, believing that their desire to have a tracker interest rate provides a basis for requiring their bank to grant them one. There seems to be a lack of understanding, by some complainants, that for a person to have an entitlement to a particular tracker interest rate there must be some contractual or other obligation on their bank entitling them to such a rate.



1152 complaints on hand



*Two  issues which are often raised on Askaboutmoney *


I moved house and the bank did not let me take my tracker.  Ombudsman found in favour of the bank. No obligation to do so.
I was never offered a tracker although they were available. The Ombudsman believe that the the borrowers could have informed themselves.  But as the fixed rates were lower, he found it difficult to accept that they would have taken a tracker option if it had been offered.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (27 Feb 2020)

My commentary

Summaries of 16 decisions are included in the digest. 

4 were for additional compensation where they had had their tracker reinstated, 2 got substantial compensation, 1 got an extra €3,000 although she claimed over €50k, one got nothing.

12 relate to people claiming trackers , only one was awarded a tracker.  However, as this was a systemic issue, Bank of Scotland has agreed to apply it to all other affected customers. 

The report shows what a good job the Central Bank has done.  The banks went well beyond their legal obligations in settling tracker disputes. The result is that the banks' decisions not to give people trackers, were generally upheld by the Ombudsman. 

The one person who got their tracker back would have been very unlikely to succeed in the High Court.


----------



## Megafan (27 Feb 2020)

From the press conference, in the context of the not mentioned prevailing rate cohort the below wording by the Ombudsman is very telling, making specific reference to contractual obligations (which is what 3.2 is by extrapolation). I am not close enough to past updates from the Ombudsman to say if this is a recurring public statement.  It may very well be.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I hope that by publishing these decisions it will highlight that although many people would like to have a tracker mortgage, in order for a person to have an entitlement to a tracker interest rate, there must be an obligation on the bank, contractual or otherwise, that entitles the mortgage holder to a tracker interest rate," Mr Deering said
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I wonder for those who were in the trenches over time whether getting a large lump sum at the end of a process is better that getting smaller annual amounts over time, that is, if a tracker was effective from when it should have been? Some redress to a person is life changing now, rather than incrementally improving circumstances each year over time. 

I expect it is a different situation for people who's circumstances allowed to manage/muddle though/be comfortable over the 10 years or so, as opposed to those who truly struggled over that time. Anyone fortunate enough to be put back on a tracker probably only needs to look over their fence to see someone who isn't, the Ombudsman's point above is well made. 

Brendan makes a good point about how far the banks have come, whether kicking and screaming or not, they are getting there.


----------



## demoivre (28 Feb 2020)

Megafan said:


> From the press conference, in the context of the not mentioned prevailing rate cohort the below wording by the Ombudsman is very telling, making specific reference to contractual obligations


 
He said  " contractual or otherwise"  as your quote above shows

_I hope that by publishing these decisions it will highlight that although many people would like to have a tracker mortgage, in order for a person to have an entitlement to a tracker interest rate, there must be an obligation on the bank, contractual or otherwise, that entitles the mortgage holder to a tracker interest rate," Mr Deering said _

I think the word " otherwise " is important in this context.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Jul 2021)

Since this Digest was published the Ombudsman has published other tracker decisions.

Could we crowd source this.

I am going to do a list of the tracker decisions which were upheld or partially upheld. If volunteers could take one and then summarise it, so we can get a fuller appreciation of his thinking.

This thread is to summarise them and not discuss the merits of the decision.

Any off topic posts such as "any news on the KBC Flyer?" will be deleted.

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Jul 2021)

2020 Decisions Upheld or  Substantially Upheld

2020-0102 - upheld

Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress,

*2020-0319** - 
	
	




		Code:
	

upheld

*​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination

2020-0331 - upheld​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination

2020-0398 - substantially upheld​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination, Failure to apply a tracker rate at a point in time CBI Examination

2020-0464 - substantially upheld​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination

2020 Decisions Partially upheld
 2020-0003​Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

2020-0025

Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage,

2020-0095

Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress,



2020-0116

Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product, Refusal to grant mortgage

2020-0151

Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

2020-0178

Selling mortgage to t/p provider , Delayed or inadequate communication, Failure to process instructions in a timely manner

2020-0199
Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

2020-0247​Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

2020-0289​Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

2020-0332​Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

2020-0334​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination

2020-0366​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination

2020-0369​Failure to apply the correct tracker rate as part of the Examination

2020-0382​Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product, Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale

2020-0390​Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

2020-0416 -
Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

2020-0424​Failure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination

2020-0427​Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage, Application of interest rate

2020-0461​Failure to offer a tracker rate at point of sale, Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

​


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Jul 2021)

2021 Decisions

*Upheld or partially upheld *
Decision Reference 2021-0012 partially upheld ​*All Conducts Complained Of: Maladministration (mortgage), Arrears handling - Mortgage Arears Resolution Process , Complaint handling (Consumer Protection Code) , Dissatisfaction with customer service , Premature ceasing of arrears negotiations*

Brendan's summary: Although this is classified as a tracker mortgage, and maybe it was, that was not an issue in the complaint. 

The guy made no payment at all between 5/2015 and 9/2018 , but 

" having regard to the particular circumstances of
this complaint, in particular the failing on the part of the Provider to adequately record the
address of the Complainant, the failure of the Provider to send quarterly arrears letters for
a period of 18 months, the breaches of the Provider of the CPC, the delay from the Provider
in issuing the Complainant with a response in this matter, ....I intended to partially uphold the
complaint and direct the Provider to make a compensatory payment of €3,500 , plus the reasonable costs of swearing the aforementioned affidavit, to the Complainant. "


----------

