# Appeals on grounds of margin above 3%



## tom bonass (9 Dec 2015)

Hello , could anyone advise if they have lodged an appeal yet in relation to the margin issue . I mean someone who has gone on the ECB plus 3.25 for example ?


----------



## Gerry Canning (10 Dec 2015)

Surely @ ECB + 3.25% you are still within VRM Variable Rate Mortgage rates , so what would be the grounds for appeal?
Am I missing something or not understanding ?


----------



## Highchair (10 Dec 2015)

Yes, what you are missing is what basis the bank used in determining the rate people were placed on.


----------



## Gerry Canning (10 Dec 2015)

Highchair,

I still don,t get it ?

Mr Bank gives loan @ ECB + 3.25% . Customer agrees to that.
I cannot see why there should be an entitlement for any business to give a determination of why people are charged a mutually  agreed amount?

In Banking ,eg, you can have higher rates on LTV (loan to value) .

If what you are saying is that customer is being screwed @ ECB +3.25% , then I agree, but still can,t see how a case to query and hopefully reduce rate can be successfully pursued, unless Government apply pressure and they only want to protect Banks not Joe Soap.


----------



## rodger (10 Dec 2015)

I think the question is where did ptsb arrive at 3.25

We might look at it and say it's good compared to SVR

But prior to 2008 trackers were in the region of ecb +1%

What gives PTSB the right to suddenly hike this margin?


----------



## Highchair (10 Dec 2015)

The tracker rate of 3.25% must be contractual in some fashion and in many cases contracts have no specified rate. So the question of how the bank determined the rate is what is key and they dont seem to want to say how the came up with the figure


----------



## rodger (10 Dec 2015)

A good point was made in another thread recently

Aib and PTSB claimed these were the "prevailing" rates.

Now if trackers were discontinued at this time then I believe we need to go back to the previous offered tracker. In 2007.

A genuine tracker offer and acceptance thereof could make it "prevailing".

Personally I believe when banks used the expression "prevailing" they meant the ecb rate. And the margin would remain fixed.


----------



## ppcjbm (10 Dec 2015)

The notes in this previous post may be help full when making an appeal


Brendan Burgess said:


> Hi pp
> 
> There is no mention of trackers in the Consumer Credit Act.
> 
> ...


----------



## Gerry Canning (11 Dec 2015)

rodger said:


> A good point was made in another thread recently
> 
> Aib and PTSB claimed these were the "prevailing" rates.
> 
> ...


Rodger,
Was (prevailing) not the legal case a customer used on an old Danske case and customer lost?
I agree margin should remain fixed at % over ICB or ECB .
But still if customer signed for ECB + 3.25% on tracker or variable mortgage  and that is what he is being charged , he has I think a poor case in looking for any explanation or indeed reduction.. Sorry !


----------



## Wardy7 (11 Dec 2015)

Gerry I think you are missing the point here. 

I speak for myself only.  I am one of the people on the 3.3% rate.  I didn't sign any agreement for it.  Nor am I on a variable mortgage.  What I signed for, was that after my fixed rate period, I would automatically revert to a tracker rate but that rate was not specified on the contract.  So while majority of people on tracker mortgages pay a rate of 1+%, those of us who are part of the redress scheme who didn't have a rate specified on contract, are basically being shafted with this extortionate tracker rate.  That is the issue.


----------



## tom bonass (11 Dec 2015)

I am in the same boat as Wardy and hundreds of others.

The purpose of my question was to try to ascertain if anyone in our position participating on this forum has actually lodged an appeal so far on this issue regardless of the rights and wrongs and the varying opinions on the issue. What matters is what the appeals panels holds up or perhaps if it goes to the High court most likely. Unless Central Bank decides to intervene which seems unlikely but it is possible.


----------



## Wardy7 (11 Dec 2015)

Tom, I haven't appealed but I did lodge a formal complaint with PTSB regarding the rate.  After a couple of months of " we are still investigating", they finally decided that they were right with the 3.3%.

I'm with Padraic Kissane now!


----------



## tom bonass (11 Dec 2015)

ok thanks..I am thinking of going same route myself.

 I asked you a question on another thread just about the wording on your loan offer .Mine did not use the word 'prevailing' at all ( not saying this is important ) just interesting to see if yours/others use same wording as mine.


----------



## Wardy7 (11 Dec 2015)

No, mine says "the then current PTSB tracker mortgage rate".


----------



## Gerry Canning (11 Dec 2015)

Wardy7 said:


> Gerry I think you are missing the point here.
> 
> I speak for myself only.  I am one of the people on the 3.3% rate.  I didn't sign any agreement for it.  Nor am I on a variable mortgage.  What I signed for, was that after my fixed rate period, I would automatically revert to a tracker rate but that rate was not specified on the contract.  So while majority of people on tracker mortgages pay a rate of 1+%, those of us who are part of the redress scheme who didn't have a rate specified on contract, are basically being shafted with this extortionate tracker rate.  That is the issue.


You are right Wardy,I wasn,t clear on your point.
I see your issue is that once you finished on a Fixed rate you understood you would be on a Fair Tracker rate .
Therefore (as an opinion) you have a case that needs answering ,and you are being screwed !
So good luck.


----------



## Wardy7 (11 Dec 2015)

Thanks Gerry!  Hopefully we'll get there in the end!


----------

