D
Dan Murray
Guest
A friend of mine has "tracker issues" - my understanding of his situation is, as follows:
- Loan on an investment property was taken out, on a tracker basis, in 2005
- Loan switched to a 5 year fixed rate in 2006
- In 2011, at the expiry of the 5 year term, the bank refused to return the mortgage to a tracker
- This refusal to provide a tracker in 2011 was a big shock as my pal had always assumed that he could revert to the tracker basis from 2011
- There were no warnings in 2006 to the effect that opting for the fixed rate would effectively remove his right to return to a tracker basis in 2011.
At a general level, I haven't been following this tracker debacle as closely as perhaps I should. I've done a quick search just now - and apologies if this is answered elsewhere - but I'd really appreciate answers to the following:
1. Is this the type of case where the tracker is restored, or not - and if not, why so?
2. Does it matter that the purpose of the loan was for an investment property?
3. Under consumer protection legislation, how would my pal be then classified (i.e. in 2005/6) in the context of terms like personal consumer, consumer, etc.?
4. What were the relevant disclosure requirements in 2006?
5. What are the consequences if a bank breached these disclosure requirements?
If I've left out something, I should be able to get whatever other info is required....
- Loan on an investment property was taken out, on a tracker basis, in 2005
- Loan switched to a 5 year fixed rate in 2006
- In 2011, at the expiry of the 5 year term, the bank refused to return the mortgage to a tracker
- This refusal to provide a tracker in 2011 was a big shock as my pal had always assumed that he could revert to the tracker basis from 2011
- There were no warnings in 2006 to the effect that opting for the fixed rate would effectively remove his right to return to a tracker basis in 2011.
At a general level, I haven't been following this tracker debacle as closely as perhaps I should. I've done a quick search just now - and apologies if this is answered elsewhere - but I'd really appreciate answers to the following:
1. Is this the type of case where the tracker is restored, or not - and if not, why so?
2. Does it matter that the purpose of the loan was for an investment property?
3. Under consumer protection legislation, how would my pal be then classified (i.e. in 2005/6) in the context of terms like personal consumer, consumer, etc.?
4. What were the relevant disclosure requirements in 2006?
5. What are the consequences if a bank breached these disclosure requirements?
If I've left out something, I should be able to get whatever other info is required....
Last edited by a moderator: