Hi all,
I got my response and it was unsuccessful but one thing has stood out and I was wondering would anyone think it was worth following up on?
There's a line in the letter that says if they had offered the tracker rate in 2012, it would have been the same or more than the variable rate at the time.
Surely if it was the same that would mean that down the line, the tracker would have been beneficial so it could be argued that giving me the tracker rate at the time could have been the better option?
Does anyone think that's a valid line of argument or is it done and dusted when they send that final decision? I will probably write to the ombudsman just to see what they say.
I got my response and it was unsuccessful but one thing has stood out and I was wondering would anyone think it was worth following up on?
There's a line in the letter that says if they had offered the tracker rate in 2012, it would have been the same or more than the variable rate at the time.
Surely if it was the same that would mean that down the line, the tracker would have been beneficial so it could be argued that giving me the tracker rate at the time could have been the better option?
Does anyone think that's a valid line of argument or is it done and dusted when they send that final decision? I will probably write to the ombudsman just to see what they say.