AIB Appeals Panel putting all cases on hold to see if they are prevailing rate cases?

[Megafan]

Thank you for your update. I also feel the -fixed rate ended between 10 Oct 08 to 12 january 2009 cohort might also help our cases. This was an arrangement between CBI and AIB, ombudsman wasn’t involved, had he known this and that a prevailing rate would be found he might have made a different decision. I wonder what the views of the legal people would be on a arrangement between CBI and AIB to restore 300 out of c6000 tracker all with the same 3.2 clause.. are the c5700 not disadvantaged now.. time will tell....

That is an interesting point you make above, in that the FSPO made their decision and post that the CBI stepped in to guarantee the rate to the 12th of Jan.

Anyway, it is just something interesting that needs to be resolved. Another interesting tangent is that our appeals had a compensation element which wasn't part of the FSPO appeal. As the FSPO has upheld the principal of being entitled to a tracker, then if the appeals panel similarly now has to uphold, if the process isn't just terminated, then they may have to look at the compensation element, since there is specific reference to it in the appeal.

If you were so inclined to make a subsequent appeal to the FSPO, a rejection or otherwise from the tracker panel could help frame that decision.

Best not to hope for too much but needs to be worked through.

 

[Megafan]

Not as interesting an update as the "300" but a BDO letter today notes the panel is waiting for some final information from AIB but hopes to be in a position to "re-consider" appeals shortly.

It was short and sweet, make of the above what you will.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We wrote to them some weeks back and made the following point amongst others..."AIB explicitly acknowledges that both the FSPO and Appeals Panel are separate processes. However to my mind, both processes are absolutely intertwined in that the fundamental principles at issue are the same. In my initial letters to you as part of my appeal, I outlined more comprehensively the issues as I saw them, and what would make right the situation. The FSPO decision certainly has re-assured me that I was on the right track in making my appeal".
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have faith in the process, it will be difficult for the Panel not to uphold remaining appeals post the FSPO judgement. I think the process is worthwhile anyway, though through the prism of having received the FSPO award takes the sting out it not going in our favour should that happen. I have always felt the Panel will have to work their way through this process and the most recent correspondences to my mind anyway, indicate they are on a journey.

 

[tnegun]

Got a letter today to say our appeal was being forwarded to the AIB Independant Appeals Panel IAPA by the Independant Redress Panel. I didn't even know it was with the IRP. I had claimed further loss arising from a BTL so I guess thats factored into it.

 

[Megafan]

This weeks update notes the Panel have re-started reviewing cases such as our own, thanks for patience, update us as soon as they can etc etc..

So hopefully in 2021 sometime we might be able to draw a line under this aspect.

 

[Nailligo]

This weeks update notes the Panel have re-started reviewing cases such as our own, thanks for patience, update us as soon as they can etc etc..

So hopefully in 2021 sometime we might be able to draw a line under this aspect.

Would this mean reviewing the appeals from before or based on complaints sent to AIB?
It would be great to get a proper chance this time.

 

[krockroc]

Hi,
FYI...
ours sent to IAPA too. Not sure I like being complex ;-)

 

[Brendan Burgess]

This is my understanding, but I stand to be corrected.

1) If the Panel was reviewing your case when the Ombudsman's decision became public, they put the case on hold. Now they have resumed their consideration of your case in the light of the Ombudsman's decision.

So it will be taken that AIB did breach the contract. It will be taken that the write down and refund are fair as far as the overcharging goes. If you have made an appeal for compensation, they will hear that.

If you don't like the decision from the Panel when you eventually get it, you can appeal to the Ombudsman.

2) If the Panel had issued a final decision before AIB agreed to implement the Ombudsman's decision, then your case is finished as far as the Panel is concerned.

You can appeal to AIB directly for compensation or further redress.

If they don't offer you anything or offer you enough, you can complain to the Ombudsman. Karen, who took the original Ombudsman case, did not seek compensation as she was not greatly inconvenienced. But if you really struggled with your mortgage or you were in arrears, then you should be looking for compensation.

Brendan

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Hi kroc

Thanks for posting the lettter.

Not sure I like being complex ;-)

I think that "serious" would be a better word. This suggests a much bigger mortgage than average or a loss of ownership or legal proceedings.

Do any or all of those apply to you?

Brendan

 

[tnegun]

We got the same letters. I suspect that ours is complex as I'm claiming that the loss of an unrelated BTL was due to the breech of contract with AIB and have requested that AIB put that right.

 

[krockroc]

Hi kroc

Thanks for posting the lettter.

I think that "serious" would be a better word. This suggests a much bigger mortgage than average or a loss of ownership or legal proceedings.

Do any or all of those apply to you?

Brendan

Hi Brendan,
sorry, very late reply....work....Christmas.

No, mine was not any of those. Average size, no loss of ownership and no legal. On advice of an AIB staff member, I did stop paying the mortgage, just to get them to engage with me. She said it was the only way they would talk to me. But never legal. It worked, in that they spoke to me, but they were horrific to deal with. Threatening and condescending. Up to that point, I used actually think AIB were okay. They had given good financial advice and rates were competitive. After that experience my wife and I laugh when we see their ads on TV now.

Way back in 2007, I was on a Tracker, moved to 1yr fixed rate (moving house, cheapest rate while moving with 2 mortgages). At the end of the term, they sent a letter with the rate options (including Tracker). I have no recollection of that letter but when I queried before, they sent a copy of the letter. We were going through a lot of stuff at the time so very possible that they sent it and we just missed it. As we did not reply, they reverted us to standard variable. My query was that we were never on a variable rate so why did we 'revert' to that? We should default back to the previous version of our mortgage i.e. a Tracker at whatever rate was being applied at the time.

Why default us to a version of a mortgage that we never had?

So, not complex really. I'd have thought it's a Yes/No.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Why default us to a version of a mortgage that we never had?

Eh, because that was the wording of the contract?

3.2 FURTHER FIXED INTEREST RATE OPTIONS/CHOICE



At the end of any fixed interest rate period, the Customer may choose between: (a) a further fixed interest rate period, or

(b) conversion to a variable interest rate Mortgage Loan, or

(c) conversion to a tracker interest rate Mortgage Loan,

at the Bank's then prevailing rates appropriate to the Mortgage Loan. If the Customer does not exercise this choice, then the Mortgage Loan will automatically convert to a variable interest rate Mortgage Loan.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Up to that point, I used actually think AIB were okay. They had given good financial advice and rates were competitive. After that experience my wife and I laugh when we see their ads on TV now.

That captures my experience exactly.

They don't exploit inertia by keeping variable rates high and reducing fixed rates. They have the lowest Standard Variable Rate. They generally treated customers in arrears better than the other lenders - they are the only one to have written down mortgages while leaving the borrower with ownership.

Brendan

 

[Megafan]

Final response from Panel today. Very short, probably no different to earlier responses saying no loss was suffered, but with additional paragraph noting the FSPO award in 2020 outside of TME.

I am a bit disappointed in that they had the opportunity to uphold post the FSPO award and even make FSPO award commensurate with any award they might have done but they didn't. They stuck to the earlier logic as they saw it. Not sure why it took them an additional year or whatever to send us the same response.

We will reject the findings as a matter of course. Probably will give some thought to go to FSPO as is the right by rejection of the Tracker findings but I don't know by doing this whether it is like a nuisance claim to the FSPO.

Its a shame AIB didn't pay interest as compound. It was just a sting in the tail for those who stayed close to the story in the end.

 

[Balfour]

Its a shame AIB didn't pay interest as compound. It was just a sting in the tail for those who stayed close to the story in the end.

Was there anything in your response regarding the above? or was their response on a different matter?

 

[tnegun]

no different to earlier responses saying no loss was suffered, but with additional paragraph noting the FSPO award in 2020 outside of TME.

That's very disappointing the panel has learned nothing

Its a shame AIB didn't pay interest as compound. It was just a sting in the tail for those who stayed close to the story in the end.

It is almost as if AIB wanted to goad us into pursuing this to its ultimate end.

 

[Megafan]

Was there anything in your response regarding the above? or was their response on a different matter?

No reference I'm afraid.

We had written to them separately on this matter post AIB calculating simple interest but they made no reference to same. That is probably fair enough as AIB would need right of reply post our letter and everything was in the public domain at this stage.

 

[Megafan]

That's very disappointing the panel has learned nothing

I dont know what they thought really. Maybe they never believed we had a case and the FSPO decision was an outlier. Or maybe they believed we had a case but didn't have the conviction to rule against the bank.

Either way a for us at least the avenue is now closed.

The contradiction on their letter is what annoyed me I suppose in effect them saying we suffered no loss while making reference on the same letter to the FSPO award which meant we did suffer a loss that was redressed and compensated.

Hopefully the panel might come good for yourselves..

 

[tnegun]

Received our response today too, it's very short and shows nothing to suggest that they considered or deliberated over it at all, we submitted a copy of our complaint to AIB post the FSPO award detailing our case at the BDOs request but theres no suggestion in this rejection that they considered it at all.