AIB AIB has accepted the Ombudsman's decision and will be rolling it out to 5,900 impacted customers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Brendan, was Karen happy with the way the FSPO dealt with her case. Did she(you) get to meet him face to face / did he look for further mediation to come to this decision. As you posted to balance fairness- Was Karen given the option of taking cash instead of the write down?
 
Tdress2020 said:
Hi Brendan, was Karen happy with the way the FSPO dealt with her case. Did she(you) get to meet him face to face / did he look for further mediation to come to this decision. As you posted to balance fairness- Was Karen given the option of taking cash instead of the write down?
Click to expand...

Yes, the Ombudsman's office dealt with it very well. No complaints.

No, there is no option to take cash instead of the write down.

Brendan
 
Brendan, why did the FSPO decide that AIB had to pay Karen compensation for not offering her a tracker and then not say that Karen should be put on a tracker, it's a baffling decision to be honest.
 
kopkidda said:
Brendan, why did the FSPO decide that AIB had to pay Karen compensation for not offering her a tracker and then not say that Karen should be put on a tracker, it's a baffling decision to be honest.
Click to expand...
Have to agree. The more I think about it the more of a fudge it seems. Variable rates are pretty low and near to tracker rates now but there is still a difference. And over the lifetime of a mortgage that difference turns into a lot of money. Surely that was the whole point. I think the principal of reinstating the tracker is very important even if there was a compromise on what the rate should be. I would hope this will be resolved.
 
It was a very long written decision which I hope he will publish soon and then you can see his rationale.

By the way, no one is obliged to accept this.

They can make their own case to the Ombudsman and argue why they should get a tracker.

And they can go to the High Court. In fact, I do hope that someone takes a case to the High Court. I suspect that AIB would settle it with a non-disclosure agreement.

Brendan
 
It's bitter sweet news for us. It's very welcome don't get me wrong and I am so so grateful to Karen and Brendan and all those who persevered on our behalf. The € 1615 came at a time when I was being treated for Cancer and to be honest we were grateful for a bit of a cash injection. We kept our full mortgage payments up throughout my treatment despite reduction in income and additional medical costs. We went through the banks appeal process explaining everything about my situation but they had us convinced we didn't have a leg to stand on. I had a wig to buy and hospital admission bills so I used the money to pay off some of that instead of pursuing a case. Now this redress is due to come at a time when my employer has announced they are cutting my salary by 10% for a 6 month period between June 1st and Nov 30th. And my husbands has already been cut by 30% indefinitely and we have not applied for a mortgage break. So you see this redress will fill the gap created by covid 19 somewhat. However I'm determined to look on the bright side. We did not lose our home , I am still here. We still have jobs, and I know this is not the case for everyone. But all of this is in no way thanks to AIB and I feel they got off light.
 
misstealeaf said:
Very interested to know how the 12% and 4% were arrived at if you’ve any insight on that?
Click to expand...
I had previously calculated the amount I was overcharged and it works out as approximately 16% of the capital when I came off the fixed rate in 2011. I think the ombudsman has calculated the overcharge and broken it down into these two payments rather than the 12% and 4% being plucked out of the air. That's just what the overcharge works out as in Karen's case?
I would take the difference in how the redress is being applied for the prevailing rate customers as an implicit suggestion by the ombudsman that our case was not as black and white as previous tracker redress cases (in his opinion).
 
Last edited:
misstealeaf said:
Very interested to know how the 12% and 4% were arrived at if you’ve any insight on that?
Click to expand...

You will have to wait until the Ombudsman publishes his decision for the 12%

There is no 4% as such. The direction was to refund the interest charged on the 12%.

I have worked it out, very roughly, as about 4% of the capital balance.

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
It was a very long written decision which I hope he will publish soon and then you can see his rationale.

By the way, no one is obliged to accept this.

They can make their own case to the Ombudsman and argue why they should get a tracker.

And they can go to the High Court. In fact, I do hope that someone takes a case to the High Court. I suspect that AIB would settle it with a non-disclosure agreement.

Brendan
Click to expand...
Thanks very much Brendan and Karen and everyone else who played a part in getting this result. It is amazing to see AIB concede so much ground.

It is understandable for some to be disappointed, we all had the money spent in our heads but to get this far from nowhere is monumental and a credit to all involved.

Brendan, once AIB action all the Ombudsman recommendations per mortgage, does that mean the mortgage holder loses the option of raising further issues with Ombudsman re an individual case? It just seems that there are points some people might want to pursue.

I note Charlie has changed his online article to reflect the details disclosed in the thread.

I wonder will there be any further amendments based on any discussions between the CBI and AIB on final awards to cut off any chance of death by a thousand cuts.

Were we to raise a query with the Ombudsman, it would relate to the future value of not having a tracker. There is 20 years left on our mortgage(!), we could go through a few crashes yet so there is definitely a question there.

Either way, great news for today.
 
Last edited:
While the news is most welcome AIB should do the right thing and restore all to a tracker rate as we are being compensated from time fixed rates expired. If I have 15 more years on a variable rate I will pay way more interest than a .75% + ecb rate tracker
 
Megafan said:
It is amazing to see AIB concede so much ground.
Click to expand...

Hi Megafan

Is that a bad choice of words on your part?

They conceded nothing.

They have been dragged kicking and screaming on this issue for 5 years now. They conceded nothing.

They refused point blank that these customers were even impacted.
They refused to write to them telling them that they were not impacted.
They spoke down to me and Alan when we raised the issue over the last three AGMs.
They made a laughing stock of themselves in front of the Oireachtas Finance Committee defending the indefensible.
The Central Bank forced them to admit them to the Ombudsman and legal process.
The Appeals Panel cut and paste the AIB press release into their rejection of every appeal on the issue.
During the Ombudsman process they refused to mediate for settlement, but would only mediate "for clarification"
They robustly attacked every point made during the exchanges with the Ombudsman.
After the preliminary decision was issued and after they had announced that they were making a provision of €300m, they lodged a 10 page series of legal challenges to that preliminary decision.
They waited 35 days after the final decision was issued before they decided not to appeal to the High Court and concede defeat.

So that is all they conceded - defeat after years of conceding nothing else.

While at the same time claiming "We put the customer at the centre of everything".

Brendan
 
Last edited:
Megafan said:
Brendan, once AIB action all the Ombudsman recommendations per mortgage, does that mean the mortgage holder loses the option of raising further issues with Ombudsman re an individual case? It just seems that there are points some people might want to pursue.
Click to expand...



No one will have to accept the redress offered by AIB. They can complain to the Ombudsman or go to the High Court.

The Ombudsman decides every decision on its merits. However, by making a decision on this case, he has, in effect, given a guide to how he sees it. But you can certainly make further arguments.

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Hi Megafan

Is that a bad choice of words on your part?

They conceded nothing.

They have been dragged kicking and screaming on this issue for 5 years now. They conceded nothing.

They refused point blank that these customers were even impacted.
They refused to write to them telling them that they were not impacted.
They spoke down to me and Alan when we raised the issue over the last three AGMs.
They made a show of themselves in front of the Oireachtas Finance Committee defending the indefensible.
The Central Bank forced them to admit them to the Ombudsman and legal process.
The Appeals Panel cut and paste the AIB press release into their rejection of every appeal on the issue.
During the Ombudsman process they refused to mediate for settlement, but would only mediate "for clarification"
They robustly attacked every point made during the exchanges with the Ombudsman.
After the preliminary decision was issued and after they had announced that they were making a provision of €300m, they lodged a 10 page series of legal challenges to that preliminary decision.
They waited 35 days after the final decision was issued before they decided not to appeal to the High Court and concede defeat.

So that is all they conceded - defeat after years of conceding nothing else.

While at the same time claiming "We put the customer at the centre of everything".

Brendan
Click to expand...
Perhaps it was the wrong word!! Maybe lose would be a better word but it was good if nothing else that we got an insight into what you and others went through.

I have no love for AIB for lots of reasons over the years..
 
Daithib said:
How will we know what we are exactly entitled to in regards redress and compensation
Click to expand...

When AIB sends you a letter in July or August with a copy of their calculations.

In the meantime, you can work out the write-down. It will be 12% of the capital balance when you rolled off the fixed rate.

You could work out what interest you were charged on that since then, or else use my 4% of the capital balance figure as a very rough guide.

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
When AIB sends you a letter in July or August with a copy of their calculations.

In the meantime, you can work out the write-down. It will be 12% of the capital balance when you rolled off the fixed rate.

You could work out what interest you were charged on that since then, or else use my 4% of the capital balance figure as a very rough guide.

Brendan
Click to expand...
Thanks Brendan
So that 4% could be higher and if so how is it calculated?
Will your current repayments reduce?
Is paying the overcharged interest and paying compensation different sums?
Charlie Weston reckons customers will get at least €10k so can you explain the refund and compensation sums.
Is that Central bank now finished with this cohort or do they ha e a final say on the FSPO conclusion
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Hi Megafan

Is that a bad choice of words on your part?

They conceded nothing.

They have been dragged kicking and screaming on this issue for 5 years now. They conceded nothing.

They refused point blank that these customers were even impacted.
They refused to write to them telling them that they were not impacted.
They spoke down to me and Alan when we raised the issue over the last three AGMs.
They made a laughing stock of themselves in front of the Oireachtas Finance Committee defending the indefensible.
The Central Bank forced them to admit them to the Ombudsman and legal process.
The Appeals Panel cut and paste the AIB press release into their rejection of every appeal on the issue.
During the Ombudsman process they refused to mediate for settlement, but would only mediate "for clarification"
They robustly attacked every point made during the exchanges with the Ombudsman.
After the preliminary decision was issued and after they had announced that they were making a provision of €300m, they lodged a 10 page series of legal challenges to that preliminary decision.
They waited 35 days after the final decision was issued before they decided not to appeal to the High Court and concede defeat.

So that is all they conceded - defeat after years of conceding nothing else.

While at the same time claiming "We put the customer at the centre of everything".

Brendan
Click to expand...
Brilliant
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top