I am also one of the 1800 staff who lost their tracker by switching to the staff variable rate in 2006. I took my case to FSO and won it. BOI appealed the decision , but before the case was heard in the High Court, FSO contacted me to state that they were not proceeding with it. Instead, they were going to review my case again with a new team of investigators . 18 months later Bill Prafiska advised me that I had lost my case and ruled against me ! Needless to remark, I was devastated. I was awarded 1000 euro which would not cover the amount of extra money I pay every month on the variable rate. Why would FSO rule against their own Head of Legal Services who found in my favour? It is impossible to get any information from BOI regarding the review , I have heard of only one case where a customer has got their tracker returned. I suggest you write to Deloitte who are signing off on the review, also to Central Bank expressing your disquiet at lack of information given to customers. At this stage of review, the bank must have a pretty good idea as to the number of customers they have to return to trackers.
I am also one of the 1800 staff who lost their tracker by switching to the staff variable rate in 2006. I took my case to FSO and won it. BOI appealed the decision , but before the case was heard in the High Court, FSO contacted me to state that they were not proceeding with it. Instead, they were going to review my case again with a new team of investigators . 18 months later Bill Prafiska advised me that I had lost my case and ruled against me ! Needless to remark, I was devastated. I was awarded 1000 euro which would not cover the amount of extra money I pay every month on the variable rate. Why would FSO rule against their own Head of Legal Services who found in my favour? It is impossible to get any information from BOI regarding the review , I have heard of only one case where a customer has got their tracker returned. I suggest you write to Deloitte who are signing off on the review, also to Central Bank expressing your disquiet at lack of information given to customers. At this stage of review, the bank must have a pretty good idea as to the number of customers they have to return to trackers.
I am also one of the 1800 staff who lost their tracker by switching to the staff variable rate in 2006. I took my case to FSO and won it. BOI appealed the decision , but before the case was heard in the High Court, FSO contacted me to state that they were not proceeding with it. Instead, they were going to review my case again with a new team of investigators . 18 months later Bill Prafiska advised me that I had lost my case and ruled against me ! Needless to remark, I was devastated. I was awarded 1000 euro which would not cover the amount of extra money I pay every month on the variable rate. Why would FSO rule against their own Head of Legal Services who found in my favour? It is impossible to get any information from BOI regarding the review , I have heard of only one case where a customer has got their tracker returned. I suggest you write to Deloitte who are signing off on the review, also to Central Bank expressing your disquiet at lack of information given to customers. At this stage of review, the bank must have a pretty good idea as to the number of customers they have to return to trackers.
This is rally bizarre. At this stage BOI are obviously not meeting the obligations as outlined by CB. I thought U B were poorI am also one of the 1800 staff who lost their tracker by switching to the staff variable rate in 2006. I took my case to FSO and won it. BOI appealed the decision , but before the case was heard in the High Court, FSO contacted me to state that they were not proceeding with it. Instead, they were going to review my case again with a new team of investigators . 18 months later Bill Prafiska advised me that I had lost my case and ruled against me ! Needless to remark, I was devastated. I was awarded 1000 euro which would not cover the amount of extra money I pay every month on the variable rate. Why would FSO rule against their own Head of Legal Services who found in my favour? It is impossible to get any information from BOI regarding the review , I have heard of only one case where a customer has got their tracker returned. I suggest you write to Deloitte who are signing off on the review, also to Central Bank expressing your disquiet at lack of information given to customers. At this stage of review, the bank must have a pretty good idea as to the number of customers they have to return to trackers.
Don't know where Charlie Weston got his information on that. May just be guessing as it was thought that it was staff that made up the bulk of new cases to be reviewed.Is there anymore information as to the 602 are. Some papers saying they are staff. Other's saying BOI wont confirm?
Don't know where Charlie Weston got his information on that. May just be guessing as it was thought that it was staff that made up the bulk of new cases to be reviewed.
.
Just because it was on the radio or Charlie Weston says it, doesn't mean it is the case. No staff member on this thread got their tracker restored or they would have posted.I absolutely heard on the radio that it was staff mortgages. I sincerely doubt a good journalist like Charlie Weston just plucks thinks out of the air. He even got an award this year for his journalism.
Would be pretty certain that all letters have issued...they were going out immediately after the press release on 16th Dec. You could call the mortgage centre and ask them what rate you are on, as tracker rate will now have been restored to all those who have received letters. Alternatively, January mortgage repayment will also reflect the new lower rate.Does anyone know or can anyone confirm if BOI have now issued all 602 letters to people who are deemed to have lost trackers?
Do this regularly, doesnt seem to make a difference, however if everyone on here pulls together and writes in, maybe they will listen. The press release given prior to the central bank update was very vague,the lady on the help line is so heavily scripted, you would be quicker getting blood out of a stone. This plus the update from the central bank has been so poorly communicated,they should have given an update on each individual bank, leading to further frustration.Hopefully we are all put out of our misery in early 2017.I have not heard of any of the 1800 affected staff getting their trackers returned, however the review is ongoing so there is still hope. At this stage though, it is worrying that none of the staff have been successful in getting their trackers restored. I would urge all staff to write to Central Bank expressing their concerns at the lack of transparency and total lack of communication by BOI, also to contact Deloitte who are overseeing the review.
I have not heard of any of the 1800 affected staff getting their trackers returned, however the review is ongoing so there is still hope. At this stage though, it is worrying that none of the staff have been successful in getting their trackers restored. I would urge all staff to write to Central Bank expressing their concerns at the lack of transparency and total lack of communication by BOI, also to contact Deloitte who are overseeing the review.
I am one of the 1800 staff affected and as already outlined on AAM I did take my case to the Ombudsman and he found in my favour, however FSO then rejected their own findings and reviewed my case again. I waited another 18 months and surprise surprise Bill Prasifka found in favour of BOI.
He concluded his findings by stating the following-
"I am cognisant of the fact that the wording in the documentation, in particular the MFA's signed by the Complainants, are not very clear. It would have been most prudent of the Bank to have specifically defined a tracker rate in the original loan agreement, which could have specifically prevented the confusion which led to this dispute. It is also a failure of the Bank in neglecting to clarify exactly the rate that would apply on expiry of the Complaints fixed rate, which they took out in December 2006.. I also must bear in mind the fact that the Bank communicated with the Complainants on two occasions in 2008, that they would be availing of the tracker rates on expiry, albeit the Bank clarified this not to be the case shortly afterwards.
I direct the Bank to pay 1,000 in compensation to the Complainants."
He has acknowledged the failures of the Bank in their dealings with me but yet he finds in their favour!
How can anyone have confidence in FSO when they overturn their own findings?
We had a date set for the High Court hearing, I had spoken to the person who had found in my favour and he was very confident we would win our case and then , out of the blue, I receive a call to say they were not proceeding to the High Court, had cancelled their findings and would review my case again with a different team.
I wonder was it because by winning my case, BOI would be forced to return trackers to 1800 staff and no way would the bank allow that to happen.
Despite their ongoing tracker investigation I doubt very much that the bank will return the trackers to the 1800 staff as they have Bill Prasifka s finding in their favour. They will conveniently forget the original finding in my favour.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?