BOI Tracker Rate - Advise on appealing to High Court

Maybe I read it wrong but?

Was Ombudsmans case that BOI should not have cancelled Tracker on 1st loan. In that case consumer won and Ombudsman found for him..
Is the fact he did not get tracker on new loan not a separate issue , that can be pursued on the strength of Ombudsmans decision to find for customer on 1st case.
 
Hi Gerry

Let's say that Bank of Ireland offered nonie a tracker mortgage when they should have.

So he is sitting there happily with his cheap tracker.

Then he chooses to sell his house to buy a new house. He would have lost his tracker then anyway. This is not in dispute.

Nonie's only argument is "If Bank of Ireland had given me the tracker I would not have moved and so I would still be on the tracker".

That might well be the case, but it would be impossible to prove.

The Ombudsman ruled against him. Even if you disagree with the Ombudsman, you can only disagree with him, on balance. The High Court might form a different view to the Ombudsman, but that would not matter. A difference of opinion does not count as a "serious and significant error".
 
Thanks for all comments.
Ombudsman did rule in our favour that BOI should have given us back our tracker.
If the mortgage advisor was called to give testimony then they could confirm we were ranting(!) About how they were refusing to give us the tracker back.. We took their confirmation thst we were not entitled as the truth. The mortgage advisor is aware that this was the key determinant in our decision to move. It was only the following year that the Bank admitted their "error" and failure to tell us it was a tracker....
 
Last edited:
Hi nonie

Why did you move houses?

Was there something wrong with the first house? Was there something right or better about the second house?

Brendan
 
We had no tracker and like for like the new loan was no more expensive based on this lack of tracker. We used savings as well and used some of these to clear the negative equity on the existing house. We had no necessity to move. This seems to be a difficult concept for people?
 
Pps the whole mortgage process was initiated when a BOI relationship manager chap wrote and contact ed us cold calling. ...
 
nonie said:
We had no necessity to move. This seems to be a difficult concept for people?
Click to expand...

It's certainly very difficult for me to understand. I suspect that the Ombudsman didn't understand it either.

You had a SVR mortgage and you moved and took out another SVR mortgage.

Why did you move? For the moment, forget the fact that you would not have moved had you a tracker.

Brendan
 
A lot of people don't have a necessity to move but they still move - is that a difficult concept?

Are you saying you spent stamp duty, solicitors fees, movers etc etc because you lost a tracker?
All the loss of tracker did was make your decision easier and less complicated.

It's irrelevant you paid paid the negative equity - most people who move have to do that
 
This is actually really helpful. I am saying we had no necessity to move and I now realise that that appears to be a foreign concept to many... including the ombudsman.
Thanks.
 
nonie said:
I am saying we had no necessity to move and I now realise that that appears to be a foreign concept to many... including the ombudsman.
Click to expand...

Moving house is a very expensive and stressful process.

One does not need to have a "necessity" to move.

But that is different from having a reason to move. One needs a good reason to incur the expense and stress of moving.

What was your reason for moving?

Brendan
 
Nonie, I feel your anger over your mistreatment by the bank is completely clouding your judgement. Unfortunately angry people often pursue actions which are not in their best interest.

Ask yourself why not a single person here thinks it's a good idea that you take your case to the High Court?

Bottom line is that you want to be compensated for something hypothetical - for the situation that you would have kept the mortgage to term. And not only is the situation hypothetical, it's extremely unusual; I imagine only 20% or so of mortgages are held for the entire period. You have a miniscule chance of winning the compensation you feel you deserve but you are guaranteed to incur 10s or 100s of thousands of costs.

I cannot sue a mugger because I was on the way to the bookies to back a horse that subsequently win. I can get compensated for the money they took from me - but not for the potential winnings. Yes they were guilty and I was completely innocent but even if I show the judge the back page of the Herald with my biro mark around Lucky Jim in the 3:45 at Kempton - it's not going to help.
 
darag said:
I cannot sue a mugger because I was on the way to the bookies to back a horse that subsequently win. I can get compensated for the money they took from me - but not for the potential winnings. Yes they were guilty and I was completely innocent but even if I show the judge the back page of the Herald with my biro mark around Lucky Jim in the 3:45 at Kempton - it's not going to help.
Click to expand...

darag

That sums it up brilliantly. I will plagiarise that analogy in similar cases in the future.

Brendan
 
All very interesting. Thanks.

However I completely disagree about the 20pc of people holding their mortgages etc.
I would hazard only a tiny percent of tracker mortgage holders have moved and lost their rate over the last number of years. They were so valuable no one was willing to move and surrender them. This added to the stagnant market. It is for this very reason that banks have now launched tracker mover mortgages.

Banks have been caught red handed using unscrupulous tactics to get customers off trackers.

In summary we were had and they got away with it.
 
nonie said:
Sorry but no one would move home and risk losing their tracker surely?
Click to expand...


I''m sorry but this is complete nonsense. It's often stated on here and in the media that trackers are very valuable, and yes they are, but living in a house that is not suitable is not worth the cheap price of a tracker, living in a house in the wrong location because of a cheap tracker is not worth the cheap price of a tracker.

You have consistently failed to anwser one basic question.

Why did you move house, forget the bank, forget everything else, why did you move?

I also have a second question.

How much would you have saved if you had kept your tracker. You mentioned several hundred thousand in post 3?

When you come back with the proper answer to those two questions you may get different advice, but it would want to be some story !

I do however have sympathy for you, for a) dealing with another disgracful bank and b) going to the bureaucratic ombudsman. Statistically you did well to win with him.
 
I moved house and lost a tracker...we had to our old house was totally unsuitable for 2 small kids

I hated doing it but i did and a lot of people in our situation did the same. I feel for you Nonie but i'm just telling you people did move and choose to lose trackers
 
I think that this story shows how tough the Ombudsman's job is.

The clear majority of us think that he made the right decision in this case.

But nonie is totally unhappy, even though he won his case.

Bank of Ireland has a loss marked against them, although it's only a minor loss.

Brendan
 
Can I ask what the outcome of high court appeal was? Did you appeal? i am in a similar position but with Ulster Bank - mortgage was on a tracker, fixed, was promised it would return to tracker upon completion of the fixed. Documents were ambiguous. Needless to say, they didn't. I argued with them by phone for months, eventually moving the mortgage to AIB 10 months later as the property was heading to negative equity and their rate was better. Ulster Bank refused to engage at any stage in that 10 months. 2.5 years with the ombudsman then - the bank lied, pervaricated, obfuscated and tried every dirty trick possible. The ombudsman ruled that the bank had erred but said as the account was closed they could not reinstate the tracker nor did they see fit to pay the full amount of the compensation in the difference.
 
Hi all,
Didn't log on or post recently as really feeling quite mentally affected by the whole situation.
To clarify we moved from a 3 bed house to another 3 bed house around the corner. We bought our old home in 2006 and completely renovated it ourselves from own pocket. We were on Bank of Irelands "Premier Banking" corresponce list and were offered a new mortgage in 2012. We didn't realise we were in negative equity at first... but soon realised once we started looking that we were going to lose a lot of money - we lost 50% on the sale of our home in the end. We bought the new house as a "do-er upper" and we thought we might recoup some of the money we had lost.... We thought it might be the only way out for us in the long term after losing €450k on the value of the house. We were repeatedly told we had no tracker on the existing mortgage so we were not going to lose anything by taking out a new mortgage - Bank of Ireland lied. Yes there was a negative equity trade up mortgage available but they insisted we pay off the negative equity on our house instead as it was "cleaner" that way. For anyone who says Trackers are not valuable or it wouldn't be a reason not to move here are the sums; €480k on 4.69% over 26yrs = €352k cost of credit. €480k on 1.05% tracker over 26yrs = €69k cost of credit. That's a whooping €283k in the difference. So again we had no necessity to move from our 3 bed house to around the corner. Bank of Ireland swindled us big time by miss-selling us a new mortgage, removing our Tracker and signing us up to a new mortgage with new whooping rates. To reiterate Ombusbdans found in our favour but couldn't force BoI to reinstate our Tracker as we had signed new contract.... so very interesting what you say Fin Crusader... our problem is we now have zero funds left to bring this to the High Court (2 working parents & 2 small kids in a house that needs vast work... had new baby (with medical complications) year after moving in to a barely habitable house).... the Tracker would have made life bearable.
Thanks all.
 
Last edited:
nonie said:
We bought the new house as a "do-er upper" and we thought we might recoup some of the money we had lost.... We thought it might be the only way out for us in the long term after losing €450k on the value of the house.
Click to expand...

At last, you have explained why you moved. Although, I have to say it seems to me like a fairly strange reason for moving.

nonie said:
So again we had no necessity to move from our 3 bed house to around the corner. Bank of Ireland swindled us big time by miss-selling us a new mortgage,
Click to expand...

Bank of Ireland did not mis-sell you a new mortgage. You chose to move, for your own reasons. You were on an SVR and you stayed on an SVR.

Had you been on a tracker, you probably would not have moved. But your reasons for moving are very strange, so you might well have moved even if you had a tracker.


nonie said:
For anyone who says Trackers are not valuable
Click to expand...

No one has ever said that they are not valuable

nonie said:
or it wouldn't be a reason not to move
Click to expand...

No one has said that either. What they have said is that some people voluntarily give up their trackers to move to a more suitable home.

Your case is very odd in that you moved for no good reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top