EBS refuses switch claiming new Central Bank rules mean I must stay with BoI a year before switch

I wonder will the CCPC take an interest in this development?

I can't see how the length of time that a borrower/applicant has had a mortgage with another provider has anything to do with a lender's underwriting process - it looks like a blatant attempt to restrict competition to me.

I would also query whether EBS have breached the transparency requirements of Central Bank's CPC, as amended with effect from the start of this year to facilitate mortgage switching.

Sarenco said:

I can't see how the length of time that a borrower/applicant has had a mortgage with another provider has anything to do with a lender's underwriting process

Click to expand...

There is one aaspect that's an underwriting concern. Typically when someone switches, they end up missing a payment. This could be because the new mortgage is for a little more than needed to redeem the old one, or just due to timing the first payment due in the new one is a month later. For credit risk they like to see 12 consecutive months of repayments.

There's a poster who was refused a home improvement loan from KBC because they had switched mortgage less than 6 months previously: https://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/avantcard-personal-loan.212104/

Sarenco said:

I would also query whether EBS have breached the transparency requirements

Click to expand...

Looking at the wording changes, what part do you think they may have breached?
Granted, this might not be in the spirit of what CBI intended by the measures, but I can't see anything in the wording that they've gone against.
It would be very difficult for CBI to force any regulated entity to have more flexible underwriting criteria.

RedOnion said:

Typically when someone switches, they end up missing a payment. This could be because the new mortgage is for a little more than needed to redeem the old one, or just due to timing the first payment due in the new one is a month later.

Click to expand...

Maybe I have misunderstood the point but surely the new lender would simply adjust the payment date so that the first payment isn't missed, no? In any event, wouldn't this issue equally arise with a borrower with a 12-month payment history?

RedOnion said:

Looking at the wording changes, what part do you think they may have breached?

Click to expand...

Well, the CPC requires a lender to publish information on the switching process it has in place. It seems to me that EBS omitted to publish a key new condition to their switching process and the CBI might consider that a breach of the CPC. It certainly seems to offend against the general principle that a regulated entity should makes full disclosure of all relevant material information in a way that seeks to inform a customer.

Sarenco said:

surely the new lender would simply adjust the payment date so that the first payment isn't missed, no?

Click to expand...

I've explained it poorly. The customer doesn't go into arrears or anything, but the first payment due date gets set up in the following month, so there might be 2 months between last date with previous lender and first payment with new one. So there are only 11 payments in 12 months.

Sarenco said:

It seems to me that EBS omitted to publish a key new condition to their switching process

Click to expand...

It appears that all the banks have conditions that aren't published, so they're all falling foul by that measure. I haven't noticed any lender including minimum terms in their switching guides. But just a general 'lending criteria, terms and conditions apply' type statement...
It's an interesting point.

RedOnion said:

The customer doesn't go into arrears or anything, but the first payment due date gets set up in the following month, so there might be 2 months between last date with previous lender and first payment with new one.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm being dense but if the customer doesn't go into arrears and neither the old nor the new lender is out of pocket, how does this impact the underwriting process?

This obviously wasn't considered much of an issue until very recently, which is why I think this really has more to do with preventing switches/restricting competition.

Sarenco said:

I can't see how the length of time that a borrower/applicant has had a mortgage with another provider has anything to do with a lender's underwriting process - it looks like a blatant attempt to restrict competition to me.

Click to expand...

It's not an risk or underwriting issue.

If I were a lender giving cash back I would not take on a new customer who has shown a willingness to switch.



Brendan

Hello,

The Banks have elected to offer cashback deals, so need to accept the risk of doing this.

Why not offer a cheaper lending rate, where those loyal customers who keep their mortgages with the lender for longer periods, benefit more ? It's simple, but yet quite a few of the Banks rather try and entice customers in with short term cashback incentives (and higher lending rates), then we see EBS cry foul when someone appears to be availing of the opportunity presented to them in a semi-competitive marketplace.

Attempting to mislead a customer is very wrong, and needs to be punished. Regardless of the outcome of the complaint, I would take the final response letter and then submit a complaint to the Ombudsman, as a matter of principal.

Brendan Burgess said:

It's not an risk or underwriting issue.

If I were a lender giving cash back I would not take on a new customer who has shown a willingness to switch.



Brendan

Click to expand...

Consumer watchdog would have a field day if above statement was true. Fines galore.
Anyone know the deadlines for banks to deal with complaints? I got a written response stating they are looking into complaint but no correspodance in the last 2 weeks.