KBC KBC basing cohorts on Application date rather than Draw-down dates

I met my Broker in early Feb, I send in all my payslips and salary cert in a few days later and kbc signed it on the 14 02 08 by their under writer on my info I'd send in. I didn't sign my application till 17 02 08.
 
My application form shows that my loan was approved before I filled out the application form. kbc signed it off in my brokers office on 14 02 08. So either I follow the Broker or kbc. My broker was not looking out for me and kbc wanted my money.
 
Last edited:
Whats the point in going after the broker? what will that do?
Will he be not liable for selling me wrong information and not having my best interest at hand. Brokers have themselves insured or if he wants to challenge kbc to say he didn't receive any info on stopping the info on the flyer.why should I be the one to lose out because of their greed.
 
I dont know, you will have a huge task getting anything out of the broker, in my case the broker is gone out of business
 
So either I follow the Broker or kbc. My broker was not looking out for me and kbc wanted my money.

Not to be pedantic about it again, but you wanted the KBC money to buy the house. KBC wanted the future interest and the broker wanted the commission. There was something for everyone in the whole mix

Will he be not liable for selling me wrong information and not having my best interest at hand.

My broker was not looking out for me

I am not sure what the commerical relationship between you and your broker is? Do you have the terms and conditions of the engagement to show what they were to do or not do as the case may be. I am not sure "looking out for you" is one of their roles - although you might find some wording in there that supports your position


I remember my wife asking him what the rate would we be on after our fixed ratr was up and he said you will revert to a tracker.

The bigger question is can you prove this sufficiently to be able to take a legal challenge against your broker? If not, then its just your word against their's a decade after the event happened !


The other big issue is your responsibility to ensure that the mortgage agreement said tracker when you assumed you were going onto a tracker - how much weight would a court put on this?
Simple answer here is it is one thing being annoyed and frustrated; its a very different thing to being able to prove you were misled in court !
 
in my case the broker is gone out of business
And this would be a real issue in a lot of cases

The other big question is it was unlikely there was collusion between independent brokers on this, so if they all done the same thing - maybe the problem was further back in the chain.

The interesting thing would be if a case was brought against a broker, would they swallow the hit on their insurance or try to counter-sue KBC ? This would be a real test for whether the broker things they were misled by KBC or the ones doing the misleading in the interests of commission.
 
And this would be a real issue in a lot of cases

The other big question is it was unlikely there was collusion between independent brokers on this, so if they all done the same thing - maybe the problem was further back in the chain.

The interesting thing would be if a case was brought against a broker, would they swallow the hit on their insurance or try to counter-sue KBC ? This would be a real test for whether the broker things they were misled by KBC or the ones doing the misleading in the interests of commission.

Any case against any Broker, would be based on negligence. Negligence would have a statute of limitations period of six years so any claim against a broker would be pointless at this stage.
 
Not to be pedantic about it again, but you wanted the KBC money to buy the house
Yes that's true, but I also thought when I was signing my contract that I was rolling on to a tracker. If kbc pulled the flyer in Feb 11 and kbc signed off my loan on the 14th but never told me my application was invalid then their wrong and yes I am annoyed and frustrated due to the fact I know what I was told 10 years ago. At this moment kbc still haven't formally told me my account is not impacted, which i have requested twice. I am confident that if it goes to the Ombudsman they will find the dates of sign off and application need answering.
 
Any case against any Broker, would be based on negligence. Negligence would have a statute of limitations period of six years so any claim against a broker would be pointless at this stage.
Thought this might be the case, but wonder is there anything else you could explore here in terms of commercial relationships. Probably a long shot to be honest
 
Yes that's true, but I also thought when I was signing my contract that I was rolling on to a tracker.
Absolutely no disagreement in the fact you thought you were signing a contract to roll onto a tracker. However, the contract does not state this and this is where the issue is. You were misled/misunderstood somewhere along the way but the mortgage contact does not state tracker anywhere - or ECB + offset anywhere.

If kbc pulled the flyer in Feb 11 and kbc signed off my loan on the 14th but never told me my application was invalid then their wrong
Who was present when KBC signed the loan agreement? I assume it was the broker and the KBC person? Who discussed with the KBC representative that you understood you were rolling onto a tracker? I am assuming no one. Your application was not invalid from a KBC point of view. They had no way to know that you expressly stated you wanted a tracker - you had applied for a fixed term at this stage.
When the loan agreement came out, the word tracker was no where on it. You could have rejected this as something that you were no longer interested in as you were not rolling onto a tracker like you understood.
So just to be 100% clear - your application was not invalid. Your application was successful - just not what you understood it to be, but no queries were raised on the details of the mortgage contract and the lack of tracker here.

yes I am annoyed and frustrated due to the fact I know what I was told 10 years ago
By the broker only. My understanding is no one from KBC ever said you would go onto a tracker, and the broker has no correspondence from KBC that you would be going onto a tracker. They told you something which has turned out to be untrue and to be fair to KBC I cannot see how this is their fault. Have you any evidence/proof or even confirmation from the broker that he even mentioned rolling onto a tracker with KBC at the time?

At this moment kbc still haven't formally told me my account is not impacted, which i have requested twice.
I think it is likely that KBC are still reviewing the cases around the fringes of the flyer dates.

I am confident that if it goes to the Ombudsman they will find the dates of sign off and application need answering.
I was not exposed to mortgage application process for brokers towards the end of the Celtic Tiger and whether it was common place to approve a mortgage before the application was made. I am sure that given it is around the fringes of the dates in question, there is a chance there is something to be discussed. It all depends on how strict a line KBC hold on the dates in question.

I think the challenge you have in any complaint to the Ombudsman is separating what KBC done to what the broker done and who misled you and when. I think you will struggle to convince the Ombudsman that the infamous flyer influenced your decision and it was not the actions of a broker intent on commission instead. Whether the infamous flyer influenced your brokers advice is difficult to answer, but there is still no explanation as to why the broker did not advise you that the game had changed between your chat and the formal application and let you decide from there

In simple terms, your challenge is convincing the Ombudsman this is KBC's fault and not the broker's fault !

I suspect that it wasn't a "withdrawal" of the flyer but a new communication regarding mortgages and rates that supercedes all prevous communications.
And I think this is where @peemac is correct and the broker misread the latest communication or did not understand it. I struggle to see how any broker would not be clear to a client when they explicitly discussed rolling onto a tracker if they understood what the communication said - UNLESS they felt they had already earned the commission and did not want to risk it.
 
However, the contract does not state this and this is where the issue is. You were misled/misunderstood somewhere along the way but the mortgage contact does not state tracker anywhere - or ECB + offset anywhere.
On My loan offer letter its says when my fixed term expires I would roll on to iibs Home loans renewal rate/ prevailing variable rate which I understood was a tracker, so to say "tracker" was not stated on my contract isn't entirely accurate.
 
On My loan offer letter its says when my fixed term expires I would roll on to iibs Home loans renewal rate/ prevailing variable rate
Not to be pedantic here again (I really sound like I am working for the bank at this stage), but while you UNDERSTOOD this to be a tracker, the word tracker is not mentioned in this line whatsoever. There is also no mention of ECB and no offset against it.
I would read that line to say that when your fixed term expires you will be put onto the default variable rate the bank have on the expiry date. I know others will disagree with me on this and how I read prevailing - but this is how I read it. The "doctors differ and patients die" saying comes to mind.

I am at pains to differentiate between what you understood to be a tracker versus what is on paper that says its a tracker. A tracker must track something and have an offset to it. Without this it is hard to call it a tracker. What you understood is not in question here - its what you sought clarifications on and what the wording of the mortgage contract states.
 
would read that line to say that when your fixed term expires you will be put onto the default variable rate the bank have on the expiry date. I know others will disagree with me on this and how I read prevailing - but this is how I read it. The "doctors differ and patients die" saying comes to mind.
Gnf , I had a look over my application again this morning and on the section of " your mortgage type,rate and term details"
Amount of loan - €280,000
Tick repayment method annuity- Endowment
Mortgage Term- 30 years
Tick interest rate choice- no box was ticked,the options we're-
Variable
Tracker
Fixed
Underneath the Broker has wrote "4.85% 2 years" is it not strange no box was ticked.
Also the small print says our applicable discounted variable rate for fixed periods or our "tracker" rate available subject to criteria. The latter I was sold.What would you read into this?.
 
@Jazzer1
I would read you signed up to a 2 year fixed mortgage @ 4.85% with no detail on the application form about what you were to roll onto. This meant the default rollover applied, and this was included on the mortgage homeloan agreement - which I understand to be "variable base rate (Currently 05.25%)
What I would definitely read into this is tracker was not ticked by anyone - rightly or wrongly, so KBC has no means of knowing you expected a tracker on maturity of the fixed period. There is no handwritten note to mention rolling onto a tracker or the tracker box not ticked. I cannot see how KBC was to know you expected a tracker rate once the fixed period expired. All they can see is you applied for a fixed rate for 2 years.

Small print says nothing really in your personal case other than it is subject to lending criteria. You have not applied for either so the small print does not apply.

The latter I was sold.
No sorry. You may have discussions with the broker about a tracker, but you were not sold a tracker by KBC. You were sold a fixed rate mortgage rolling onto default rates.


Take a step back and tell me where KBC was told (in writing) you were expecting a tracker on maturity of the fixed rate? And note the broker is not employed by KBC and they are not an agent of KBC - they are independent!
 
You may have discussions with the broker about a tracker, but you were not sold a tracker by KBC. You were sold a fixed rate mortgage rolling onto default rates.
Anyone who started on a fixed in the period of time was meant to roll over to a "tracker", like the 650 cohort of people who went before me. Alot of the 650 private dwelling cohort wouldn't had "tracker" stated on their contract either.
 
cannot see how KBC was to know you expected a tracker rate once the fixed period expired. All they can see is you applied for a fixed rate for 2 years.
Because I was fixed for 2 years and to rollover to a "tracker" like the flyer stated.
 
Anyone who started on a fixed in the period of time was meant to roll over to a "tracker", like the 650 cohort of people who went before me. Alot of the 650 private dwelling cohort wouldn't had "tracker" stated on their contract either.
Absolutely - but KBC have conceded that those between certain dates who did not have a tracker listed on the mortgage documentation were to be given a tracker because of this infamous flyer. KBC deem roughly 650 people to be impacted by this. KBC state that they withdrew the statements on the flyer via an update to brokers on 11th February 2008. I have no idea what this update was, but it appears to be sufficient to convince the central bank it is reasonable. It has said at the Oireachtas committee it will look at individual cases on the fringes.

I have no doubt there were people outside of those dates influenced by what brokers said. The problem is who was at fault - the broker or KBC? I have no doubts there are people within those dates who are now on a tracker that never asked about one. However that is the rule KBC have come up with

I am struggling to understand your current argument - is it
(a) you are on the fringes of the dates of the flyer and were influenced by it because your broker did not tell you that you would no longer roll onto a tracker OR
(b) KBC was supposed to give you a tracker mortgage but did not, even though the application form does not mention it? OR
(c) something completely different

Those in group (a) are simply relying on this flyer - nothing more and nothing less
If you want to be something else - group (b) or (c), you have to prove your case

I still don't see how a conversation with your broker around rolling onto a tracker rate that is not listed in any written form, including the application form, makes KBC liable for you not rolling onto a tracker? Does this make sense to you?
 
Back
Top