KBC KBC statement on tracker redress

Status
Not open for further replies.
Many people that should have been on trackers had to rent out their homes to pay the mortgage. Had they of been on their tracker rate in the first place this wouldn't have happened. Double the damage by KBC.
 
Lightening said:
Many people that should have been on trackers had to rent out their homes to pay the mortgage. Had they of been on their tracker rate in the first place this wouldn't have happened. Double the damage by KBC.
Click to expand...

This is both depressing and enlightening to hear. I wanted to move back in but couldn't afford to unless I rented out both rooms and lived in the attic or shed. Do you know of anyone who has had progress who rented out their home?
 
Seems to be a number of new posters and queries in last few days particularly , would it not be best after all this time to wait just another few weeks and see if anyone is definitively part of the 450 so we get clear idea of which cohorts are first being ?
 
490 is the figure, from what I have read. I spoke to KBC on the phone. They say everyone of these will be notified before the end of the year. But they wouldn't tell me over the phone if I am one - the psychological torture continues.....
 
Mauritius

There are a further upto 600 in addition to the 490. I believe these 600 will be sorted.

Quote
KBC anticipates that up to an additional 200 to 600 cases may be impacted unquote.

KBC it appears, will redress and compensate most of the above cases by the end of the year.

We don't know which cohorts are in the 490 and which are being Investigated and debated.

Brendan did a post of KBC customers the bank deem not impacted i.e.
*Trackers who Fixed expiring to SVR (Standard Variable Rate) (in those exact words )
*Alternative arrangements to the loans which "knowingly and agreed" to give up the Tracker

I personally don't agree that these accounts should not be included.

They also state quote KBC continues to engage with the Central Bank in relation to the identification of impacted customers.unquote

So they appear to be doing a lot of "debating"

I do believe this will be resolved by year end as per their statement for "most" accounts but not all and this will continue into next year.

Sit tight ! All we can do is wait till end of year
 
Hi Lightening. This comment is a concern for me:

*Alternative arrangements to the loans which "knowingly and agreed" to give up the Tracker

In early 2009, I signed a form to give up my tracker rate because it was the only way KBC would give me a further 12 months arrangement of Interest Only payments. The document didn't state it was a permanent move to SVR and I thought it would return to the tracker after 12 months but they never gave me that option. (I think the scant wording in itself makes their case weak.) The difference between my tracker of 0.95% and the SVR is huge. I feel that they took advantage of my financial situation - having pointed out to KBC that I wasn't at the time able to move to full capital payments but hoped to be able to do so within the year. I find it shocking in retrospect that a bank would use some one's financial situation to multiply their interest rates by over 400%
 
Can I ask why a fixed term agreement, expiring onto an SVR, would not be deemed impacted by bank?

I assume the bank deemed this case not impacted before the last round of consultation with Central bank at the end of August!
 
Sorry folks excuse my naivety.. the letter just confirmed I'm in the review.. I haven't really followed this closely as I never had a tracker .. fixed from the start in Early 2007.. not really sure If I have any case? Is it worth contacting the Kisane man who's involved in these cases.. though his fee could be throwing good money after bad as I'm already crippled with the home loan..
 
@mccoypat94 Padraic is wonderful but you might be better off at this stage waiting to see what happens next, particularly as you say you "never had a tracker." It might be that they were required to offer you one at the end of your fixed rate ("all fixed rates will roll onto tracker") as in the notorious KBC document to brokers which is causing KBC untold problems.
 
THE NUMBERS

@Lightening like to see what you or others think of below , if any figures incorrect pls let me know

We really would love to know who are in the 490 . Im guessing these are the ones padraig maintained at the meeting had the strongest cases in his opinion , so ones that stated somewhere they they would revert to ECB plus xyz % ..... at end of fix or discounted rate

I hope that then leaves the 2 cohorts Padraig outlined kbc deemed not impacted the ones in the 2-600 who i also believe will all be resolved , (that figure wouldnt have been mentioned publically .... get impression govt wont budge on these )

Or is there another number still under review between central bank that will battle on in new year.


Only guide i can see is to look at the numbers which dont really add up .... a few observations

1. Padraig said there could be 2500 at the very beginning impacted ...( articles surrounding flyer )


2. I dont believe the 571 they identified in 2010 were in this figure . ( sounds mickey mouse if bank addressed them of their own accord when all the rest were left overcharged )

3. 1090 have been impacted as per KBC, 490 plus 200-600 leaving 1410 .

4. Large number of posters here seem to have had (tracker fixed reverted to svr ), had (variable , requested tracker fixed reverted to svr..myself) so majority on here would fit into cohorts deemed not inpacted

My point is hard to see where the 1090 figure comes from if those not deemed impacted are not included and being argued with the CB .

But there still looks to be a large number left 1410 ....unless the 2500 includes people that didnt have trackers to start with ..... and padraig was including the 571

We are all waiting for the first genuine success story on these threads ... crazy even at this stage not one of us has been contacted !
 
Has Brendan confirmed that people who had on their loan offer that they would be on a variable rate (that tracked the ECB) and fixed where the agreement said they would revert to a different standard variable rate will not be impacted??? What is this based on?

If so I thought this was nearly everyone I have spoke on this over the years. And if that's the case its off to the FSO again.
 

The Statement

"In a prior review concluded in 2010, the bank identified 571 customers that would have moved from a fixed rate mortgage to a standard variable rate, but based on a review of their individual circumstances, the bank concluded that these customers should return to a tracker rate following the fixed rate period. These customers had their accounts amended prior to the expiry of the fixed rate period so they then correctly rolled to a tracker product"

The above statement is still vague as it doesn't state what the the start product was however;
"moved from a fixed rate mortgage to a standard variable rate" In my eyes the 'fixed rate mortgage' was the product from the outset! This statement is backed up by many people posting in 2010 on forums that KBC were rolling them to a tracker and they had commenced on a fixed rate in 2007. At that time(2007 approximately but also end 2006) the communication to brokers (flyer) was in operation. There was no standard variable rate on drawdown and no wording to this effect (although KBC interpret the wording to suit themselves as SVR) These fixed rate contracts were to roll to tracker as the communication to brokers stated and the Central Bank itself supported this in 2010 according to his statement in the Oireactas on 28th September 2017.

HOWEVER!

In the Oireactas on 28/09 when Mr. Verbraeken was asked by Deputy McGrath "what was the 2010 issue", Mr. Verbraeken goes on to state

"The 2010 issue concerned a cohort of customers who had received, in 2008, an offer from the bank to switch to a fixed-rate period. Initially, they were scheduled to move to a variable rate at the end of that period. Prompted by the Central Bank, the bank conducted a review at the time and decided these customers would go back to their tracker rate"

"It was 571 customers. I can be specific about that because it-----"

"That was dealt with in 2010 during the time that these customers were still on their fixed rate. This was a matter that did not entail any redress and compensation because these customers were never overpaying what they should ultimately pay in interest".

Deputy McGrath "Did that not trigger a review within the bank? I appreciate that Mr. Verbraeken was not in charge at the time. That was an important issue identified. Was there not a trawl through the mortgage book to examine the related issue of customers who may have come off a fixed rate and who were not offered a tracker rate?"

Mr. Verbraeken "None of my colleagues present were in the bank at that time and most of the then senior management are no longer in place. I understand this review was quite narrow in its scope. It was dealt with to the satisfaction of the Central Bank at the time. This did not trigger a wider review of the handling of tracker rate administration"

Deputy McGrath "There are many in dispute or not yet complete?"

"I would not call it "in dispute" but we are considering a variety of customer journeys with modification to contract either because a customer applied for a modification of the contract or because the bank offered a modification of the interest rate and the customer journey of that cohort, so that is still under consideration"

As above, there is a degree of conflict in Mr. Verbraeken's statements, but perhaps he got confused in the Oireactas.

As we know there are 7 cohorts as stated by Padraic and Brendan has stated KBC have deemed two (as previous post) not impacted. (I presume KBC have announced this somewhere or to someone ?). From reading the above, I take it those that the fixed from the beginning at the time of the brokers communication should have rolled to tracker. As Mr. Verbraeken says himself that review in 2010 "was narrow in its scope".

I feel everyone in the Cohorts are impacted. Isn't this what the whole issue is about. How the banks cheated people out of their tracker. There are many forms of cheating (I'm putting this midly) it just depends on how and when it was done during the customers journey with the bank.

Mr Verbracken (when asked by Deputy McGrath)

"I would not call it "in dispute" but we are considering a variety of customer journeys with modification to contract either because a customer applied for a modification of the contract or because the bank offered a modification of the interest rate and the customer journey of that cohort, so that is still under consideration"

I believe KBC will be selecting the cohorts first that are simple to identify. After that it will be looking at individual cases.

The gloves will be off.

you can read KBC's meeting at the Oireactas on the Oireactas website "
"Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach Debate -
Thursday, 28 Sep 2017"
 
I have friends who fixed at drawdown with IIB and even have a letter from their broker signed and stating these exact words:

"Should you decide to choose a fixed rate at the beginning of your mortgage, you will have a choice of another fixed rate when this expires or you can choose a variable or tracker rate"

KBC have told them by letter and over the phone many times that they will not be considered as part of the examination. They actually advised them to contact their broker to ask why they sent out that offer.....unbelievable!!!

At the town hall meeting I thought Padraic said that the people had a variable rate (that tracked ECB) and signed fixed rate documents with the word "revert" would be on of the top 3 chances when asked about the cohorts. I suppose I can rule one based on the friends experience above.
 
@Mauritius
Read Verbraekens statement in the Oireachtas then the KBC redress statement re the 571 2010 only, (ignore my comments)

Perhaps someone can throw some more light on this!
 
Lot of talk on here about 2 cohorts that KBC are strongly challenging with CB as not impacted. I'm also in the cohort, that started on tracker product, fixed, & revered to SVR.
As KBC seem to be behind other lenders, in the Tracker review, do we know how other lenders are dealing with similar cohorts, & if any other bank has deemed accounts impacted, where they defaulted onto the company's standard variable rate, on expiry of fixed term rate? I'm seeing a lot people returned to their tracker rate, but have only been paying attention to KBC so is there further hope to be taken from how other banks have handled the specific cohort in question above?

Also, probably a stupid question, but if all else failed, with a high court appeal the only option, can a case be filed against KBC, using a large amount of similar cases, to make legal costs manageable?
 
I've been hearing about the two cohorts also. In your case @Cushcam did the wording state that you would move to SVR at the end of the fixed period? If so, and you saw what you were signing, were you not reluctant to agree to such?
 
Yes & No. Why would I, or anyone be reluctant about a short term fix, for a period of stability, before reverting back to a contracted variable rate, over a 35 year term. That was what I assumed & expected to happen based on the direct discussions at the time.

Had I asked what a SVR product was, who is to say I would have been informed about losing the tracker anyway, back then

On email correspondence prior to agreement, a tracker versus fixed repayment breakdown was requested, & no where in the reply, was it made clear, or did it prepare us for that fixed term agreement, that by choosing a fixed product, product x would become obsolete in the market by the time of expiry.

Perhaps if alerted of the change, existing customer would have had reluctance, hence why make these agreements transparent & clear. They were worded to catch us fools in hindsight.

Four months previous to fixed term expiry date, the bank gave us a 1.5% tracker on a loan top up, so had best practice applied at the time, perhaps the bank should have notified if we wanted the option of break out fees, to get same generic tracker rate applied to main mortgage also, without being deceptive about it. Recession looming! Money talks, Fcuk customer care!

If tracker is still being offered, why would there be cause for concern one year earlier? What notice was provided that the tracker was to expire! That's the info we needed to be reluctant. Where was the mention of the SVR product, in the email correspondence with the bank.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top