Hi All,
I wish to ask about the statement KBC released on 20th Dec 2017 on their own website where they gave an update regarding the cohorts that they have admitted to so far. I am sure most have read it already but i have posted it below for those whom have not seen it yet.
My case would relate to the exact time frame and situation that the 650 customers (as KBC have gone at lengths to state "PDH only") have been identified, except the main difference in my case was my mortgage was a but to let property not a PDH. From what I have reviewed in the famous KBC flyer released in Nov 2006 it does not separate between PDH or Buy to let mortgages in fact it states "All IIB Homeloan fixed rates".
Furthermore my approval in principle states very clearly that it was approved "subject to a tracker rate". My loan offer issued in Nov 2006 with the condition of tracker rate clause in the special conditions, but at the time the rates were continuously rising so a few days later I elected to fix it for 2 years. Of coarse they altered the condition on the amended loan offer by inserting the prevailing variable rate clause which caught me out.
I have already made a formal complaint any brought to their attention the mortgage approved "subject to tracker rate" which is on their approval in principle letter and also all over the underwriting notes for my case as I have my GDPR file.
They replied back to me to say they don't consider this to be of the cases to effected but I fail to see why not? They time lines are exactly the same as the 650 PDH cases that have been identified but I fail to see where KBC are separating PDH from buy to let as I don't see any information to see how they are getting away with this.
I am sure there would have to be at least a few thousand of cases that would also be affected by this exact same situation I find myself in.
I would really appreciate if any one has some helpful information regarding this situation as I intend taking my case with the ombudsman or go to court. I would like to get some thoughts in this group before making that decision and if anyone as taken a similar case recently?
Much appreciated.
Update on Additional Customers Accounts Identified as Impacted
In our October statement KBC had anticipated that an additional 200-600 accounts would be identified as impacted.
The Bank is now confirming that this number has increased and as a result of further review, a group of c. 2,557 mortgage accounts are now identified as impacted for a variety of reasons. These accounts will be moved back to a tracker rate, if the account is still open, and they will receive redress and compensation:
I wish to ask about the statement KBC released on 20th Dec 2017 on their own website where they gave an update regarding the cohorts that they have admitted to so far. I am sure most have read it already but i have posted it below for those whom have not seen it yet.
My case would relate to the exact time frame and situation that the 650 customers (as KBC have gone at lengths to state "PDH only") have been identified, except the main difference in my case was my mortgage was a but to let property not a PDH. From what I have reviewed in the famous KBC flyer released in Nov 2006 it does not separate between PDH or Buy to let mortgages in fact it states "All IIB Homeloan fixed rates".
Furthermore my approval in principle states very clearly that it was approved "subject to a tracker rate". My loan offer issued in Nov 2006 with the condition of tracker rate clause in the special conditions, but at the time the rates were continuously rising so a few days later I elected to fix it for 2 years. Of coarse they altered the condition on the amended loan offer by inserting the prevailing variable rate clause which caught me out.
I have already made a formal complaint any brought to their attention the mortgage approved "subject to tracker rate" which is on their approval in principle letter and also all over the underwriting notes for my case as I have my GDPR file.
They replied back to me to say they don't consider this to be of the cases to effected but I fail to see why not? They time lines are exactly the same as the 650 PDH cases that have been identified but I fail to see where KBC are separating PDH from buy to let as I don't see any information to see how they are getting away with this.
I am sure there would have to be at least a few thousand of cases that would also be affected by this exact same situation I find myself in.
I would really appreciate if any one has some helpful information regarding this situation as I intend taking my case with the ombudsman or go to court. I would like to get some thoughts in this group before making that decision and if anyone as taken a similar case recently?
Much appreciated.
Update on Additional Customers Accounts Identified as Impacted
In our October statement KBC had anticipated that an additional 200-600 accounts would be identified as impacted.
The Bank is now confirming that this number has increased and as a result of further review, a group of c. 2,557 mortgage accounts are now identified as impacted for a variety of reasons. These accounts will be moved back to a tracker rate, if the account is still open, and they will receive redress and compensation:
- c. 1,907 mortgage accounts that converted from a tracker rate to another rate product post drawdown up to the period July 2008 are now identified as impacted.
- c. 650 PDH (Private Dwelling Home) mortgage accounts are now also identified as impacted. These related to new mortgage applications in the period November 2006 to February 2008 that drew down their mortgage on a fixed rate with a roll off to a standard variable rate. While these customers were never on a tracker rate, KBC has decided to offer these PDH customers a tracker rate product if the account is still open.