KBC Summary of the KBC Cohorts

Hi folks. This issue is not over. It is not over despite what the banks, their cheerleaders and, yes, the Central Bank would like.

Interesting query in The Irish Times today from somebody who is only now realising they could have been entitled to a tracker rate. No surprise that the issue of whether you can trust KBC comes up a lot.

www.irishtimes.com

KBC, transparency and tracker mortgages

Q&A: Dominic Coyle
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com
 
Gimmestrength, I'm not sure there's anything new in that. Like the original person who wrote the letter, I also had the prevailing rate argument. I queried this with KBC. When pushed, they told me that the prevailing rate at the time (2005) was the SVR (I have this in writing from them), so I don't know what to believe either, but I honestly don't hold out any hope of getting anywhere with this. I could bring it to the Ombudsman, but would I get anywhere?
 
Hi Sanparom,
The thing is, KBC have said many things that later turned out not to be true. As the person who wrote in and the author's response in the IT article says, they cannot be trusted. They have been dragged kicking and screaming into the tracker investigation and have resisted all along the way. Outside of the tracker scandal they were busy over the last couple of years resisting independently structured insolvency arrangements using technical legal arguments later rejected by the High Court. They do not put the customer first despite their slick marketing and brand association with marathons and wellness (the irony given the mental health issues they have caused).

So in short, just because they say an SVR was the correct rate at the time doesn't make it so. If in any doubt ask them formally and lodge an Ombudsman case if you or an advisor such as Padraic Kissane feels you have a case. Don't take their word for it. This is NOT over
 
I will ask them formally. That's a good idea. It was around a year ago when they answered my question re the prevailing rate and said it was SVR, so I will root through my documentation and push them on this. If they cannot prove that it was SVR, I will contact Padraic Kissane for advice.
 
I am in the same boat with the lenders prevailing variable rate, I do think that this was the tracker at the time and was worded that way when you fixed from the start which I did like many others.

Unfortunately thinking and proving are two different things.

Wonder what’s padraic kissane view on this one ??
 
"Do you have a case? I don’t know. I am aware I previously noted that, in 2006, KBC, or IIB Homeloans as it was called back then, did advertise a promise that its “standard practice” was to transfer everyone on a fixed rate to a tracker mortgage at the end of the fixed term as a default.
And a separate correspondent sent me a letter from KBC to them stating that anyone coming off a fixed-term mortgage would be automatically transferred to a tracker mortgage. That letter also related to KBC policy in late 2006."
That is an excerpt from the article. Do any of you know what the correspondence he refers to is. It doesn't sound like flyer but separate correspondence.
 
Not sure what letter he’s referring to
If it’s not the flyer it sure would be nice to see it.
 
Darn40 said:
Not sure what letter he’s referring to
If it’s not the flyer it sure would be nice to see it.
Click to expand...
Yes indeed, sounds like private correspondence. The cases now will come down to what can be argued at the ombudsman. The banks including KBC used the so-called cohorts to group similar cases that they eventually deemed impacted and redressed. Reluctantly and only when they were caught out. It allowed them to ring fence and limit the damage to their financial positions, which of course is more important to them than what is in the interests of customers.

But the effect of the cohort strategy was to ignore some cases that were and are unique/open to interpretation, but no less deserving. It also allowed the banks to say matters were concluded and the CB to issue a final report which suits the banks and the part of the CB that is tasked with ensuring the stability of the banking system (as opposed to the other bit that must champion consumer rights) .

Remember the CB's framework document at the start of the tracker examination stated that where there was ambiguity in mortgage documents the benefit of the doubt should be given to the consumer. We know there was plenty of ambiguity in documentation, communication and contracts so we will have to argue these cases strongly. This is NOT over
 
Some very good points raised today . There are only a small number of KBC customers left in the waiting room so i would still hold out hope of getting something when the FSPO review my case , you would hope they have the tools to properly challenge them
 
In the Irish times article, the person making the query drew down the mortgage in May 2008 and never had a tracker, nor had anything to suggest a tracker. At the time of drawdown, many banks had started to withdraw the trackers and certainly were not advertising them the way they previously did.
I think it is also outside the date of the infamous flyer.

So I can't see any hope for that person
 
It is not all about the flier Peemac. It is also not all about whether a person was on a tracker before roll off from fixed rate etc. People who never had mention of tracker in their contracts have been deemed impacted and redressed.

The bank, kicking and screaming, have dealt with cohort cases. The ombudsman will decide on the other cases. People who feel or are advised they have reasonable cases should go to the ombudsman and not be discouraged from doing so by narrow criteria set down by the bank or by people here. Not over.
 
Wonder said:
My case is at the investigation stage with the ombudsman on this matter I will keep this page updated.
My strong advice is get you case together and file with the ombudsman.
Click to expand...

Hi Wonder, did your contract mention the prevailing rate? I remember you posting about your case before, but I can't remember the details.
 
I’m a new poster to this forum. Very similar query to the above. I took out my mortgage in Jan 06 (slightly before the flyer date) but rolled off my 1yr fixed in Jan 07( within the flyer dates) . For years my request has been denied as out of scope. I asked for multiple SARS and evidence of what options for rates KBC provided to me at the time. All previous SARS said there was no evidence of any rate options provided to me. I sent another email last week and suddenly KBC have sent me a letter which did advise me of Rate options . dated december 06 it advised me that as rates are rising they have the following fixed rate options avavailable (letter proceeds to list out various fixed rate options.). Absolute no mention of trackers or variable rate options -surely I could have option to select tracker if they made me aware of it as we all know if was a viable offering in January 2007. I’m pinning my arguement on breach of code of conduct where KBC should have advised of all options on table and not just a select set of fixed rates. ( I won’t mention the many years of consequences of this situation but I’m sure many users can emphatise) I’m hoping this new evidence (whic i always had recollection of) will change things . Interested in any thoughts about this?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top