Ulster Bank and the €5,250 offer

C

cremeegg

Registered User
Messages
4,251
Apologies on opening a new thread for this but Brendan's original now has 72 posts on missing letters.

I have received the €5,250 offer which on the one hand is an unexpected bonus, but I am curious to see if there is anymore to be had from UB. The opportunity cost involved in loosing the offset is unknowable. I used it extensively in the past, but have not used it in recent years. Who knows what the case might have been in the future.

I resent their highhanded manner in writing to say they are changing the contract.

UBs handling of these accounts since they took them over from FA has been abysmal.

With the continuance of the 'Pay and re-draw' facility I do not understand what exactly I will loose.

Does UB have the right to make these changes. Their FAQ refers to 'Ulster Bank Offset Banking terms and Conditions' Section A Conditions 4(a) 8(d) and 10; Secrtion B part 1 Conditions 5.2 and 7;Section D Conditions 15,16 and 18.

Well I never signed any Ts and Cs with UB. My loan was with First Active. Though Section 44 of the FA Ts and Cs allows FA to 'vary existing terms and conditions...by any means FA considers reasonable'.

Does anyone have any idea if the €5,250 is a good deal, or how would one go about haggling with UB.
 
Apologies for choking up the original thread with posts about missing letters! Right now that thread is the only source of advice on how to get answers with UB on this.

Regarding the offer, I think it is completely dependent on your own circumstances to determine the true lost opportunity. Of course, without a crystal ball, it's not truly knowable - but I know for my own case, I have done a calculation using an online offset calculator to determine how much interest I am likely to pay over the remaining term, and then I looked at how much I will realistically save and offset during that period. That has given me a minimum number that I will be happy with from UB. If my offer is less than that, I fully intend to make a complaint.
 
I've already made a complaint to UB and am going to go through their complaint process first.
In my opinion and I'm no expert, I also signed up with FA Those are the T&C that matter.

Any clause that gives the institution unlimited scope to change said T&C's could be classed as an unfair term and be nullified .

Section 3.2 of the consumer protection code states that " A regulated entity must ensure that the name of a product or service is not misleading in terms of the benefits that the product or service can give a consumer."

Not sure about haggling with UB haha however some opinions I've sought think they will pay more to have the problem go away.

You've nothing to lose by making a complaint, their FAQs state you are getting the goodwill exgratia payment and it doesn't interfere with your right to complain.

Also saw a solicitor looking specifically for UB offset flexible mortgage customers
 
I submitted two letters, one as a data access request and the complaint was a personal complaint by me to go through their complaints system. Solicitors would be too expensive for that
 
aoraki said:
What do the First Active T&Cs say about removing the offset capability, is it mentioned?
Click to expand...
It's mentioned more than once. That they can add and remove products as they fit for whatever reason. If you want the actual quote I'll do it when I'm home.

But I'm not 100% sure but nearly 90% sure that I saw something to the effect of ;

" If you have an offset mortgage you must have an offset account"
 
A poster in another thread posted up a link to the old First Active T&cs in another thread;


I was looking for smoking guns but there are a few clauses in those T&Cs that are wide enough in scope to allow Ulster Bank to justify removing the offset feature. I’m not claiming any expertise in this matter though, a contract lawyer might disagree. You may have a case but I would suspect you would need professional help to prove that, and that professional help would cost money.
 
Hey aoraki,

I have the First Active t&c from 2007 here in front of me . Going googly eyed reading them. Anyway I'm like you, not claiming any expertise but I'm annoyed enough to motivate myself to investigate.

I agree with you about some clauses in the Ts & C's being wide enough to seem to allow UB to do what they like . But after reading the CCPC guide to unfair terms in contracts, I think there may be quite a few smoking guns in there.

If you go through the banks complaint process and after they issue a final response and your still not satisfied , you can complain to the FSPO and they'll investigate for free .

Professional help would have a cost attached yes. And my own view on that is the advice can go both sides of the argument unless there's already a precedent.

Send me a pm if you want to compare notes.
 
Got a response to my complaint from Ulster Bank. Am unsure if I'm allowed to post it here? If anyone can advise?
 
cremeegg said:
Apologies on opening a new thread for this but Brendan's original now has 72 posts on missing letters.

I have received the €5,250 offer which on the one hand is an unexpected bonus, but I am curious to see if there is anymore to be had from UB. The opportunity cost involved in loosing the offset is unknowable. I used it extensively in the past, but have not used it in recent years. Who knows what the case might have been in the future.

I resent their highhanded manner in writing to say they are changing the contract.

UBs handling of these accounts since they took them over from FA has been abysmal.

With the continuance of the 'Pay and re-draw' facility I do not understand what exactly I will loose.

Does UB have the right to make these changes. Their FAQ refers to 'Ulster Bank Offset Banking terms and Conditions' Section A Conditions 4(a) 8(d) and 10; Secrtion B part 1 Conditions 5.2 and 7;Section D Conditions 15,16 and 18.

Well I never signed any Ts and Cs with UB. My loan was with First Active. Though Section 44 of the FA Ts and Cs allows FA to 'vary existing terms and conditions...by any means FA considers reasonable'.

Does anyone have any idea if the €5,250 is a good deal, or how would one go about haggling with UB.
Click to expand...
The argument would be that anyone with an Offset Mortgage had an Offset Arrangement and closing the facility account is making the offset arrangement null and void i.e. without an account to offset against the mortgage account, there is no offset arrangement but the mortgage was sold to the customer on that basis. So UB are closing the account, removing the offset arrangement completely and renaming the mortgages.

This is the crux of the problem. Also, they claim they are fully legally entitled to do all of this but yet they feel they need to provide customers with an ex-gratia payment out of goodwill due to possible losses from their actions. Why do this? Why would a bank give away money if they are legally entitled to do what they are doing? Banks are about profit. UB are leaving Ireland, they do not need to leave behind any goodwill with us, they will never deal with us again. None of this makes any sense.
 
Getplanning said:
The argument would be that anyone with an Offset Mortgage had an Offset Arrangement and closing the facility account is making the offset arrangement null and void i.e. without an account to offset against the mortgage account, there is no offset arrangement but the mortgage was sold to the customer on that basis. So UB are closing the account, removing the offset arrangement completely and renaming the mortgages.

This is the crux of the problem. Also, they claim they are fully legally entitled to do all of this but yet they feel they need to provide customers with an ex-gratia payment out of goodwill due to possible losses from their actions. Why do this? Why would a bank give away money if they are legally entitled to do what they are doing? Banks are about profit. UB are leaving Ireland, they do not need to leave behind any goodwill with us, they will never deal with us again. None of this makes any sense.
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t make sense. But there has been complete silence from the likes of the central bank and the regulators about this since this whole thing was announced late last year. So it’s difficult not to draw certain conclusions from that.

There has also been silence regarding any challenges to this which also leads me to think that those challenges have a) been few and far between and b) have so far not been successful and have fallen on deaf ears.

Those mortgages are due to transfer to Dilosk in a few weeks, so looks like it’s a fait accompli and I’d be very surprised if anything derails it at this point.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top