Nationaldude, they are people on this thread with 2, 3 & 4 kids and couples with no kids who can lose their home after 10 or 14 years just because of this wording differences not mention in their contracts.
Do you think is funny?
Nationaldude haș nothing better to do with his time and usualy is going on threads and make poor coments.
@RAzvan R I just had a look over Nationaldude's posting history. He has made 16 posts in the last 18 or so months. This is hardly someone with nothing better to do with their time. Not sure the same could be said about myself, but that's a different topic
I think you might be a bit unfair towards him. I accept he may not have supported some of the discussions on here, but he is hardly laughing at people. If you go back through the posting history, it shows he was in negative equity himself at one stage also, so I am sure there is a level of empathy there.
No one is against anyone getting a tracker back where it is deserved, and redress & compensation provided where people have been wronged. No one under estimates the seriousness of this issue for a large number of people - the money involved here is quite substantial in most cases.
However, any customer who is in arrears and engaging with the bank, and paying some level of mortgage repayments will not have their house repossessed in the current political environment. You just have to read the reports from the courts to validate this. The only repossessions granted are those in long term arrears who have paid little or nothing to the bank in years, and have barely engaged with them. This is not to diminish the impact on people, but sensationalising it also defeats the purpose.
Rightly or wrongly, all Nationaldude done was show a contract with a tracker clearly called out on it. Some here have said that EBS IT systems did not support the term tracker - and this casts doubt on this theory.