Bank of Ireland increase differential on tracker rates

Bank of Ireland increase differential on tracker rates

10:32 AM, 28th February 2013, About 12 years ago 1862

Text Size

The story of the Bank of Ireland decision to increase to the differential (interest rate margin) on  tracker mortgages started on this forum when a professional landlord contacted Property118 within minutes of a letter from Bank of Ireland landing on his door mat. What ensued was outrage from landlords and affected residential mortgage borrowers. The story was quickly picked up by the National Media as it wasn’t just the 13,500 affected borrowers who were worried.

Will this set a precedent for other mortgage lenders to follow?

Property118 reacted by using funds donated to The GOOD Landlords Campaign to underwrite the cost of a barristers opinion on the legality of the Bank of Ireland’s actions. The remainder of this thread,one of the most read and most commented threads of all time on Property118, continues to tell the story as it unfolds.

If you want to skip the story and cut to the chase simply CLICK HERE

Of the 13,500 affected borrowers, 1,200 have had the decision reversed by Bank of Ireland. With additional support and pressure we believe all affected borrowers can and will see justice done.

___________________________________________

Lee, a professional Landlord asks, “help! I have just received a letter from the Bank of Ireland stating they want to increase the differential on my tracker rates.

I have 12 mortgages with the Bank of Ireland previously Bristol and West. I have been on a base rate tracker of 1.75% above base, but now Bank of Ireland are using some fine print claiming they have to recapitalise and saying the ‘new differential will be 4.49%.

How can I fight back?”

The original policy wording seems to be:

6 INTEREST

Charging interest at a tracker rate

(j) Unless we change the differential (if any) under condition 6 (n), we will not change the tracker rate unless the base rate changes.

(m) in condition 6 (n):
– a “positive differential” means a percentage which we add to the base rate to arrive at the tracker rate; and a “negative differential” means a percentage which we subtract from the base rate to arrive at the tracker rate.

(n) We may reduce a positive differential or increase a negative differential at our discretion by giving you not less than seven days written notice. This means that we can change the differential in a way that is favourable to you.

The above seems to indicate that they can reduce the rate in my favour, but not give them the right to increase it. Am I correct?


Share This Article


Comments

Darrell G

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

12:04 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Dee " at "29/01/2014 - 11:51":

Dee, Thanks for that. Sounds positive. Good news indeed!

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

12:18 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tricia Collick" at "29/01/2014 - 12:02":

Hi Tricia

That's a good start, you could also ask him to have a chat with David Morris MP and/or Jason McCartney MP about applying for a 90 minute debate 🙂
.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

12:21 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "29/01/2014 - 12:18":

PS - I disagree about EDM's being impotent. Look at how much PR we got out of it in the National newspapers. That was one of many objectives and the EDM was just our first baby step into the corridors of power.

Many MP's are frustrated at the costs of administering EDM's and rightly so. However, whilst they remain a tool to be used we might as well, we are paying for the system via our taxes 🙂
.

Fed Up Landlord

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

12:28 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Darrell G" at "29/01/2014 - 10:26":

I always find it useful in circumstances like this to look at a similar situation I have experienced and try and apply some of its principles.

I deal with a lot of Right To Manage issues where lessees in each block have to initially chip in for the solicitors fees which can be high. (Sound familiar) One scheme I just dealt with was £11,000 in fees. It took three years and went to Lands Tribunal. This cost was borne by 38 out of 52 of the lessees including myself. But there are clauses in the RTM Companies Mem and Arts and the properties lease that allow monies paid to achieve RTM to be paid back through the service charge. So now that works out at £211 each. Peanuts really. The service charge will drop from £1000 a year to £600 (saving £400 a year) so everybodies happy except the rip off Freeholder and their linked management company.

So what do we learn from this?

1. You will never get everybody on board to participate either through apathy, lack of cash, tightfistedness, or "lets see everybody else spend their money before we commit" attitude.

2. Everybody benefits in cases like this even those who do not contribute, ( this could sound familiar with the BOI issue) so there has to be a vehicle put in place to ensure they pay their way somehow and do not piggyback on the hard work and cash of everybody else. Not sure how we could do this with the BOI situation.

3. Obvious but - the more of us there are- the cheaper it is and has more chance of success.

I know Mark states that we that have paid will be the only ones compensated. But as we have seen, if and when we set the precedent either in court or an out of court settlement then BOI will see another PPI coming and try and head possible claimants off at the pass before they go to litigation. And the standing on the sideline crowd who fall into the categories above will then pile in. For free.

I agree with the secure forum, and those that have paid and will join MUST ignore the temptation to mention on open forum, on Property 118 or elsewhere. Very difficult to enforce, even with confidentiality agreements.But I cannot see any other way.

This is all assuming of course we get enough takeup, get it to court, and win!!

Tricia Collick

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

13:08 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "29/01/2014 - 12:21":

Thanks Mark, I believe he (Chris Heaton-Harris) is already in touch with David Morris after my contact.
I think he is personally campaigning for reforms to the EDM process so I am unlikely to persuade him otherwise but I agree with you it all helps with 'awarenss'.
Won't stop other people trying their MPs....
I think that if David gets a debate he will participate if he can.

Justin Selig - solicitor

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

18:25 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

LEGAL ACTION UPDATE:

We have just sent an email out to those members of the group action who had previously signed and paid up with us.

If anyone who had previously signed and paid up with us, but has not received the email, please firstly check your junk folders - if it is not there, please email: ana@lawdepartment.co.uk and she will send you a copy of our email.

For anyone who has not yet signed up with us, but has expressed an interest via this website, you will shortly receive an email from us as to how to join the action.

Colin Childs

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

18:37 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Darrell G" at "29/01/2014 - 10:09":

As has been said on many occasions before. Makes not one iota of difference. As all will come out in court. In making their decision originally BOI's legal advisors would have outlined all the pro's and con's to their client. No doubt BOI will have used a very reputable City firm. So actually won't learn anything of significant interest from the forum. They'll keep their powder dry to the appropriate time.

ian

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

19:22 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Justin Selig" at "29/01/2014 - 18:25":

Justin
Thanks for Email WOW count me in many thanks

MG1

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

19:31 PM, 29th January 2014, About 11 years ago

Many thanks Justin and you can certainly count me in.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

19:06 PM, 30th January 2014, About 11 years ago

CAPTION COMPETITION

Ours are ....

1) The lengths that some aggrieved borrowers will go to to recover their money!

2) Police are not ruling out 12,200 borrowers which the BoI screwed over last year as suspects

3) Do the Boi have 12,199 more cash machines?

Evidence

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now