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

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

14:02 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Black Panther" at "12/03/2015 - 13:51":

Thanks Black Panther for clearing up their funding, not surprised therefore that they take no notice of anyone but the banks twisted lies..interestingly I got an immediate reply from the FOS adjudicator !

Probably a standard response.....we have only Mark on our side, which I think we always knew !!

Black Panther

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

14:53 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Here's the link to the Millar case, where the MIllars took BOTH the Irish FOS AND their Bank to the High Court and the JUdge ruled in the Millar's favour and ordered the FOS to reverse their initial ruling (which was, of course, in favour of the Bank).

You might want to write back to the FOS with this information. Let me know if any difficulties accessing the court 'papers', but just google MIllars and Danske Bank and Ombudsman and you'll get to the relevant info.

http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/8869D07E6601DFD480257D66004ED374

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

15:08 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Black Panther" at "12/03/2015 - 14:53":

I think a Judicial review of the FOS decision may well be the way to go on this as it will cost significantly less than litigation. Watch this space!
.

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

17:42 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "12/03/2015 - 15:08":

Thanks Black Panther, the link worked fine, interesting...!

Mark, I wait your advice with bated breath.....their principal argument for which they seemed to take the banks statement was that I was a professional landlord, which I explained I was clearly not as they wanted my salary as a requirement for giving the mortgage, also ignoring the other things inc misleading advertising, etc....

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

17:58 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Black Panther" at "12/03/2015 - 13:51":

@Black Panther - did you really initiate your complaint only 10 days before it was declined?

Many other have waited nearly two years for a response!

I have discussed this with Mark Smith at Cotswold Barristers and we would be very interested to review all correspondence relating to your complaint, i.e. what you sent to them (including all evidence) and their responses. The purpose of this review would be to consider whether we could use your case as a test case for Judicial Review.

Mark Smith is going to consider costs and whilst it will be much less than the eye watering £825,000 Justin Selig at The Law Department needed to raise to pursue litigation, it will almost certainly be too much for one man to pay. However, I suspect many here would be willing to chip in up to £1,000 each to fund such a review and if I'm right, and there are enough people willing to effectively Crowd Fund your case, this could well be the making of a new strategy.

You will appreciate that a Judicial Review only looks at procedural matters, i.e. whether the FOS have acted properly in terms of arriving at their decision. If the answer is that they have not then a decision against them merely compels the FOS to reconsider. It would, of course, put immense pressure on them to arrive at a different decision but it does not compel them to do so. In other words, they could still, theoretically side with the BoI.

Personally, I think it is worth a shot.

I'm interested to read what others think about this too.
.

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

18:28 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "12/03/2015 - 17:58":

I, for one, would happily invest £1000, tell me how you would like me to do this.
Most of my corespondance with FOS is electronic.

If it helps I have the original B&W web ad saying 'for life'....which seemed to be on the details of the case against Danske bank ! FOS had this from me !

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

18:34 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tricia Collick" at "12/03/2015 - 18:28":

Hi Tricia

You can put your credit card away for now (a week or two at least).

There's much to do before we get to that stage but we got the bit between our teeth again now.

We will be happy to review your entire correspondence too.

Please send two hard copies of the entire correspondence (not by email) for the attention of Mark Smith, Cotswold Barristers, 4 Royal Crescent, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL50 3DA together with a copy of your passport and driving licence as proof of identity.
.

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

20:07 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "12/03/2015 - 18:34":

OK Mark, a lot of printing to do so it may take a while....!

Black Panther

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

20:31 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

The short answer, Mark, is that the SECOND FOS review of my case took a mere 10 days.

To clarify, I complained to the FOS in FEb 2013. I sent them a very long letter detailing all my evidence with 11 appendices of supporting documents. In Nov 2014, the FOS made their first ruling in the BOI's favour. I contested this on numerous grounds and included more evidence eg. the Millar case.

In Nov. 2015, The FOS then placed me under great duress to either accept the ruling, or contest within a matter of days. I strongly rejected this pressure and collated more evidence and replied to them in JAn. 2015. 10 days later, a second Ombudsman ruled in the BOI's favour again. The letter they wrote to me clearly indicated that the second ombudsman had little, if any, grasp of the case.

Hope that clarifies it. If you would like more detail, than I can do that, but am conscious of keeping things brief.

Black Panther

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

20:37 PM, 12th March 2015, About 10 years ago

THis has now become a complaint against BOTH the BOI AND the FOS - as the FOS are clearly ignoring detailed evidence I submitted and are willing to believe the lies put forward by the BOI eg. they claim I am a 'professional' investor, and I have submitted a plethora of evidence that illustrates why I am NOt a professional investor. The FOS has chosen to ignore my considerable evidence and believe the BOI, which has not a shred of evidence for their claim.

I have met with my MP and he is taking up the case. He will be writing to the FOS expressing his concern about the way they mishandling the case and also the Chair of Parliamentary Committee concerned with these matters (the name escapes me right now).

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 Automated Assistant Read More