Managing Deceased Estates Decision Reference 2022-0122

Case OutcomeSubstantially upheld
Subject MatterManaging Deceased Estates
Date07 April 2022
Finantial SectorBanking
Conducts Complained OfFailure to process instructions in a timely manner,Complaint handling (Consumer Protection Code) , Delayed or inadequate communication, Dissatisfaction with customer service , Maladministration
Decision Ref:
Product / Service:
Managing Deceased Estates
Conduct(s) complained of:
Failure to process instructions in a timely manner
Delayed or inadequate communication
Complaint handling (Consumer Protection Code)
Dissatisfaction with customer service
Substantially upheld
The complaint concerns a mortgage loan account and the consent for sale requests in
respect of two secured properties.
The complaint is made by the Executors of the estate of the mortgage loan account holder
(“the Borrower”) who died in late 2010. The Executors are referred to below as “the
The Complainants’ Case
In their Complaint Form, the Complainants state that the Provider failed to process, in a
timely and efficient manner, applications for the Provider’s consent to the sale of two
properties located in Dublin, Property 1 and Property 2 (together, “the Properties”).
In resolution of this complaint, the Complainants are seeking “financial compensation”.
The Provider’s Case
- 2 -
The Provider says this complaint relates to a Buy-to-Let (“BTL”) mortgage loan which was
sanctioned in the name of the Borrower and drawn down on 23 June 2006. The Provider
says the loan was for €500,000.00 and the purpose was to release equity from the securities
held (listed below) for the purchase of two apartments in Paris.
The Provider says the loan was drawn down over a 10 year term including a capital
repayment moratorium for the first 60 months. After the expiry of the 60 months in 2011,
the Provider says repayments were to revert to full capital and interest repayments. When
the Provider replied to the formal investigation of this complaint in July 2020, the balance
on the account as at 23 July 2020 was €487,493.24dr. Responding to this complaint the
Provider said that repayments of €500.00 per month were being made to the account.
When the loan was drawn down, the Provider says the security for the loan consisted of:
A first legal mortgage over Property 1
A first legal mortgage over Property 2
A first legal mortgage over Property 3
An extension of the Provider’s first legal mortgage over:
Property 4
Property 5
Property 6
Property 7
Property 8
Property 9
The Provider says it is relying on the following documentation provided to the Borrower
when the loan facility was sanctioned:
1. Letter of Loan Offer dated 3 March 2006
2. Standard Commercial Loan Conditions applicable to the Letter of Loan Offer
The Provider says the above documents do not contain any specific reference to ‘consent to
sale’ requests. In a submission dated 16 December 2020, the Provider said that in addition
to the above documentation, it is also relying upon ‘The General Conditions for [Provider]
Home Loans’ dated 4 January 2006.
The Provider has set out a timeline of events for the period from 1 June 2018 (when an email
was received from the Complainants’ solicitor requesting consent to sell Property 1) and 26
April 2019 (when Case Manager 2 emailed the Complainants’ solicitor to advise that a
consent to sale letter had issued in respect of Property 1).

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT