Repayment Mortgage Decision Reference 2024-0049

Date28 March 2024
Subject MatterRepayment Mortgage
Finantial SectorBanking
Conducts Complained OfRefusals (banking),Delayed or inadequate communication, Dissatisfaction with customer service , Failure to process instructions in a timely manner, Maladministration (mortgage)
Decision Ref:
Product / Service:
Repayment Mortgage
Conduct(s) complained of:
Refusals (banking)
Delayed or inadequate communication
Dissatisfaction with customer service
Failure to process instructions in a timely manner
Maladministration (mortgage)
This complaint relates to two mortgage loans issued by the Provider.
The Complainants’ Case
The complaint relates to two home loans (ending 0506 and 9618) held by the
Complainants with the Provider which are both secured by the same property. The
Complainants state that they submitted an application for a home loan of €228,000.00
(two hundred and twenty eight thousand euro) on 10 October 2018 using the Provider's
website. They state that the application amount was adjusted down to €225,000.00 (two
hundred and twenty five thousand euro) by the Provider without any consultation with the
Complainants. The Complainants assert that the Provider's agent who assisted them with
their loan application “clearly lacked life experience and was very much out of her depth in
terms of her understanding of our personal circumstances and we were reliant on her to
generate the mortgage application summary which was a huge concern for us.”
The Complainants received a home loan of €225,000.00 (two hundred and twenty five
thousand euro). They state that after the home loan ending *****506 was approved, the
Second Complainant spoke to the Provider's agent about seeking an additional loan to
upgrade the property and was told that they “were lucky to get 225,000 euro.” The
- 2 -
Complainants contend that “a bank official should not be allowed to address customers in
that way” and that their “ambition to create an asset of value was [being] hampered by
The Complainants submitted an application for a further home loan to carry out a schedule
of works which would add value to the property. They state that they submitted an
itemised value of the works to the Provider on 11 December 2019 and requested a home
loan of €79,000.00 (seventy nine thousand euro). The Complainants state that the
application amount was again reduced without any consultation with them to €70,000.00
(seventy thousand euro) and approved. They further state that the Provider's agent told
the First Complainant that he “could not afford 50 euro a month for the additional 10,000
euro over 20 years” which the Complainants assert that they entirely disagree with as they
used 93,500 of [their] own money for the works and a clearly inexperienced bank official
was telling [them] that [they] can't afford 50 euro a month.”
The Complainants further contend that they requested a variable rate on the home loan
but were given a fixed rate. They state that “there was so much hassle getting money from
the [Provider) that [they] felt [they] hod no other option but to take what the [Provider]
decided. This is not what [they], the customer, asked for.” The Complainants contend that
as their initial home loan was held with the Provider, they could not seek the additional
home loan from any other Provider and felt they “could only, reluctantly, deal with (the
The Complainants submit that they sought to draw down the €70,000.00 (seventy
thousand euro) in February 2020 and received €55,000.00 (fifty-five thousand euro) on 21
February 2020. They state they were advised that the remaining €15,000.00 (fifteen
thousand euro) would be released once an Engineer's report and an Auctioneer's valuation
report were submitted to the Provider. They assert that they submitted the
documentation on 11 August 2020, but a reply was not received until 25 August 2020.
They further assert that “the delay in responding was excessive as the documents were on
a bank official's desk ... Only for [the Complainants’] phone call there would have been
further unnecessary delays."
The Complainants state that the Provider refused to release the €15,000.00 (fifteen
thousand euro) on 27 August 2020 and that they were given the following explanation:
1. That the majority of the Second Complainant's income was now state funded;
2. That the Complainants availed of the mortgage payment break which indicated,
according to [the Provider], that they could not afford the mortgage repayments;
3. That the Complainants could not afford 83 euro per month over 20 years.

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