Tracker Mortgage Decision Reference 2023-0268

Case OutcomeRejected
Year2023
Date30 November 2023
Reference2023-0268
Subject MatterTracker Mortgage
Finantial SectorBanking
Conducts Complained OfFailure to offer appropriate compensation or redress CBI Examination
Decision Ref:
2023-0268
Sector:
Banking
Product / Service:
Tracker Mortgage
Conduct(s) complained of:
Failure to offer appropriate compensation or
redress CBI Examination
Outcome:
Rejected
LEGALLY BINDING DECISION OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN
Background
This complaint relates to a mortgage loan account held by the Complainant with the
Provider. The mortgage loan that is the subject of this complaint is secured on the
Complainant’s private dwelling house.
The mortgage loan amount was €195,000.00 and the term of the loan was 25 years. The
Offer of Mortgage Loan signed by the Complainant on 15 September 2008 outlined that
the initial interest rate was fixed for 2 years.
The Complainant’s mortgage loan account was considered by the Provider as part of the
Central Bank of Ireland directed Tracker Mortgage Examination (the “Examination”). The
Provider identified that a failure had occurred on the account and the mortgage loan
account was deemed to be impacted under that Examination.
By letter to the Complainants dated 09 March 2018, the Provider detailed that it found
that the Complainant’s mortgage loan account “was affected by a failure on our part” as
follows:
“…
- 2 -
/Cont’d…
The terms and conditions of your mortgage account state that at the end of a fixed
rate period you had the option to choose the then prevailing fixed, variable or
tracker interest rates.
The interest rate on your account was fixed for a period and when this expired
(between October 2008 and December 2013), we had withdrawn tracker rates.
Because of this, you did not have the option of choosing the then prevailing tracker
rate at the time.”
With respect to the effect of the failure on the mortgage loan account, the Provider
outlined as follows:
“…any prevailing tracker rate that would have existed at the end of your fixed rate
period would have been more expensive than the variable rates that were available
during that time. Based on best available information, it is estimated that the
prevailing Private Dwelling House (PDH) tracker rate would have averaged circa
7.9% (9.0% for Buy to Let (BTL)). Whereas, the PDH standard variable rate averaged
3.3% (4.4% for BTL). As such, you did not suffer any financial detriment as a result of
the prevailing tracker not being available during that period. However, we
recognise that this option should have been available to you and we apologise for
our failure…”
The Provider made an offer of €1,615.00 to the Complainant by letter dated 9 March 2018,
which comprised the following:
1. Compensation of €1,000.00 for the failure on the mortgage loan account; and
2. Independent professional advice payment of €615.00.
In January 2019, the Complainant appealed the redress and compensation offering to the
Provider’s Independent Appeals Panel. The basis of the Complainant’s appeal was the
inadequacy of the redress and compensation offered.
In July 2019, the Independent Appeals Panel decided that the Complainant’s appeal was
unsuccessful for the following reasons:
…the Panel was satisfied that arguably, the Bank was contractually obliged to offer
him a tracker mortgage at the end of his fixed rate period in October 2010.
However, the Panel was satisfied that, had the Bank offered a tracker mortgage at
this time, it was contractually entitled to offer the then prevailing interest rate at

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