Tracker Mortgage Decision Reference 2025-0209

• Case Outcome: Rejected
• Year: 2025
• Reference: 2025-0209
• Date: 19 December 2025
• Subject Matter: Tracker Mortgage
• Finantial Sector: Banking
• Conducts Complained Of: Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

Decision Ref:

2025-0209

Sector:

Banking

Product / Service:

Tracker Mortgage

Conduct(s) complained of:

Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of

the mortgage

Outcome:

Rejected

LEGALLY BINDING DECISION OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN

The complaint relates to a mortgage loan account held by the Complainants with the

Provider. The mortgage loan that is the subject of this complaint was secured on the

Complainants’ private dwelling house.

The Letter of Offer dated 25 May 2005 provided for a loan amount of €650,000.00 and the

term of the loan was 25 years.

The Complainants’ Case

The Complainants submit that they drew down their mortgage on 21 June 2005 in the

amount of €650,000.00 for a term of 25 years, with the first five years on an interest only

basis. The Complainants submit that the applicable interest rate was a 1-year fixed interest

rate of 2.75%, which was to convert to a tracker interest rate of ECB + 0.85% on expiry of

the fixed interest period.

The Complainants submit that what “actually occurred was at variance with what [the

Provider] agreed” as the “Home Mortgage on expiry of 1 Year Fixed rate rolled onto a

higher…standard home loan variable Interest Rate” and the “Variable Tracker Rate agreed

at outset [on] 18/05/2005 by [the Provider] was not applied on 20/06/2006.” - 2 -

/Cont’d

The Complainants detail that they “only noticed [the Provider’s] error in March 2007 and

wrote to [the Provider],” with the Provider then issuing a letter “stating [the] Tracker Rate

[was] applied to [the] account for the 1st time on 29/03/2007” on a “Tracker Rate 3.75% +

- 2 -

/Cont’d…

[ECB] 0.60% Margin [4.35%] as Loan to Value < (less than) 60% which equates to 4.35%”

which was “9 months [too] late.”

The Complainants submit that they were “overcharged from 21/06/2006 – 29/03/2007 (9

months)” as the “Tracker Rate was already agreed in writing by [the Provider] in 2005” and

that no “further correspondence was required” as they “assumed what was agreed was

agreed.” The Complainants further contend that this “more beneficial Tracker rate for

customers should have applied from 20/06/2006.”

The Complainants detail that they “never received any letters from [the Provider]

concerning the Tracker Rate in 6/2006” on either 10 June 2006 or 13 June 2006, and that

they “were meticulous in their affairs.” The Complainants further detail that even “if the

alleged letter dated Tuesday 13/06/2006 arrived on Friday 16/06/2006 the customers

Tracker was to take effect on Tuesday 20/06/2006.”

The Complainants contend that if the Provider “can prove beyond doubt that they did in

fact send letters dated 10/06/2006 and 13/06/2006, they breached the Consumer

Protection Code as they did not give [them] adequate time to respond or assimilate the

information.” The Complainants further contend that “there is no expiry date stated when

the 1-year fixed rate mortgage was to expire,” that there “should have been a call-to-

action date, but [the Provider] omitted to let their customers know”.

The Complainants submit that they obtained documentation from the Provider by way of a

subject access request in October 2010 and the Provider “confirmed [the] data [the]

customers received was the full data disclosure.” The Complainants submit that the subject

access request in 2010 “did not contain letters purportedly sent from [the Provider] dated

10/06/2006 or 13/06/2006” and the Complainants state that it appears “strange that

these important Letters allegedly posted by [the Provider] were missing”.

The Complainants submit that the mortgage loan account statements which issued from

29 March 2007 onwards in respect of the mortgage loan account refer to an incorrect

interest rate.

The Complainants state that they were “never in arrears with [the Provider]”

and that “All mortgage contracts were repaid as contracted.”

The Complainants are seeking compensation in the amount of €4,615.00 “or higher given

the 16 years of frustration” as follows:

€2,000.00 for the interest rate overcharge from 21 June 2006 to 29 March 2007;

€500.00 for a time value of money (TVM) payment;

€500.00 @ 15% private dwelling house compensation or appropriate minimum amount,

whichever is higher;

€1,000.00 compensation “for knowingly, failing to honour Agreement, 2-3 years’ time

wasting”; and

€615.00 for a legal advice payment.