Tracker Mortgage Decision Reference 2026-0043

• Case Outcome: Rejected
• Year: 2026
• Reference: 2026-0043
• Date: 13 March 2026
• Subject Matter: Tracker Mortgage
• Finantial Sector: Banking
• Conducts Complained Of: Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage product,Failure to process instructions

Decision Ref:

2026-0043

Sector:

Banking

Product / Service:

Tracker Mortgage

Conduct(s) complained of:

Refusal to move existing tracker to a new mortgage

product

Failure to process instructions

Outcome:

Rejected

LEGALLY BINDING DECISION OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN

Background

This complaint relates to two mortgage loan accounts held by the Complainants, which

were secured on the Complainants’ private dwelling house.

The Complainants drew down mortgage loan account ending 2519 in February 2004 in the

sum of €185,000.00.

The Complainants drew down mortgage loan account ending 3437 in December 2007 in

the sum of €181,000.00.

The Complainants’ Case

The Complainants submit that they took out a mortgage loan with the Provider under

mortgage loan account ending 2519 on a fixed interest rate in 2004 which they later

switched to a tracker interest rate of ECB + 0.80% in October 2007.

The Complainants state that their issue with the Provider began when they approached

the Provider for a “top up loan, or an equity release, for the amount of approximately

€18,000” in 2007. The Complainants submit that when they applied for an equity release,

- 2 -

/Cont’d…

there was no need for the Provider to require them to redeem their existing tracker

mortgage loan.

The Complainants submit that they “required €18,000 but the reckless lending policies of

this provider set a minimum of €40,000 as the equity release minimum amount of the

loan”. The Complainants submit they “could have increased their equity release amount to

€40,000 and their existing loan would not have been needed to be altered”.

The Complainants submit that the Provider informed them at the time that a tracker

interest rate was not available in respect of the Provider’s equity release product.

The Complainants submit that “their entire loan was rewritten (churned) resulting in a rate

of 5.35%” for a top-up loan to tidy up their finances. The Complainants submit that the

“wrong began when, whomever dealt with the customers in late 2007, decided it was

appropriate to churn the entire loan to an equity release loan and increase the rate

applicable to the couple’s loan from 4.80% to 5.35% especially given the original loan had

only then recently availed of a Tracker Rate and hence the loan became a Tracker

Mortgage”.

The Complainants submit that “the interest rate applicable to the loan at the time of the

enquiry was 4.80% which was increased to 5.35% over 20 years which was a difference of

0.55% at the outset but this difference grew to an astonishing level”.

The Complainants submit that the gravity of what occurred began to impact them as they

lost out on their tracker rate.

The Complainants state that “the Provider cannot attempt to blame the broker or solicitor

in this instance as neither are involved”. The Complainants submit “what occurred in 2007

was wrong and the loan was arranged in the wrong way”.

The Complainants submit that the Provider “is in clear breach of its obligations” under the

Consumer Protection Code 2006.

The Complainants are seeking:

(a) A tracker interest rate of ECB + 0.80% to be applied to the mortgage loan account;

and

(b) A refund of overpaid interest from December 2007.

The Provider’s Case