Tracker Mortgage Decision Reference 2023-0010

• Case Outcome: Rejected
• Reference: 2023-0010
• Date: 23 January 2023
• Year: 2023
• Subject Matter: Tracker Mortgage
• Finantial Sector: Banking
• Conducts Complained Of: Failure to offer a tracker rate throughout the life of the mortgage

Decision Ref:

2023-0010

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

Background

This complaint relates to a mortgage loan account (account ending 6689) which is held by

the Complainant with the Provider. The mortgage loan which is the subject of this

complaint is secured on the Complainant’s residential investment property.

The loan amount was for £220,000.00 and the term of the loan was 20 years, which was

subsequently extended to 25 years. The Mortgage Loan Offer Letter dated 08 June 2000,

outlines that the interest rate applicable to the loan was the Provider’s investment

variable interest rate of 5.64%.

The Complainant’s Case

The Complainant submits that she drew down a mortgage loan under mortgage loan

account ending 6689 with the Provider in November 2000, on a variable rate of interest

“as this was the only rate offered at the time”.

The Complainant submits that she applied for another mortgage loan with the Provider in

2008 under mortgage loan account ending 8314. The Complainant states that she was

advised by her mortgage broker at the time to place mortgage loan account ending 6689

and mortgage loan account ending 8314 on tracker interest rates.

- 2 -

/Cont’d…

The Complainant submits that she contacted the Provider to place mortgage loan accounts

ending 6689 and 8314 on tracker interest rates in or around March 2008. The Complainant

outlines that she applied to the Provider for “two Mandates for both Mortgages”. The

Complainant details that she telephoned the Provider a short time after she had signed

and sent both mandates to the Provider, to confirm that they had arrived.

The Complainant states that the Provider’s representative confirmed that “both signed

Mandates had arrived and both Mortgage [ending 6669] and Mortgage [ending 8314]

were now on tracker rates”.

The Complainant outlines that she received notification from the Provider of a varied rate

increase on mortgage loan account ending 6689 on or around 11 August 2008. The

Complainant submits that she contacted the Provider, to inform the Provider that it had

omitted to place mortgage loan account ending 6689 on a tracker interest rate. The

Complainant asserts that she was informed by the Provider’s representative during this

telephone conversation that it was “too late at this stage to place the mortgage on a

tracker rate”. The Complainant details that the Provider “also claimed not to have received

the signed mandate”. The Complainant further states that the Provider “denies having any

telephone conversations with [her]” and “even denied the telephone conversation

confirming both mortgages were placed on a tracker rate had taken place”. The

Complainant refers to a typed and signed statement from a witness who was present

when the Complainant telephoned the Provider.

The Complainant notes that she received correspondence from the Provider in or around

May 2010 in respect of mortgage loan account ending 6689 outlining that “there was an

error on the part of [the Provider] in that the forms may have been mislaid.” The

Complainant maintains that the forms she completed together with the top-up application

in or around “March 2008 was returned” to the Provider.

In addition, the Complainant maintains that the Provider did not act in her best interests as

a customer.

The Complainant is seeking the following:

(a) A tracker interest rate be applied to mortgage loan account ending 6689;

(b) A refund of the interest she has overpaid since April 2008; and

(c) Compensation of €20,000 for “trauma” caused by the Provider’s error.