Bank of Ireland increase differential on tracker rates

Bank of Ireland increase differential on tracker rates

10:32 AM, 28th February 2013, About 11 years ago 1862

Text Size

The story of the Bank of Ireland decision to increase to the differential (interest rate margin) on  tracker mortgages started on this forum when a professional landlord contacted Property118 within minutes of a letter from Bank of Ireland landing on his door mat. What ensued was outrage from landlords and affected residential mortgage borrowers. The story was quickly picked up by the National Media as it wasn’t just the 13,500 affected borrowers who were worried.

Will this set a precedent for other mortgage lenders to follow?

Property118 reacted by using funds donated to The GOOD Landlords Campaign to underwrite the cost of a barristers opinion on the legality of the Bank of Ireland’s actions. The remainder of this thread,one of the most read and most commented threads of all time on Property118, continues to tell the story as it unfolds.

If you want to skip the story and cut to the chase simply CLICK HERE

Of the 13,500 affected borrowers, 1,200 have had the decision reversed by Bank of Ireland. With additional support and pressure we believe all affected borrowers can and will see justice done.

___________________________________________

Lee, a professional Landlord asks, “help! I have just received a letter from the Bank of Ireland stating they want to increase the differential on my tracker rates.

I have 12 mortgages with the Bank of Ireland previously Bristol and West. I have been on a base rate tracker of 1.75% above base, but now Bank of Ireland are using some fine print claiming they have to recapitalise and saying the ‘new differential will be 4.49%.

How can I fight back?”

The original policy wording seems to be:

6 INTEREST

Charging interest at a tracker rate

(j) Unless we change the differential (if any) under condition 6 (n), we will not change the tracker rate unless the base rate changes.

(m) in condition 6 (n):
– a “positive differential” means a percentage which we add to the base rate to arrive at the tracker rate; and a “negative differential” means a percentage which we subtract from the base rate to arrive at the tracker rate.

(n) We may reduce a positive differential or increase a negative differential at our discretion by giving you not less than seven days written notice. This means that we can change the differential in a way that is favourable to you.

The above seems to indicate that they can reduce the rate in my favour, but not give them the right to increase it. Am I correct?


Share This Article


Comments

Lucy McKenna

16:48 PM, 6th April 2015, About 9 years ago

We did the same Gary, but I have always supported action and I guess that we can still support further action. Look forward to hearing.

Cheryl Larkin

18:24 PM, 7th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Paul Brindley" at "06/04/2015 - 09:54":

I fully understand that you are a business man and I would expect you to charge a fee for your services but your posts imply that I am apathetic and I am not doing anything to help myself but I am not a legal or contract professional and quite frankly at a loss as to who can help. All I was saying is that if you have found something that could be useful why not offer your services for a fee.

Paul Brindley

21:04 PM, 7th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Cheryl Larkin" at "07/04/2015 - 18:24":

Hi Cheryl, it's difficult for the individual borrower, you see people need to come together, put their money into a pot, yes to pay a proper level of fees, and also take this to another practical level at the same time, making their complaints far more visible. Unless that happens, you've all lost.

Lucy McKenna

9:43 AM, 8th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Cheryl Larkin" at "07/04/2015 - 18:24":

I think that when fees for the BOI have been suggested they were always much higher that for the Bristol and West which I thought were reasonable and affordable. I would like to stand corrected but I remember a suggestion of £1500 when the Bristol and West were being quoted £500. There are thousands of affected BOI clients but a lot are homeowners and not investors so probably less able to find the fees. I think that suggesting these high fees probably made even the most interested run, it really was a turn off. The fees should at least have been scaled according to the number of people that were willing to sign up, not just a blanket suggestion. I believe with the BOI there is an actual pool of about 13,000 people far in excess of affected Bristol and West.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

9:48 AM, 8th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Just to remind you all that I have been working with Mark Smith from Cotswold Barristers on putting together a proposal to fund a Judicial Review of the FOS rulings. We are very close to being able to present the plan, we are just in the process of setting up an escrow account with BARCO to hold funds raised and we will then be in a position to reveal the proposal and terms of engagement. I expect this to happen within the month.

Watch this space!
.

Lucy McKenna

9:53 AM, 8th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Good news Mark, thank you. Happy to wait.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

10:21 AM, 8th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Take a look at this >>> http://www.property118.com/cml-statement-practice-launched-buy-let/73767/#comment-54213

Talk about shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted!!!
.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

9:46 AM, 14th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Judicial Review of Financial Ombudsman Service decisions re Bank of Ireland Tracker Premium Hike

Cotswold Barristers and Property118 are offering a course of action that will reward Early Adopters to fund a test case challenging the Financial Ombudsman Service (“FOS”) decisions relating to complaints raised in respect of the Bank of Ireland Tracker (“BoI”) Premium hike via a Judicial Review. Judicial Review of Financial Ombudsman Service decisions re Bank of Ireland Tracker Premium Hike

The purpose of the Judicial Review (“JR”) will be to place the arguments before the High Court for a declaration that the FOS has been irrational in rejecting the complaints, and for a statement of the correct legal position in the test case. This outcome, if positive, will then be available to support cases brought by other borrowers against the BoI, and if negative to bring claims in negligence against solicitors and brokers.

Early Adopters are invited to pay £1,000 into an escrow account at BARCO, which is operated by the Bar Council, the regulator of UK barristers. If at least 50 people become Early Adopters by 15th May 2015 Cotswold Barristers will prepare the necessary legal arguments to seek permission from the High Courts to commence the Judicial Review. If permission is granted Cotswold Barristers fee will be £8,000 + VAT. If permission for the review is declined or the minimum number of early adopters is not reached by 15th May the funds paid into BARCO will be refunded in full. This is the only financial obligation the early adopters will ever have to meet.

The remaining funds will be set-aside to underwrite the trial costs, which Cotswold Barristers will undertake on a no-win-no-fee basis, or to make provisions for adverse costs awards to the FOS in the event of the High Court upholding the FOS decision.

The outcome of the Judicial Review will be widely publicised and Property118 will be responsible for dealing with this, hence the requirements for continuing involvement of Property118.

After the closing date of 15th May 2015 all remaining affected borrowers will be invited to instruct Cotswold Barristers to act for them in respect of pursuing the Bank of Ireland for refunds and restoration of the correct terms on the basis that 50% of any refunds of over-payments to Bank of Ireland will be paid to Cotswold Barristers as a ‘damages based fee agreement’. If no overpayments are recovered then Cotswold Barristers will receive nothing from clients who have instructed on this basis.

Early Adopters will be represented by Cotswold Barristers in respect of refund claims and restoration of correct terms but will receive all of their potential refund, hence the incentive to become an Early Adopter. As stated above, there will be no other payment required of Early Adopters.
The risk taken by Early Adopters is that refunds cannot be guaranteed, hence a commercial decision will be necessary for anybody who makes an instruction on the basis of being an Early Adopter.

There is no guarantee that such a Judicial Review will provide a favourable ruling, hence there is a risk associated with becoming an Early Adopter, however Cotswold Barristers are sharing that risk on the basis of being paid only for results.

The letter of instruction to Cotswold Barristers in respect of becoming an Early Adopter can be found HERE
.

Tricia Collick

10:43 AM, 14th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Great, at least someone believes in us....Thanks Mark and Mark.

If anyone is still doubting their intentions, I was one of the early adopters before and I was refunded once we came to a halt because not enough people believed in them !

I hope this re-assures people that they aren't going to disappear with our money.

Lets go for the Banksters !

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

11:03 AM, 14th April 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tricia Collick" at "14/04/2015 - 10:43":

Hi Tricia

We couldn't disappear with the money even if we wanted to, we won't have it LOL
.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now