Banks not at fault on tracker mortgage scandal
brianmlucey.wordpress.com/2017/ … e-scandal/
Banks not at fault on tracker mortgage scandal
I followed that link in the expectation of disagreeing with a lot of it. But it’s almost completely irrefutable I think !
I dont get his point at all. Its clear that the same thing happened across all banks and areas countrywide. Its not individuals that dictate this it had to come from HQ. Just because we don’t have names doesn’t mean that they are not responsible
“HQ”? That perfectly illustrates his point. Wherever the decision was made it was made by a person, not an acronym.
I believe its because we are averse to pointing the finger in public at an ordinary person…which might be as a result of the size of our country i.e. everybody knows everybody. There is a fear that if you publicly call out the person in the banks mortgage department who told you that you couldn’t go back on a tracker, it might be a friend of a friend or the son of your mother’s cousin. Then you would be the one who gets the blame for their public humiliation.
As a result we push responsibility to the top of the organisations and get our politicians to do the finger pointing. The guards, the bank CEOs, the HSE management etc.
Take Rimbaud’s case that was blanked by the Financial Regulator and presumably by the bank before that. You could use a case like that to get to those responsible by bringing the named people that Rimbaud spoke to, in front of some investigating authority and simply ask them why did they give that advice and who told them that it was what they should say. Take their email etc. Work your way up from there to find the person who signed it all off (or who is willing to fall on their sword for someone higher up).
Like the FBI breaking up a racket*, you have to start at the bottom to get the people at the top.
*at least according to the movies
Anybody who works in a large company knows the decision was made by committee with a recommendation from legal.
Anyone who has ever worked with a lawyer knows that they don’t make recommendations.
Besides, the point is that all of those are people.
AIB Lawyer who wants a career in bank: “it’s a commercial decision, there are risks, if you want I could get a Senior Counsel’s view? Oh you don’t ?”
I agree with you that a committee discussed this.
What this scandal needs is a whistleblower. Lots of people were given packages by the bank and might have a grudge. Although, having spent a career in the bank, they have no morals.
I have direct experience of this having defended two attempts to remove me from a tracker - in both cases the legal advice I received indicated the bank had the right to remove me from the tracker rate.
As much as the bank bashers want to sweep the legalities under the rug - the bank many cases was perfectly entitled to remove people from their trackers.
I think you’re the first holder of a tracker mortgage to make this honest admission but I think your case is typical i.e. the banks had the contractual right to take borrowers of trackers but issues (e.g. consumer protection, fairness, political pressure, legal delays) have protected the borrowers. We hear a great deal about the courts being “unable” to deal with tracker cases but is it simply that the banks have the law on their side? (Of course, the banks write the contracts and give themselves lots of wriggle-room but no-one was forced to sign up!. )
In that light, It is very odd to hear the moral outrage from politicians and, especially, the accusations of collusion among the banks. The Brian Lucey blog post also looks very different in this light - he wants to expose the individual bankers who pursued tracker mortgages but wouldn’t it be a dereliction of duty if they allowed borrowers to keep loss-making trackers to which they were not strictly entitled?
This “scandal” has been simmering for years - did the politicians and the media come on board only when the banks future was secure (Grazie mille, Sig. Draghi !)
You two should meet for a drink and put Ireland’s problems to rights
Are we supposed to believe your hunches and ramblings or the Central Bank ?
I will never cease to be amazed at the phenomenon on the pin that boils down to: Irish people deserve to be punished
jmc is the most egregious example but there’s a few others
Ooh, touchy! But I’ll stay here and discuss the issues, if that’s OK with you.
Not fair comment on Luan who simply gave us the benefit of the legal advices he received regarding his own mortgages.
Blame me for asking awkward questions but do you actually think that Irish Times article has the answers?
You highlight a statement about 21,000 trackers which the IT attributes to the Central Bank but that is not what Philip Lane told the Oireachtas Committee.
And did you notice that the court case was said to be " one of the first successful tracker mortgage cases taken since the scandal broke" although in fact it was settled out of court without the terms being published. And yes, I see she got financial satisfaction but my questions remain. What a shame if she settled when she could have created a legal precedent for other tracker holders.
It’s true that one group of Irish mortgage holders will benefit- I don’t begrudge them and the Irish banks can suck it up. But let’s be honest with each other about these mortgages and let’s tone down the moral outrage if the banks did not break the law.
Of course, the next time an Irish bank collapses, I’m sure all this will have been forgotten in the ECB and Sig. Draghi’s successor won’t be like bad M. Trichet or any of those nasty people on the Pin wanting to punish the Irish.
The facts are an uncomfortable truth for those who hop on the bandwagon of public opinion.
Unlike some I have read the contracts, taken legal advice and negotiated successfully with two banks on this matter. My outcome was successful because I focused on the Consumer Protection Code rather than the underlying mortgage agreement which offered me no protection.
So the issue is that customers were badly advised?
Sorry but you’re all over place. At no stage in this debacle have people said they are only pointing to the mortgages’ clauses. The Consumer Protection Code, being the framework in which banks must operate, is central a bank’s dealings with its customers . There’s no “bandwagon”. “Tracker Mortgage Scandal” doesn’t just refer to the mortgage document. And I think no one is saying it does.
Btw - given that you seem to be a professional landlord isn’t it arguable you’re not a “consumer” ?
The consumer code of practice governs all financial products - advice, protection, savings, insurance and the banks. It also defines a consumer transaction - As something less than €2m
In terms of being all over the place, I seem to have missed the many references in the media and this thread to the banks legal right to move some borrowers off their trackekers and the CPP (a document for the most part that is principle based) being the regulatory tool that allows the CBoI to arm twist the banks into providing redress.
Perhaps you might quote some them
All Banks and Insurance agents are Regulated by the Central Bank. As far as I am aware all those institutions have to pay fees to the Central Bank to be regulated. How much and what percentage I do not know. However, you read a lot and see, regulated by the central bank of Ireland to register yourself as a bank or insurance, as you are required to have a modicum of reserve funding in case of a flood or a bank run, or a lot of crashes. Loyds are underwriters of insurances.
At no stage did anyone in the media, or any politician, say that the banks were acting in accordance with the mortgage contracts. Instead we got lots of outrage - FOT was not alone in calling for criminal charges against bankers for the trackers (and not for the reckless practice of giving out trackers in the first place).
The banks are subject to a code of conduct and have fiduciary obligations but the goalposts seem to be shifting. The Central Bank has been engaged on this for years and it published an updated report earlier this year stating that “approximately 9,900 customer accounts have been identified as impacted by lenders, as part of the Examination, as at end February 2017” .
How has this number increased to 21,000?
Michael Somers, formerly Head of the NTMA now AIB director, gave interesting insights on Marian Finucane yesterday. Said banks were acting on legal advice, not considering ethics. Trackers and fixed rate mortgages were roughly equivalent until ECB pushed dates to zero.
Lots of sympathy for next generation who can’t get a mortgage but no one makes the connection with NPLs.
Starting about 38 minutes in:
cdn.rasset.ie/manifest/audio/20 … ifest.m3u8
They all acted on the exactly the same wrong legal advice at exactly the same time, which was to their benefit and screwed the customers. If it looks like a duck, quacks like duck, it’s a duck. They had to have known what they were doing was wrong and illegal, they bluffed and lost but in doing so it cost a lot of people heartache and stress, what about those that lost their homes.