Bank of Ireland tracker mortgage % increase

pandersturn

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I agree that it is wrong to laugh at others' expense.
But at the same time I think that it is right that people who know about this sort of stuff make their points on here.
It would be wrong of us to sit back and let the people affected talk only amongst themselves, all agreeing how bad this change is and that it must be illegal. And then from that standpoint pay out thousands in legal fees to then find out that people who weren't affected (e.g. the judge) didn't agree with them.

yes like i said all the above i don't object to constructive posts its the puerile posts that i and others object to.

BR_Landlord

brit1234 wrote: »

If you do a business deal for 10s-100s of thousands of pounds then you read the contract and understand it.

I wouldn't use the word stupid but Reckless comes to mind.

At the time there was too much rubbish about people becoming buy to let millionaires. Greed replaced common sense.

Oh for heavens sake. It seems to me you are the only one on this thread with a fixation about Buy to Let "millionaires" and you call everyone who rents out a property greedy. Grow up.

rate_hike

If anyone of the 1200 who have any letters from the Bank Justin Selig is asking if you would be kind enougth to Email them to him.

Congratulatioms to you for getting off. Hope we all celerbrate with you at a later date.:beer:

BR_Landlord

rate hike
thank you for pointing out the press release from BofI. However, I have dark thoughts... looks to me like Bof I have identified two categories of borrowers where there is some sort of evidence that would overturn their actions if taken to court, or investigated by the OFT (such as sending out a particular letter in the one case) and in taking those borrowers out of the rate hike, the BofI are more likely to be able to keep the rest locked into the contract clause.
It also throws down some bones for the various Financial watchdogs who can say they have got a result in the name of fairness etc.
Am I the only one who sees the 1200 let offs as a bone throwing exercise?

rate_hike

I personally think the Bank planed to do this from day one, to make them look good to FCA etc

BR_Landlord

Which means the actions of BofI in taking these 1200 out of the rise is a result of the meeting with Martin Wheatley FCA and nicely gets him and the Financial Conduct Authority off the hook... for the BAnk of Ireland it's a sacrifice of 1200 for the sake of good publicity all round and keep 12,300 with double their previous monthly payments.

In terms of OFT and the legal arguments which I believe have already been presented to the Bof I, Looks like BofI lawyers have responded quickly by identifying two sets of circumstances that would lead their case to fail if included.

BR_Landlord

rate_hike wrote: »

I personally think the Bank planed to do this from day one, to make them look good to FCA etc

I don't think so. I think their lawyers found some shaky cases which could bring the whole house of cards down and they are responding quickly.

Their original statement coming out of the meeting with Wheatley about treating everyone fairly was thought to be adequate at the time, looked good in the newspapers and sounded great coming out of FCA.

Thrugelmir

BR_Landlord wrote: »

Looks like BofI lawyers have responded quickly by identifying two sets of circumstances that would lead their case to fail if included.

I'm sure that there's been a thorough review going on for some time.

Jaketake

I think that Bank Of Ireland saw the article in the Sunday newspaper about being "illegal" and so acted upon this. The whole thing is unfair and the sooner the bank realises this the better for all. It is only a matter of time before justice will prevail.

Congratulations to those who got those letters. Fingers crossed the rest of us will get them as well. Martin's blog sums up the case very nicely and bank of ireland should pay heed.

Thrugelmir

Jaketake wrote: »

I think that Bank Of Ireland saw the article in the Sunday newspaper about being "illegal" and so acted upon this. The whole thing is unfair and the sooner the bank realises this the better for all. It is only a matter of time before justice will prevail.

Banks don't base decisions on newspaper articles.