Bank of Ireland tracker mortgage % increase

rate_hike

Like neverdispergirl said even baristers sometimes get it wrong. might of been Clifford Chance.?

Flying_Banana

We just opened the letter from BoI. They will reduce my differential back to the original amount. It appears that anyone who drew down or overpaid on their flexy mortgage had a standard letter of the new "account details" stating;

"Interest Rate (Current Rate: x.xx%):
From the date of this letter until the end of the mortgage term, the interest rate we will charge will be 0.69% above the BOE Base Rate."

This statement was unconditional.

BoI have admitted that this was "ambiguous" although it appears clear to my wife, and she is a lawyer.

If anyone who has such a letter now complains they should be able to go back to their original differential on the same grounds, i.e. the letter clearly implies that the differential is fixed for the term of the mortgage. If any subsequent drawdown or overpayment was done in reliance of the interest rate being fixed, the conditions under which promissory estoppel apply are fulfilled and this binds Bank of Ireland.

If you do not have a copy of the letter you should still complain on the same grounds and use the wording I have supplied in inverted commas above. It would be up to BoI to prove that they did not send such a letter. If you drew down or overpaid you got one. We have over 50 of them.

The conditions for promissory estoppel are;

1 BoI made a promise, "Interest Rate (Current Rate: x.xx%):
From the date of this letter until the end of the mortgage term, the interest rate we will charge will be 0.69% above the BOE Base Rate."

2 The promise is not ambiguous. (BoI are claiming ambiguity to try to avoid promissory estoppel.)

3 The customer acted "to their detriment" i.e drew down, (or arguably just signed up to flex mortgage believing they could draw down in the future) on the basis of the promise made.

4 Subsequent breaking of the promise is estopped.

Good luck if this applies to you. FB

rate_hike

Hi Flying Banana.
Would you be kind enougth to Email your letter you recieved to Justin Selig on property 118 as he thinks it might help the rest of us,

Flying_Banana

Dear Rate Hike,
I have done as you suggested and sent a copy of the letter to Justin at 118 together with some of my earlier correspondence.

BoI are trying to wriggle out of promissory estoppel applied to commercial contracts by only admitting that the "From the date of this letter until the end of the mortgage term, the interest rate we will charge will be x.xx% above the BOE Base Rate." is "ambiguous". It clearly is not, but this may have to go to court.

For domestic customers there is the protection of consumer law which means that any ambiguity is interpreted in favour of the consumer. Promissory estoppel therefore follows. The institution is assumed to have a skilled legal team which is responsible for saying what the institution mean.

Commercial customers are assumed to have a legal team so have to show that there is no ambiguity. Application of the rules of interpretation should suffice.

Best wishes
FB

JimmyTheWig

Flying_Banana wrote: »

If anyone who has such a letter now complains they should be able to go back to their original differential on the same grounds, i.e. the letter clearly implies that the differential is fixed for the term of the mortgage.

Are they not saying that the people who received such a letter are the 1200 people who they have conceded to?
Or do you think there are other groups of people who might have received such a letter who the BoI are trying to keep quiet about?

rate_hike

Snipit of an Email recieved from Justin,

His opinion is that the reason the Bank has given for the basis of the reversal has no legal standing. ( on the 1200 )

BR_Landlord

rate_hike wrote: »

Snipit of an Email recieved from Justin,

His opinion is that the reason the Bank has given for the basis of the reversal has no legal standing. ( on the 1200 )

Ian,
I thought the promissory estoppel was created when the BofI sent out the additional letters to the people it has removed from the rate hike. They discovered this would be used against them so they took these cases out. The fact they say the letter was "ambiguous" seems like more smoke and mirrors, as they know the real case for ambiguity lies in the clause they are pursuing with the remaining 12,300 borrowers. Or have I got this wrong?

rate_hike

BR Landlord.

Have,nt got a clue out of my depth, thats why I joined Class Action as its ther feild of expertise, its now getting complicated.

Who,s IAN ?

pandersturn

BR_Landlord wrote: »

Ian,
I thought the promissory estoppel was created when the BofI sent out the additional letters to the people it has removed from the rate hike. They discovered this would be used against them so they took these cases out. The fact they say the letter was "ambiguous" seems like more smoke and mirrors, as they know the real case for ambiguity lies in the clause they are pursuing with the remaining 12,300 borrowers. Or have I got this wrong?

i think you have got it right ian.

BR_Landlord

rate_hike wrote: »

BR Landlord.

Have,nt got a clue out of my depth, thats why I joined Class Action as its ther feild of expertise, its now getting complicated.

Who,s IAN ?

You're not wrong!
(sorry got names muddled up)