Bank of Ireland tracker mortgage % increase

stormymonday

Looking at the BOI Web site the changes they have made effectively put all the residential tracker mortgage payers on the equivalent of their SVR which is 4.49%

Presumably they will struggle to justify charging more than the SVR since it should reflect the true market cost of borrowing which is effectively their justification for stiffing those on lifetime trackers. However, it is a moot point whether the 'lifetime' tracker offered now has any real meaning if it is no different from a bog standard SVR. I think one pertinent point in any possible mis-selling claim or legal challenge could be whether the bank was offering limited period trackers at the same time as the lifetime tracker but at a lower interest rate. If a person opted for a tracker at higher interest rate because of the 'lifetime' element when they could have had a limited period tracker at a lower rate before reverting to the SVR then they might be able to claim they were misled when they were making their decision.

plimsolls_on

stormymonday wrote: »

Looking at the BOI Web site the changes they have made effectively put all the residential tracker mortgage payers on the equivalent of their SVR which is 4.49%

Presumably they will struggle to justify charging more than the SVR since it should reflect the true market cost of borrowing which is effectively their justification for stiffing those on lifetime trackers. However, it is a moot point whether the 'lifetime' tracker offered now has any real meaning if it is no different from a bog standard SVR. I think one pertinent point in any possible mis-selling claim or legal challenge could be whether the bank was offering limited period trackers at the same time as the lifetime tracker but at a lower interest rate. If a person opted for a tracker at higher interest rate because of the 'lifetime' element when they could have had a limited period tracker at a lower rate before reverting to the SVR then they might be able to claim they were misled when they were making their decision.

You make a good point, but a charge of £15 for a copy of your own agreement, I dread to think what they will charge for that info.... I bought mine in 2002, internet mortgages just didn't exist then, I can't even remember where I found it, I think in the money section of Sunday Times, and only took it because it was the only product on offer that had no redemption or early penalties, etc.. blah blah. I needed that flexibility at the time and it wasn't particularly cheap, my mortgage agrement states 5% plus 1% base rate, not cheap.

plimsolls_on

BR_Landlord wrote: »

You are making me laugh now. Do you work for B of I?

Have you actually read the letter we are all talking about??????

THE LETTER THE LETTER is evasive because it does not quote the condition to which it refers.

lol lol lol

I have written to BofI tonight asking for documentation showing that their capital reserves are not sufficient for EU rules. Let's see what they say... Oh, yes I got THE LETTER !!! :rotfl:

Chope1973

I think all of you who say that we should stand together are correct.

Personally I chose a mortgage linked to the bank of England Base rate specifically, as I did not trust the banks independent variable rate, as they are entitled to change this whenever they want.

If I wanted to be done over by the banks , I would have picked the banks variable rate.

Many have mentioned that it is within the terms and conditions, so that we just have to suck it up........not the case, the financial ombudsman is there to ensure that all T&C's are fair. Clearly if you sign up to a bank of England base rate, and they can change it at anytime due to T&C;s this this not fair practice.

So I say to all just prepared to suck it up. DONT.......the more people that fight it and complain to the ombudsman, the more likely it is to be overturned.

At the end of the day, we bought into a product, and for once we are sitting very pretty, if it had been the other way, they would not be so keen to let us out of our contracts

.......Is it any wonder banking has a bad name

Ohhhh.....and the clause states something about dramatic changes in the market, and about the retaining the existance of the bank...If this is the case why are they still offering new mortgages to new customer as 3.25%......They are taking the mick!!!!!!!

Chope1973

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Not gleeful at all.

Just bored by all these "oh, it wasn't my fault, my lucks run out, I didn't prepare. No one told me gambling on interest rates was dangerous....wheres my compensation" type theories.

I know it sounds harsh, but if people took products that they could'nt afford if base rates hit 3%, why on earth were they taking those products?

You appear to want the Irish tax payer to pay the price for people gambling. I don't think that's fair.

For those who have lost jobs etc, I have genuine sympathy, but again, this isn't so much the banks fault, this happens sadly, to many.

Everyone seemingly is looking for someone to blame and someone to take compensation from. Anyone, so long as they don't have to take any responsibility themselves. We have one posters who's decided it's not his fault he's undertaking BTL, not his fault he has this mortgage, not his fault that he won't reduce the price to sell the property, presumably as it's not his fault he can't as he's on an interest only mortgage and has no equity and not his fault for trusting salesmen. It's a racket.

For those who have several mortgages theres even less sympathy. It's pure greed and people have found themselves burned.

I think you sadly misunderstand the issue, its not whether I can afford it......I am sitting very pretty on my current mortgage payments..., and even with the new payments, Im still ok, even though there are better deals in the market...The point is that I took a gamble and committed to bank of England Base rate changes, I did this because my research indicated that this was the best thing to do.......There are T&C is the small print that enable the BOI to do this......This is not about who signed up to something and got burned. This is about BOI renaging on the contract due to some small print that basically says they can change the main point of the contract for any reason at anytime.

If you want this to be a sign of Ireland business integrity...then I fear you may never get out of recession....this is not about people b*tching because things have gone against them.....this is about being pure and simply being conned.....


.

pinkllama

Are all Bank of Ireland BTL mortgage holders affected?
I took out a BTL 3 year fixed rate mortgage in early 2006. in 2009 it reverted to a tracker (base+1.75%)

The mortgage was taken out with The Bank of Ireland, not Bristol & West or other company.

I haven't received a letter yet.

sm1234

If a fruit company offered to supply you with bananas for the next 20 years for 10p per kilo, or some other product/price that clearly doesn't cover the true cost and lots of people bought into it, you might well take a punt. Sooner or later though the company would rightly go bust and you wouldn't get the deal for the lifetime of the offer. Any fair and reasonable person would suck it up and accept that they were lucky to have it so good (too good) for a while and move on.

BofI was/is essentially bust, the bailout is subsidising mortgage holders low rates. Low rate mortgage holders are not paying their way. It's therefore not unreasonable for banks to invoke small print in this very 'unusual time' to make low-rate mortgage holders pay the true cost of their debt, rather than all the rest of us paying it through bail outs.

I feel sorry for people who stupidly took on too much debt, but I feel more sorry for the people who chose (or had the choice forced on them) to take the hard path of renting badly regulated housing stock/saving at ever decreasing rates, waiting for the day that governments no longer artificially sustain overpriced property and allow prices to fall to their true value.

It's a zero sum game in the pain stakes - when one groups lot goes up, the other lot goes down. Your point of view will probably be most effected by how this news hits your pocket. On a moral level, I think the fairest outcome is clear - mortgage holders should pay their way. It sounds callous to want mortgage holders to suffer, but the only reason we want that to happen is to improve the lot of the rest of us.

cs1800

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Not gleeful at all.

Just bored by all these "oh, it wasn't my fault, my lucks run out, I didn't prepare. No one told me gambling on interest rates was dangerous....wheres my compensation" type theories.

I know it sounds harsh, but if people took products that they could'nt afford if base rates hit 3%, why on earth were they taking those products?

You appear to want the Irish tax payer to pay the price for people gambling. I don't think that's fair.

For those who have lost jobs etc, I have genuine sympathy, but again, this isn't so much the banks fault, this happens sadly, to many.

Everyone seemingly is looking for someone to blame and someone to take compensation from. Anyone, so long as they don't have to take any responsibility themselves. We have one posters who's decided it's not his fault he's undertaking BTL, not his fault he has this mortgage, not his fault that he won't reduce the price to sell the property, presumably as it's not his fault he can't as he's on an interest only mortgage and has no equity and not his fault for trusting salesmen. It's a racket.

For those who have several mortgages theres even less sympathy. It's pure greed and people have found themselves burned.

You miss the point - yes it was a gamble and I won I expect to be paid out on my bet or in this case get the low interest rate, if I had lost fairly I would not be complaining - so get your facts right before you start having a go at people complaining with justification.

Thrugelmir

Chope1973 wrote: »

The point is that I took a gamble and committed to bank of England Base rate changes, I did this because my research indicated that this was the best thing to do.......

.

Banks aren't casinos. Directors of banks are duty by bound by statutory law, regulations set out by the FSA and the BOE as how to run their business in a fit and proper manner.

The new banking rules were set ou in 2010 with full implementation by 2019. So higher rates were always coming.

So those speculators (as they are not investors) that don't understand their "bets" are odds on to be the losers in the race to the line.

BR_Landlord

"The bank claims its terms and conditions allow it to increase the differential between the base rate and the rate it charges homeowners on some tracker mortgages. Not all tracker borrowers have this clause, so not all are hit."
Helen Knapman (Source: Money Saving Expert website)