KBC Tracker Mortgage

Trevor Kent

DriverMad wrote: »

This is getting interesting.

On my Fixed Rate Instructions it states:

"Fixed rate repayments from the 1st May 2007 for the term as indicated above thereafter reverting to the company's standard variable rate."

There is no bold, nothing that I will loose tracker...

I rang and told me I will go on a variable rate not a tracker....

What should I do now. Do I have any case????

Were you on a fixed rate from the begining of your mortgage? My situation was that when I bought my house, I fixed the interest rate for 3 years. The contract I got stated that after the 3 years, my mortgage would default to a Tracker mortgage.

Some people here seem to think they are still giving out tracker mortgages. They are not, they are only giving them to people who had contracts stating the mortgage would default to a tracker after the fixed term. The contract states they have to do this so they have no choice.

I do feel sorry though for people who came off tracker mortgages back in the day onto fixed rate. Chances are your contract states you will default onto a standard variable rate once the fixed rate term ends.

Anyone had experience from KBC trying to get you to change to a variable rate mortgage by giving you some sort of financial reward for doing so? I have not myself but I did hear that banks are trying this.

maxer68

Trevor Kent wrote: »

I do feel sorry though for people who came off tracker mortgages back in the day onto fixed rate. Chances are your contract states you will default onto a standard variable rate once the fixed rate term ends.

Hi Trevor

The issue those who agreed trackers and who then took a 3 year / 5 year fixed is that KBC sent out unrequested forms with fixed rate deals, urging you to take a fixed rate out and not telling you that you would lose your tracker rate.

I and many others believe that this was done on purpose as there was a greater margin on fixed rates than tracker rates.

The key argument is the original mortgage document states very clearly that the variable rate will NEVER be more than 0.95% (or whatever agreed rate) above the ECB Refi rate. It does not say the word "tracker".

I'm waiting on the ombudsman final report and I'm hoping for a positive outcome. I, thankfully, have access to senior counsel who specialises in this end for payment of no more than a box of good chocs:D for initial opinion and I may have some good news - but until I get the ombudsman report and get some other papers from KBC, I cannot divulge it. - But if what I suspect is true, there could be some real hope on the horizon for those duped into giving up their trackers.

odonovanpm

I am in the exact same situation; I fixed in 2006 with no mention on the fixed rate form that KBC would be revoking their price promise of +1.1% on the ECB [as you stated tracker is not mentioned].

My loan agreement clearly states that (a) I am paying the "lenders variable rate", (b) the variable rate charged will be no more than 1.1% on the ECB, and (c) this rate will persist for the lifetime of the loan.

I am waiting on the final verdict from the ombudsman which is due over the next few weeks.

raglan

Hi Odonovanpm,

I lost my case with FSO. Wording was almost exact as yours.....wishing you good luck...it would be good if some of us got a good response as it may set a turnaround in decision.

odonovanpm

Hey Raglan,

I got the bad news yesterday; lost my case also. My opinion is the FSO are protecting the banks as if everyone with the same argument was to get their tracker back the banks would seriously struggle to cope. KBC failed to respond to the FSO in the time allowed and when I queried this it was greeted with a muted response.

Before submitting my case I sought advice from three legal professionals that all agreed that I had a genuine case. There is little doubt that the faceless FSO process defuses some of the argument and makes communication of the details more difficult.

KBC were very sure of themselves throughout and were confident that such cases would be dismissed. It may sound like bitter grapes [which it's not] but I believe that the entire system is corrupt and setup for the banks not to lose.

Who knew that a 20 page legal contract could be completed altered by a single italicised line of text that did not state any changes?

raglan

Hi odonovanpm,

Sorry to hear that.........I think you are dead right as I quoted stuff that I read on the Central Banks code of conduct that didn't seem to be met by KBC when they DUPED us....and didn't seem to matter. I queried also when KBC hadn't replied within the allocated time and was told that they allow for some delay!!

goldheart

Hi I am new this form and very interesting reading ! My 5yr fixed rate is up this week with ptsb. I can not find anything in my mortgage contract that states tracker rate. I have a letter from 2007 witch states:

" Please find attached the current options available to you, including our competiive tracker variable rate. If we do not receive a written instruction from you in relation to the above on or before jan 2007, we will automatically switch your loan to the tracker variable rate. "

The bank never explained to us what a tracker was and we fixed for security reasons as at the time the rate was good. Now they want 8.75% to fix it for 5 yrs again which we wont be doing.

Question 1 : Why were we automatically been put on tracker if we did not
instruct the bank otherwise when it has no mention in our
contract ?

Question 2 : Are we entitled to ask to be put on tracker now as we have not
been offered it this time and we are existing customers not new
ones ?

I have my doubts about it you dont know unless you ask so your help would be appreciated.

maxer68

goldheart wrote: »

Hi I am new this form and very interesting reading ! My 5yr fixed rate is up this week with ptsb. I can not find anything in my mortgage contract that states tracker rate. I have a letter from 2007 witch states:

" Please find attached the current options available to you, including our competiive tracker variable rate. If we do not receive a written instruction from you in relation to the above on or before jan 2007, we will automatically switch your loan to the tracker variable rate. "

The bank never explained to us what a tracker was and we fixed for security reasons as at the time the rate was good. Now they want 8.75% to fix it for 5 yrs again which we wont be doing.

Question 1 : Why were we automatically been put on tracker if we did not
instruct the bank otherwise when it has no mention in our
contract ?

Question 2 : Are we entitled to ask to be put on tracker now as we have not
been offered it this time and we are existing customers not new
ones ?

I have my doubts about it you dont know unless you ask so your help would be appreciated.

I assume the mortage started in 2007 and you stared off with a fixed rate for 5 years.

Its not for the bank to physically explain every rate, but they all had info on all the rates in various leaflets.

In this case it seems you did not opt for tracker rate in the first instance and therefore as trackers no longer exist, you cannot get one now.

But they shoudl give you other options including variable rate, 1 year fixed, 2 year fixed etc.

Interest rates are going nowhere but down / stable over the next couple of years, so I'd probably take the risk of variable. - At 8.75%, the 5 year rate is stupidly high.


AS for KBC - I am building a very strong case for trackers to be returned to those who were sent unsolicited fixed rate letters in 2006 and effectively duped out of the tracker rates. I can't say too much at present, but I have very positive initial legal opinion on the case and all papers and documentation are now being studied to build up a case that will initially be used in any reply to ombudsman and possibly thereafter in a high court action.

goldheart

Thanks for the reply, the mortgage was took out in 2006 and as we were building we were drawing down stage payments until we fixed for 5 yrs in 2007. If we researched and went with tracker when offered it in 2007 we could be still on it now but thats the way things go. A lesson to be learned !

raglan

Hi,

I tried to send you an email but your inbox must to full.

leighlinboy

Hi All

Thanks for all the info to date. Im pretty much resigned to the nasty sting of going back onto the variable rate when this 5 year fixed weight around my neck is removed in a few months time. I too was bombarded with letters and it certainly swayed me a little.

My next problem now is the variable rate that KBC are offering which is absolutely apalling. We are talking over 1% more than the AIB rate. 4.34 APR versus 3.29 i think

What is the current situation re switching providers, i know they have tightened up, has to be 80% ltv minimum ive read in some quarters.

Has anyone explored this avenue..........

leighlinboy

I wonder will the permanent tsb decision today withdrawing their appeal have any knock on effect on other banks, namely Kbc... Didn't appeal myself in the end, but appears 2000 others that didn't could be re compensated...

DriverMad

I wonder will KBC do anything? I made a complaint to the bank 2 years ago about but I did not follow it up with the ombudsman within the 15 days.

I wonder can I do anything now?

havertyf

Hi

We lost our tracker with KBC in the exact same circumstances as alot of other people on this thread. Fixed in 2006 for two years and when that finished went onto a variable rate. We only had the tracker rate for the first 3 months of our 35 year mortgage. We went to the FSO and lost that too. We felt our case was strong and senior council advised we had a 50% chance in court after we lost with the FSO. It would cost 40K euro to find out though. We signed our fixed rate term with IIB using their fixed rate term document, KBC subsequently bought IIB and beefed up alot of their documentation.

We compared IIB and KBC's fixed rate documents and it was clear that the IIB document was lacking in clarity compared to the updated KBC version. There was no doubt what would have been the situation if we had used the KBC fixed rate document.

In the argument against us by the FSO, they actually agreed with us on the lack of clarity of the IIB document which could give rise to confusion but their decision was based on the fact we should have known what "reverting to company's standard variable rate" would mean. Subseqently, I have tracked cases where the FSO have found in favour of the mortgage holders due to confusing documentation provided by the Irish owned banks. What's that about!

My feeling at the time we lost the FSO case was that KBC was not an Irish bank. Our original mortgage was with IIB who were part of Bank of Ireland and our documentation signed for the fixed rate was before KBC came in. I want to believe in the impartiality of the FSO but I'd like to know what is the overriding difference between the cases brought to the FSO relating to KBC trackers being lost compared to cases relating to Bank of Ireland, AIB and PSTB.

Is there any chance KBC are going to give us back our tracker, I'd say almost no chance ... why would they. There is nobody going to put the pressure on them to do it plus they have all these positive outcomes backed up by the various FSO cases brought against them.

Finally, as a KBC representative told me on the phone one time, "listen, the tracker is gone" effectively telling me to get over it, deal with it. I stopped feeling sick about it years ago, if we magically happen to get it back now, it will be a bonus.

leighlinboy

Hi There

Im guessing no , seem to be a very specific set of circumstances at a particular time.

There are differing reports , and the papers are saying different things

One saying banks will be under pressure to reviews cases where they didn’t indicate the implications of going back to the low rate tracker (generic statement)

Other saying it’s just in the exact case with TSB where they broke the 5 year tracker early and bank didn’t honour commitment to renew tracker

My own case was different in that I was bombarded with letters to go fixed as the ECB rate was flying up,so I fixed for 5 years, hoped id get tracker after that but low and behold variable arrived

Reverting to SVR at end of the term was there in (very) small print at the top ,wasnt to know tracker wouldn’t exist as a product,.and with variables at roughly the same rate at the probably didn’t think twice, was under pressure to fix as they were going up every month.

So im not holding my breath to be honest.

The thing that sickens me is that when I first signed for my mortgage they put me on a variable when I requested a tracker form the mortgage advisor,had to get it changed in the first month , as if they were after the tracker from literally day one before first payment was taken.

I didn’t make a complaint as I seen may others on this page do it and other threads and

Reading plenty of comments saying anyone that stupid to give up their tracker doesn’t deserver to get it back , did a degree in business and finance , panic makes people rush decisions,
so ive given up feeling stupid at this stage 

Best of luck to anyone that gets something back, hope we all do by some miracle

odonovanpm

I thought all those treated unfairly by KBC and not offered an option to go back on a tracker rate after being bombarded with fixed rate offers might find it interesting to know the central bank are getting all banks to setup a framework to review these cases by March 2016.

It is unclear whether cases that have gone through the financial ombudsman process will be reviewed.

leighlinboy

odonovanpm wrote: »

I thought all those treated unfairly by KBC and not offered an option to go back on a tracker rate after being bombarded with fixed rate offers might find it interesting to know the central bank are getting all banks to setup a framework to review these cases by March 2016.

It is unclear whether cases that have gone through the financial ombudsman process will be reviewed.

Thanks for the update is there any link to this ? Was wondering if they could put some concrete timeframe around it..

odonovanpm

There is an article on the RTE news app about this today.

VincePP

I wouldn't throw the towel in on thius.

New governor of Central Bank has taken this very seriously and is in the midst of a major investigation.

AIB have now put over €100m aside to cover rebates on their trackers coming from the central bank investigation. http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/aibs-customers-in-line-for-65000-tracker-payouts-34510461.html

Central Bank also has taken 500 case reports from ombudmans as the beive there were grevious errors. Next report is due at end of April.

If the ombudsman had actually read the Central Bank code of conduct and had applied it, then outcomes would have been different. Instead the ombudsman (mostly banker representatives) purely looked at the paperwork and never even glanced at the code of conduct (code form part of banking regulation). Thankfully the Central Bank does not have to adhere to a 6 year rule.

With AIB coming clean so quickly, KBC is probably not far behind.

Lets just say its better than 50/50 at this stage.

DriverMad

My request was rejected by the ombudsman.

I am not entitled as I signed a fixed rate form with KBC so it was ruled out.

VincePP

DriverMad wrote: »

My request was rejected by the ombudsman.

I am not entitled as I signed a fixed rate form with KBC so it was ruled out.

If Central Bank rules against the banks as is now expected (as per above AIB have set aside over €100 million to correct trackers) it will supercede any decision of the ombudsman.

KBC's fixed rate instructions did not comply with code of conduct and did not explain the meaning of Standard Rate. Ombudsman did not think that was an issue, Central Bank says otherwise.

Also the fact that you had less than 10 days to "seek independence legal advice", make a decision and return the form to avail of the "special fixed rates" is totaly cajoling the customer to make a hasty decison especially when the consquences of that decision are not made clear to the customer.

As i said, better than 50/50 chance, and its a nice feeling to see that the Central bank is finally taking this seriously and not pandering to the banks.

I'll put it another way - if the banks were able to pick the governor of the central bank, Philip lane (new governor) would be the very last person on their list.

odonovanpm

Having your case rejected by the ombudsman is the reason this review is taking place. I got a response from the ombudsman to confirm those that had their cases rejected will be included in the banking review.

odonovanpm

I think the odds are more like 80/20 to be honest. It is inevitable that KBC will have to reinstate (at some point) the variable price promise in the original IIB mortgage contracts, but as I read regarding the AIB case, the attitude within the banks is to continually deny any wrong doing at all costs. My concern would be that they will try to dispute the case further with certain individuals, such as those of us that (rightly) went to the FSO. To be honest, I think a lot of us here probably have a legal case against the FSO if their handling of the case is found to be negligent.

VincePP

odonovanpm wrote: »

I think the odds are more like 80/20 to be honest. It is inevitable that KBC will have to reinstate (at some point) the variable price promise in the original IIB mortgage contracts, but as I read regarding the AIB case, the attitude within the banks is to continually deny any wrong doing at all costs. My concern would be that they will try to dispute the case further with certain individuals, such as those of us that (rightly) went to the FSO. To be honest, I think a lot of us here probably have a legal case against the FSO if their handling of the case is found to be negligent.

I'd like to think 80/20 too, but prefer to be a little more cautious.

If central bank say they were wrong there's very little kbc would be able to do.

odonovanpm

You're probably right to be cautious VincePP but if you review what KBC did it is criminal, very much black and white. It's only a matter of time before they will need to admit wrongdoing or pull out of Ireland - the increasingly negative press coverage along with an eventual new government are all going to play a role this year I reckon.

leighlinboy

Great to see this issue back in the public domain, I'd really like to start seeing KBC's name being mentioned in these reports ASAP... Hopefully they will fall like a house of cards , kbc have been a disgrace, perhaps not as blatant as ptsb and aib , but underhand and sneaky . Will they be in a position to hold out as they are Belgian based ?

odonovanpm

How have they not been as blatant as PTSB or AIB? They are all in violation of the same 'crime' - moving customers from one product to another without their consent. The fact is people that lost tracker rates with KBC are probably paying between €6-12k more per annum due to KBC's actions. These excessive payments on greed fuelled standard variable rates have affected families. I know fathers that are living away from their family to meet these type of commitments, people that were too stressed to get up for work each day, and the list goes on and on. As others have posted on the thread, the original IIB contracts never used the word tracker. The original contract shows the offering is a variable rate product with a marginal price promise of +1.X% on the ECB rate. Therefore, what is the difference between a 'variable' and 'standard variable' product? KBC's argument lies in the fact they are 'clearly' different products, which is bordering on laughable if transparency and clarity are the criteria being assessed in this review.

If they are found to be in the wrong, KBC cannot get away with it just because they are a foreign bank. However, I am not naive enough to think KBC are not looking at every way to get around reinstating the original 'variable' rate. Reports from meetings within AIB suggested that up until December 2015, they felt they could 'still get away with not reinstating tracker mortgages', and I am sure KBC feel the same right now.

leighlinboy

I hear you i have had plenty of sleepless nights mulling over how ive been stitched up by KBC, ive paid nothing but interest in 6/7 years when everyone else has made inroads in their mortgage . what i meant was they more explicit in my circumstance with the return to variable listed on the fixed form, as we know now there has literally been nothing variable about it in the following years not to mention coercing people off better value trackers ...their behaviour was IMO disgraceful bombarding people unsolicited....all these cases were booted out immediately , we are as entitled to redress same as ptsb and aib , they had exactly same goal as the rest , executed it slightly different, lets hope this is apparent when they get to the KBC cases....asap

odonovanpm

Just a quick update on this thread. I asked a friend of mine, who is a QFA and mortgage broker, for additional details related to the Central Bank review. He provided me with some details but suggested that Personal Insolvency Practitioners would probably be more 'in the loop' with regard to the review. I met with him informally last week and showed him the FSO case, including the fixed rate form that IIB/KBC used to take everyone off their tracker mortgage circa 2006. Firstly, after skimming the original loan agreement he told me that I signed up to a variable rate product (i.e. not a tracker), at which point I highlighted the ECB 'price promise' condition and his jaw dropped. People forget that the word 'tracker' is a brand/marketing term that was coined by the banks from 2006 onwards. He said there is absolutely no chance KBC could reasonably argue that the 'variable' rate on the original loan agreement was clearly differentiated from the 'variable' rate mentioned on the fixed rate letter. Secondly, and more importantly, he said that the review is focused on the banks compliance with the 2006 Customer Code of Conduct, which means that any fixed rate form that did not clearly and explicitly state "your tracker/condition is being removed at the end of the fixed rate period" will be ruled null and void. Therefore, if the above conditions apply to you the conditions in your original loan agreement will (eventually) be reinstated.

The only question in my mind is whether KBC feel they can (yet again) come up with a strategy to avoid giving back the preferential variable/tracker rate. It is widely reported that they are considering existing Ireland at the end of 2016, so it would not surprise me if they are trying to use this as a bargaining tool to minimise their exposure to the review process. However, if they do this it is only going to lead to massive lawsuits and redress claims, which will incur a much greater cost than simply reinstating the original rate.

It will be interesting to see their first public reaction in the coming months given they have been noticeably silent to date.

leighlinboy

Could you elaborate on the ECB price promise ? Thks
Yes anxious to hear something re KBC at this stage