BANK INTEREST RATE CUTS ME EYE !

second74

I refer to the much hype surrounding a certain banks interest rates cuts. As their customer I am very disappointed with their proposals. They are intending to only cut mortgage interest rate cuts for customers whose LTV is 90% or below. This I believe will only comply to very few mortgages, given that most householders who bought before 2008 are in negative equity and those who have bought since would have had cash on had as it has been difficult for anyone to get a mortgage.

I find it frustrating that where the Government could immediately implement laws that allow the Government to take water charges from wages/social welfare income in a blink of an eye, but when it comes to standing up for the ordinary person on the street, they seem to be pussy footing around the issue.

I had this post up previously naming the bank, but it has been deleted. I got a response from someone saying as I was not on tracker and in negative equity I had fallen between two stools. I would say I have loads of company between those two stools!!

Amirani

You are a high credit risk to the bank - negative equity/high LTV. In addition to this, collateral repossession is notoriously difficult in Ireland. The bank obviously feel that in order to make a profit on the money it lent you (and account for risk) they can't lower your rate in line with the reduction in <90% LTV.

second74

thanks for putting banks side.however the reason the minister is after them to lower their interest rates is because they are ridiculously high compared to rest of Europe and are making a big profit. Also considering it was my taxes that bailed them out, for them to be making more money out of me is frustrating. Seeing it was them that was handing out money without caution was one of primary reasons for property bubble

average_runner

second74 wrote: »

thanks for putting banks side.however the reason the minister is after them to lower their interest rates is because they are ridiculously high compared to rest of Europe and are making a big profit. Also considering it was my taxes that bailed them out, for them to be making more money out of me is frustrating. Seeing it was them that was handing out money without caution was one of primary reasons for property bubble

No bank forced anyone to take a stupid high mortgage, common sense from the person that borrowed it, has to come into it.

second74

Excuse me I did not take out a stupid high mortgage and I resent the implication, I am complaining about banks making high profit as opposed to rest of europe.I do not appreciate banks advertising reducing interest rates when it possibly only applies too minimum no of mortgages.
plus the fact the banks were giving the money which was inflating the price of houses,if banks refused to give the money, the price of houses could not have gone up.

Trish56

I totally agree with you. All lenders have reduced rates for new customers and some for existing customers however both KBC and Bank of Ireland still have not reduced their standard variable rate from 4.50% for existing customers in negative equity - this is a disgrace as these customers cannot switch and in most cases cannot trade up. The Government should be negotiating to have rates reduced for all mortgagors especially those trapped in negative equity.

second74 wrote: »

I refer to the much hype surrounding a certain banks interest rates cuts. As their customer I am very disappointed with their proposals. They are intending to only cut mortgage interest rate cuts for customers whose LTV is 90% or below. This I believe will only comply to very few mortgages, given that most householders who bought before 2008 are in negative equity and those who have bought since would have had cash on had as it has been difficult for anyone to get a mortgage.

I find it frustrating that where the Government could immediately implement laws that allow the Government to take water charges from wages/social welfare income in a blink of an eye, but when it comes to standing up for the ordinary person on the street, they seem to be pussy footing around the issue.

I had this post up previously naming the bank, but it has been deleted. I got a response from someone saying as I was not on tracker and in negative equity I had fallen between two stools. I would say I have loads of company between those two stools!!

second74

Permanant TSB is not much better, as the LTV percentages keep most mortgage holders out of the criteria to qualify for "interest rate cut".

Nervous Wreck

second74 wrote: »

Excuse me I did take out a stupid high mortgage and I resent the implication, I am complaining about banks making high profit as opposed to rest of europe.I do not appreciate banks advertising reducing interest rates when it possibly only applies too minimum no of mortgages.
plus the fact the banks were giving the money which was inflating the price of houses,if banks refused to give the money, the price of houses could not have gone up.

Ah, calm down. The above poster said that you weren't forced to take out a stupidly high mortgage, and you weren't. The fact that you bit off more than you could chew is not just the lender's fault; it's yours too. Blame who you want. I'm quite sure no one really cares what you do or do not appreciate. Housing prices are not a bank's concern. Why should they be? They offer loans, they don't set house prices. Instead of getting snappy with people on the internet who are simply putting across facts, why don't you write a letter of complaint to your lender? Maybe you'll feel better about it then. Getting defensive and aggressive on a message board isn't really going to garner you much sympathy. \


Also, drop the 'my taxes paid for this' crap. We're all in the same boat in that regard. We all pay taxes and they all went to the same things. You are not alone or special in this so get off the damn high horse.

second74

As we have seen in recent times if the bank wont lend the money, people can't buy the houses, therefore house prices go down or stabilise. I did not bite off more than I could chew, I just don't believe in being fleeced. I disagree that it is crap that my taxes and everybody's else paid for bailout, I believe that to be a fact. I am very calm by the way

Nervous Wreck

And as I said, a bank isn't responsible for the prices of the property market, whether their actions help causing it or not. They don't care and aren't obliged to; this argument is pointless. And you're not being fleeced; you're paying the repayments that you signed on for. Just because your opinion on what's fair has changed doesn't mean your contract will.

And I didn't say you were wrong about taxes; I said you're not the only one whose taxes went where they did so drop the entitlement crap; we're all in the same boat.

Amirani

second74 wrote: »

thanks for putting banks side.however the reason the minister is after them to lower their interest rates is because they are ridiculously high compared to rest of Europe and are making a big profit. Also considering it was my taxes that bailed them out, for them to be making more money out of me is frustrating. Seeing it was them that was handing out money without caution was one of primary reasons for property bubble

As I said, Ireland has a very different system when it comes to repossession of collateral. There are also a large amount of tracker mortgages and non-perorming loans that have to be subsidised by performing loans. Irish banks have some of the worst debt ratings in Europe, and gave generally lower capital levels, so it costs them more to raise money than Euro counterparts. Due to all of these, interest rates are bound to be higher.

As regards your taxes bailing out the banks, so did mine and everyone else's. The only way that more of our taxes won't gave to go into the banks is if they can return to profitability and thus private ownership. Government are allowed to set interest rates at AIB and PTSB - they own them. They have obviously chosen not to.

second74

Please note nervous wreck I said my and everyone taxes, also my original post stated that government could implemented laws to take water charges directly from people but I find it frustrating that but when it comes to standing up for the ordinary person on the street, they seem to be pussy footing around the issue
I failed to see where I was snappy or aggressive in any post, I am merely responding to points made.