Danske bank to close retail customer accounts

Ryaned40

No I came this far and not the kind of person to give up when things get tough, quiet the opposite! 10 days is not much more extra to wait, next step of investigation will start after that

kennM

Ryaned40 wrote: »

No I came this far and not the kind of person to give up when things get tough, quiet the opposite! 10 days is not much more extra to wait, next step of investigation will start after that

Just sent off my complaint to FSO.... everything backed up, copies of original T&Cs, responses from Danske to complaint etc., original marketing material from Danske (NIB) around Offset mortgages, proof variable and offset different products, etc. Hoping to fast track some of the early arguments they have produced. Lets the games begin!

yop

I will start getting onto it over the weekend.

So to make life easier for those who will follow us up;
We are going with the proof of emails/brochures which prove that the Offset and Variable are in fact different.
The screen shot of the interest rates from the time we took the mortgage out.

Anything else?

robbe

Why not use the original press release from NIB themselves (still up on the Danske website) dated 2005

http://www.danskebank.ie/en-ie/About-us/Press/Press-releases/2005/Pages/Press-release-20050118.aspx

Makes interesting reading I think, not necessarily from a contract law standpoint but if we are relying on what one could reasonably expect from the contract we signed with NIB their own marketing material/press release could be useful. Also amusing considering who their CEO was and where he is now.....

I'm yet to receive the FSO response from Danske to the questions the investigator posed but I imagine it will arrive soon. If I could have a copy of the marketing bumpf you have that would be great. I, like other on this forum, will not be going anywhere as far as this complaint goes!

Cheers

yop wrote: »

I will start getting onto it over the weekend.

So to make life easier for those who will follow us up;
We are going with the proof of emails/brochures which prove that the Offset and Variable are in fact different.
The screen shot of the interest rates from the time we took the mortgage out.

Anything else?

kennM

robbe wrote: »

Why not use the original press release from NIB themselves (still up on the Danske website) dated 2005

http://www.danskebank.ie/en-ie/About-us/Press/Press-releases/2005/Pages/Press-release-20050118.aspx

Makes interesting reading I think, not necessarily from a contract law standpoint but if we are relying on what one could reasonably expect from the contract we signed with NIB their own marketing material/press release could be useful. Also amusing considering who their CEO was and where he is now.....

I'm yet to receive the FSO response from Danske to the questions the investigator posed but I imagine it will arrive soon. If I could have a copy of the marketing bumpf you have that would be great. I, like other on this forum, will not be going anywhere as far as this complaint goes!

Cheers

I'd came across this personally and printed it off... probably preferable not to advertise the fact on a public forum, you can be guaranteed that Danske will find it and pull it from their servers. If possible can the post be edited to remove URL?

robbe

Not sure that I'd share your worry that Danske are monitoring our every move. My own sense is that they are singularly unconcerned with our argument and will stick rigidly to what the contract says they can do. I have a pdf of the file if anyone wants it but as the press release was a matter of public record I think leaving the url there for the few people who took a complaint is worth the possibility that they take it down. Actually would be a good sign if it was removed if you think about it.....

kennM wrote: »

I'd came across this personally and printed it off... probably preferable not to advertise the fact on a public forum, you can be guaranteed that Danske will find it and pull it from their servers. If possible can the post be edited to remove URL?

Ryaned40

yop wrote: »

I will start getting onto it over the weekend.

So to make life easier for those who will follow us up;
We are going with the proof of emails/brochures which prove that the Offset and Variable are in fact different.
The screen shot of the interest rates from the time we took the mortgage out.

Anything else?

Push the mis-sold product, I downloaded the offset advert from 2005 on their website and forwarded it to fso. It explains how it works etc and more importantly it states savings you will make during the TERM of your mortgage .

kennM

Ryaned40 wrote: »

Push the mis-sold product, I downloaded the offset advert from 2005 on their website and forwarded it to fso. It explains how it works etc and more importantly it states savings you will make during the TERM of your mortgage .

I personally wouldn't push the mis-sold. That will fall outside the statute of limitations which is 6 years regarding the Ombudsman's remit. The avenue I'm pushing is breech of contract, there is no clause in the terms and conditions that we signed that permits them to do what they are doing. They have produced terms and conditions that we haven't signed claiming they are within their rights, rubbish. If we haven't signed or consented to same then they are not applicable... end of. Do you think the bank would permit you to change the terms and conditions you are abiding by arbitrarily without their agreement? Hell no!!! and that's the exact position we will be maintaining.

I fully intend on pushing them into a fair negotiation or if they won't negotiate then put all the facts & figures and demonstrable loss in the FSO's hands for them to make a ruling. I just hope the FSO have the teeth and are willing to use them

robbe wrote: »

Not sure that I'd share your worry that Danske are monitoring our every move. My own sense is that they are singularly unconcerned with our argument and will stick rigidly to what the contract says they can do. I have a pdf of the file if anyone wants it but as the press release was a matter of public record I think leaving the url there for the few people who took a complaint is worth the possibility that they take it down. Actually would be a good sign if it was removed if you think about it.....

I think it'd be naive to think that Dankse aren't monitoring. This issue has the potential of costing them possibly hundreds of thousands (if not into a few million) euros. I've seen the level that insurance companies will go to in order to defend claims which are way way smaller.....

Ryaned40

kennM wrote: »

I personally wouldn't push the mis-sold. That will fall outside the statute of limitations which is 6 years regarding the Ombudsman's remit. The avenue I'm pushing is breech of contract, there is no clause in the terms and conditions that we signed that permits them to do what they are doing. They have produced terms and conditions that we haven't signed claiming they are within their rights, rubbish. If we haven't signed or consented to same then they are not applicable... end of. Do you think the bank would permit you to change the terms and conditions you are abiding by arbitrarily without their agreement? Hell no!!! and that's the exact position we will be maintaining.

I fully intend on pushing them into a fair negotiation or if they won't negotiate then put all the facts & figures and demonstrable loss in the FSO's hands for them to make a ruling. I just hope the FSO have the teeth and are willing to
I think it'd be naive to think that Dankse aren't monitoring. This issue has the potential of costing them possibly hundreds of thousands (if not into a few million) euros. I've seen the level that insurance companies will go to in order to defend claims which are way way smaller.....

You could be right KennM but I made this point in my first reply and the fso sent on the mis-sold complaint to them to reply to, so in my opinion it is relevant if it wasn't the fso would not have forward this point to them. The more digs u can make the bigger the hole gets! If u get my drift.

kennM

Ryaned40 wrote: »

You could be right KennM but I made this point in my first reply and the fso sent on the mis-sold complaint to them to reply to, so in my opinion it is relevant if it wasn't the fso would not have forward this point to them. The more digs u can make the bigger the hole gets! If u get my drift.

Get exactly what you mean.... I typically use the analogy.... "If you throw enough s&&t then some will stick "

BuffyBot

RainyDay wrote: »

Who's server logs do you subpoena? You don't know who's servers transported the email between the sender and the recipient.

If you wish to discuss the in's and out's of email protocols, please do elsewhere folks.

Back on topic, please.

Toots

I've moved some of those posts to Legal Discussion. Pending approval from the Legal Discussion mods, the conversation can be continued there.

earlyevening

I have original docs about interest rares with NIB in 2006/7. I took out an offset mortgage around then.

What specific info are you looking for and I'll see if I can help.

ABC101

O.K.... currently trawling through the filing cabinet..

Offset Mortgage Rates

17th August 2007.... 4.99%

Letter from NIB 9th May 2008.... 5.24% effective from the 19th May 2008.

Letter from NIB 29th July 2008.....5.59% effective from the 21st July 2008

Letter from NIB 29th October 2008... 5.65% effective from the 27th October 2008.

Letter from NIB 29th December 2008....5.15% effective from the 1st December 2008.

Letter from NIB 29th January 2009........4.4% effective from the 12th January 2009.

Letter from NIB 26th February 2009......3.9% effective from the 23rd February 2009

Letter from NIB 6th May 2009.....3.65% effective from the 6th May 2009



4th October 2011.

Home Loan Interest rates

From the 11th November 2011, we are increasing the interest rate applicable on our standard Variable Rate home loan to 4.35% (4.4% APR) in line with applicable terms and conditions. This is the first interest rate increase on the Bank's variable home loan since 2008.

************************************************************

30th September 2011..OFFSET MORTGAGE GROUP

We will increase the debit rate on your account by 0.95% to 4.6% p.a. from the current rate of 3.65%.

Taking effect from the 11.11.2011.

************************************************************

That is all I have chaps... hopefully it will be of use to ya!!

yop

Folks, can I ask, the side letters with this product.

Did everyone get one? They are saying that they didn't send them out after 2006, can anyone please verify this please.

jwrbs

yop wrote: »

Folks, can I ask, the side letters with this product.

Did everyone get one? They are saying that they didn't send them out after 2006, can anyone please verify this please.

What side letter is this? Don't think i got one - would be useful to know what they said (and why they stopped sending them out....)

ABC101

Yes... not exactly sure what you are referring to when you quote side letter.

nicky5mx

Side letter is the most important thing we have as its basically says that the bank will not cause an unwanted termination of the off-set arrangement (which they have now done). This side-letter forms part of the original mortgage agreement. This is what I am really relying on in my response to the FSO as I believe there is now a breach of contract.

yop

nicky5mx wrote: »

Side letter is the most important thing we have as its basically says that the bank will not cause an unwanted termination of the off-set arrangement (which they have now done). This side-letter forms part of the original mortgage agreement. This is what I am really relying on in my response to the FSO as I believe there is now a breach of contract.

When was your mortgage taken out?
They are saying that Offset mortgages taken out since 2006 did not receive that side letter.
Ours was taken out 2007

ABC101

nicky5mx wrote: »

Side letter is the most important thing we have as its basically says that the bank will not cause an unwanted termination of the off-set arrangement (which they have now done). This side-letter forms part of the original mortgage agreement. This is what I am really relying on in my response to the FSO as I believe there is now a breach of contract.

Ok. Yep that definitely sounds important.

All I could find was the home loan agreement.

Somebody mentioned previously that side letters stopped after 2006, is that true? If so how did they know that? My drawdown was in late 2007, so maybe that explains why I have no letter?

nicky5mx

This is what it says........

"We will ensure when removing an account from the offset portfolio that validation will take place to ensure that the account is not the last mortgage account or linked account causing an unwanted termination of the Offset Portfolio"


IMO.....it is pretty clear that they cannot do what they are doing now. The above is part of the contract. They can issue all the revised terms and conditions they want but the mortgage agreement is now broken by DB and they must not get away with it.

nicky5mx

I took mine out in 2005 I think so maybe that is why I received a side-letter ?

yop

nicky5mx wrote: »

I took mine out in 2005 I think so maybe that is why I received a side-letter ?

Looks like it, they stated in the letter to the FSO that this letter was not sent out after 2006. So this is their get out.

nicky5mx

Sorry guys......I was not aware that they stopped sending these out after 2006. I hope it does not weaken your case with the FSO. Guess I am lucky to have this as part of my mortgage agreement.

Please do not give in just because you do not have the side letter.......I think there is a bigger argument then just the side-letter.

yop

nicky5mx wrote: »

Sorry guys......I was not aware that they stopped sending these out after 2006. I hope it does not weaken your case with the FSO. Guess I am lucky to have this as part of my mortgage agreement.

Please do not give in just because you do not have the side letter.......I think there is a bigger argument then just the side-letter.

Well again they have pulled a fast one by removing that side letter, so it probably doesn't help. But that said there are so many holes in what they have done it should still mean there is a strong case.

ABC101

Really sneaky!!! Strange how corporations/ institutions can just do what they want.

There is a clause in the home loan agreement about one current account must be present to service de offset. Section 6 ( I think).

But then it also states they can amend terms and conditions.

I'm concentrating on paying down de mortgage ASAP but it's still going to take ages.

nicky5mx

I agree.....It does not help but there are many other arguments to be made. I would guess and hope that the FSO will make a blanket decision for all the complaints regarding this matter.

makeorbrake

nicky5mx wrote: »

I would guess and hope that the FSO will make a blanket decision for all the complaints regarding this matter.

That's what should happen. However, similar circumstances have played out before - and I think it involved danske that time too (would have been posted about here or on AAM or both). Every complaint was similar - but there was no 'blanket decision'. Everyone had to go through the motions individually - even though once they had lost the very first case, the outcome for each and every complaint thereafter was the very same....but they made people go to the trouble of complaining.

<EDIT> I remember now the other case where they made everyone complain separately => http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=170932
Perhaps they unilaterally changed this eventually - although I never recall them doing that...</EDIT>

robbe

yop wrote: »

Folks, can I ask, the side letters with this product.

Did everyone get one? They are saying that they didn't send them out after 2006, can anyone please verify this please.

No side letter here unfortunately, mortgage issued 2007. On the one hand it's a pity and could well be the piece of paper that, were I to have it, could have swayed the case in my favour. However one of my arguments is I have made is that I could reasonably have expected, given the nature of the product I was sold, that an offset mortgage would have had an account (be it savings or current) to 'offset' against it. If the FSO find in favour of Danske it will probably be on the basis that their terms and conditions entitled them to do whatever they liked - anyone who has this letter can show otherwise.

kennM

robbe wrote: »

No side letter here unfortunately, mortgage issued 2007. On the one hand it's a pity and could well be the piece of paper that, were I to have it, could have swayed the case in my favour. However one of my arguments is I have made is that I could reasonably have expected, given the nature of the product I was sold, that an offset mortgage would have had an account (be it savings or current) to 'offset' against it. If the FSO find in favour of Danske it will probably be on the basis that their terms and conditions entitled them to do whatever they liked - anyone who has this letter can show otherwise.

Hey Robbe, the signed T&Cs associated with the offset mortgage do not entitle them. They have shot themselves in the foot by producing Ts&Cs to support their position that are dated long after the offset mortgages were sold. If they were entitled to do what they've done associated to the original terms and conditions they would have highlighted same and not bothered to give a 1% sweetener. The 1% sweetener is to ensure there is a smaller number of complaints going through the FSO.

It's a numbers game really for Danske, that's all..... I would suspect that each case will be dealt with individually. Danske will capitulate at the 11th hour and any deal arrived at will be under the terms of a non disclosure agreement and that'll be it.

Thats my speculation...hopefully I'm right. Dankse have adopted an indefensible position but there needs to be an impending action/problem to get them to step off that position. It's the same routine with insurance companies and claims, they won't negotiate till the last minute.... why? because there is no benefit in them doing it any sooner. If they have to cough up they prefer to hang onto the money as long as they can,.