Natwest considering closing Ulster Bank in the ROI

Doodah7 wrote: »

If you are not earning more interest on your funds on deposit than the interest rate of your mortgage, then it makes no sense to be paying the higher interest mortgage loan.

You will get a better 'return' on your money by clearing your mortgage.

Yea.. theres that..
Some of the cash is tied up where its doing similar and I have it..


I'll hold for the moment..

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What would it mean for Ulsterbank in Northern Ireland?
Are they linked anymore?

I believe they are separate.

If they do kept the north they would probably rebrand it to NatWest as would be cheaper have one brand but that is only speculation.

JTMan wrote: »

Natwest have said that there will be no changes to UB in NI.

It would make sense to merge Ulster NI with NatWest from a cost perspective. I think that this is what will happen if Ulster pulls out of Ireland.

relax carry on wrote: »

So if it does close, does anyone have any suggestions for a reliable bank without mad costs for day to day banking. And also probably transfering a mortgage to if Ulster Bank sell their mortgage book

If Ulster sell up / close in the south, they may keep the mortgage book and have it managed by someone else or keep a core team and manage it themselves.

Even if they did sell it, the terms and conditions do not change one iota.

On current accounts, just like Danske bank, there would be many months advance notice, so there is zero need to be concerned in any way at present.

Ulster Bank NI is a totally separate bank these days and is the dominant bank in the north (and profitable)

kerryjack wrote: »

It's not as simple as opening another current Account, My current account is linked to my mortgage, it's an offset mortgage the more I have in my Account the less interest I pay on my mortgage. I have already knocked 2 years off my 30 year mortgage and have about 12 years left at 1,15 % so some sort of deal will have to be done with us.

Same here, I pay no interest and want to keep it that way They gave us something years ago to sign away one of the options for the repayments on that account but for the life of me I can't remember the details!

I have the paperwork, must have a read They had to get a signature to change whatever it was they did that time that I can't remember!

As it wasn't a UB product originally then their stupidity won't come into it!

Timing belt wrote: »

It will probably say that in the event of a sale or exiting the market that they have the right to move you onto a SVR mortgage

I'm wondering would that have even been anticipated though by First Active when those mortgage were originally issued? Different times!

If that was a common clause couldn't the lenders that have already exited here have got people off their trackers that way, they didn't and the purchasers of the mortgages have to honour the terms of the mortgages they buy.

Timing belt wrote: »

Will probably announced when they publish Q3 results at the end of the month.

Q3 results are tomorrow morning. Staff have clearly not been told yet and I guess staff would be told first so maybe the announcement will be after the results despite media talk that the announcement would be made this month.

Timing belt wrote: »

They won’t tell staff before results as staff will leak to media. Staff would only be told at the same time as press release is issued not before and that would be holding statement which would be followed up with a team discussion or individual meetings.

Yeah, staff would leak to the media but the stock market is the key. Natwest could have told staff this evening (post market close) and then made the announcement to the market with the results tomorrow morning before the market opens.

Anyways, I guess the Natwest results will be out around 8 AM tomorrow. Will be interesting to see if it just says that a strategic review is ongoing or if tomorrow is the day of the announcement.

JTMan wrote: »

This morning Natwest just said that the review of Ulster Bank continues.

Looks like we won't get an answer by the end of October as reports had suggested.

This review surely cannot go on much longer, new business must be falling off a cliff for Ulster Bank.

They wouldn't have let it be known there was a review if they weren't going to close in the Republic. Now that it is known, it can go on for as long as they like. It may be that they are expecting approaches from potential purchasers of some or all of the business. Due diligence may be occurring during this process. The possible loss of any new business during this period is inconsequential.

Why should the Irish government be under any pressure.

What 'competition' is going to be provided. Another government owned Bank won't provide competition and the Irish Government is not meant to be in the business of running more and more Banks

Quackster wrote: »

To save (at least some of) the jobs, the issue of towns where Ulster is the last bank with a local branch and the notion of creating a 'credible third force'.

The Government already owns most of PTSB. It doesn't want to be in the business of owning banks but we are where we are. They'll offload AIB and PTSB as soon as they can get some reasonable return from doing so.

It's quite clear the government expects bank branches to close in various towns. One government minister recently advised people to use the Post-Office if their local bank branch closes. In order for the banks to properly complete with the online providers, the banks will have to cut their cost base. This will mean reducing branch numbers with consequent reductions in the numbers of staff. The government is not concerned about saving jobs in banks. Banking is moving increasingly online and trying to keep labour intensive activity going for the purpose of saving jobs would be lunacy. The days of the banks providing branches on the High Street for the purpose of obtaining the takings of the local businesses are over. The government is quite happy that less cash is used, that shops increasingly operate with less and less cash and more use of debit and credit cards. There are now quite a number of business operators who refuse to accept cash at all. There is no need for a trip to the local bank branch before and after business hours to lodge cash or to obtain cash for floats. There is no worry about security or theft of cash and money laundering becomes much more difficult.
Ulster bank will be let close down.

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Refusing to accept legal tender. Sounds like a fairly illegal practice.

.

Nothing illegal once the terms are made clear before a contract is entered into.

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Refusing to accept legal tender. Sounds like a fairly illegal practice.

I would suggest that you fully check the meaning of legal tender and acceptance before you embarrass yourself somewhere.

I'll save you the effort

A debt must have occurred first. Then in settlement of that debt you offer legal tender, it must be accepted.

For a debt to occur in this meaning you must create an account with the merchant.

So, say you still shopped in Shaws and had a shaws account (yes they still do this) and you went to the accounts office and offered €300 cash and they refused it, that would be wrong and you could use that if such dispute went to court.

If however you just went into shaws, picked up a suit and couple of shirts and it came to €300, they could refuse to take cash from you (highly unlikely) and there would be absolutely nothing you can do.

If you do what a "pub talk" lad said and walked out with the goods because you "offered legal tender", you'd be arrested for theft and the pub talk excuse would be laughed out of court.

But what this has to do with ulster bank possibly closing, I don't know