Mr. Wim Verbraeken:

I would welcome getting the details of that specific case to make sure the decision we communicated - I presume it is based on a recent decision - and the determination were correct. We welcome all customers who believe they have evidence that we did not consider to come forward. I welcome the same in this case. The 650 customers relate to new owner-occupied, PDH, customers who applied for their mortgages between November 2006 and February 2008. That coincides with a period when the bank had issued a communication to its intermediaries, the brokers, which are governed by their own specific regulatory context, for a product that was specific to new owner-occupied, PDH, customers which meant they started on a fixed rate and rolled off to a tracker.

We have decided, based on the review we conducted on the period right up to December 2017, that the 650 customers who signed loan agreements to start on a fixed rate and roll off to a standard variable rate should have had the customer journey of a fixed rate rolling off to a tracker, as did 90% of all new PDH applicants who applied in the window of time in question. More than 6,000 cases originated through the broker network in the window during which the broker communication was valid rolled, as intended by the bank, from a fixed rate to a tracker. The 650 cases signed a loan agreement based on moving from a fixed rate to a standard variable rate. We have decided, as a matter of policy, to offer these customers a tracker rate and to offer redress and compensation.