Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

71. To ask the Minister for Finance the number of customers at Permanent TSB who were wrongly moved from, or prevented from being on, a tracker mortgage, and who have had their case dealt with by the bank; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29266/15]

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

72. To ask the Minister for Finance the number of cases the Financial Services Ombudsman decision that Permanent TSB has acted wrongly in removing persons from tracker mortgages affects; the number of these cases that have been, decided; decided in favour of the customer; and decided against the customer; and the number of cases still pending. [29267/15]

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

73. To ask the Minister for Finance the deadline for Permanent TSB to restore and-or compensate those who it was found to have moved off tracker mortgages wrongly, or prevented from accessing tracker mortgages; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29268/15]

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

74. To ask the Minister for Finance the legal costs incurred by Permanent TSB in appealing the finding of the Financial Services Ombudsman that it acted wrongly in removing persons from tracker mortgages. [29269/15]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 71 to 74, inclusive, together.

I have been informed by permanent tsb ("PTSB") that it is currently subject to an Enforcement Investigation by the Central Bank in relation to the circumstances in which the bank refused to allow certain customers who had switched from a tracker rate mortgage to a fixed rate mortgage for an agreed term to revert to a tracker rate mortgage at the end of that term.  The bank based its refusal on the fact that these customers had not completed the agreed term of the fixed rate because they had chosen to break that term early in order to avail of lower variable rates available at the time.

PTSB has informed me that this Enforcement Investigation is ongoing and the bank is working with the Central Bank to identify relevant customers, to calculate the loss suffered by these customers, to agree an appropriate redress for those customers and to move these customers to the appropriate tracker rate.  While this investigation is ongoing it is not possible to state how many customers may be included in the exercise or what the total or average level of redress may be.

The bank has made clear to my officials that it will do everything in it's power to expedite this matter and ensure that all affected customers are identified and receive appropriate redress.

I understand that as part of its Enforcement Investigation the Central Bank has the power to impose a regulatory sanction on the bank for its conduct in this matter but that is ultimately a matter for the Central Bank and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on that.

The bank has also been in contact with the Financial Services Ombudsman ("FSO") on this issue.  The bank has withdrawn an appeal which it had lodged in respect of a High Court decision in a case between the FSO and the bank.  The High Court found that the bank had acted in breach of the Consumer Protection Code on this matter by not specifically warning customers who broke the term of their fixed rate that they would lose the right to revert to a tracker rate at the end of the fixed rate term.  The bank has also indicated to the FSO that as part of its wider review, it wishes to review a number of similar cases which the FSO has received and which the FSO has not yet offered an opinion on pending the outcome of the Supreme Court Appeal.