@Cal Mooney: Pearse Doherty is on fire lately. That man is one of very assets in the Dail

@Dave Doyle: there was no fraud.

@Joe Phillips: in fairness to him he always has been. How he’s not leader of SF yet I don’t know.

@Trust The Chalice: If you have another word for describing dishonestly appropriating money or goods belonging to another by means of deceit with the intention of permanently depriving that person of those goods or money I am curious to find out what your dictionary is going to throw up.

@Dave Doyle: Exactly what I thought – they didn’t fail at all, in fact succeeded in what they set out to do and that was to get as many people as they could onto a higher interest rate than they needed to be.

@Trust The Chalice: 99 people lost their homes because of bank fraud. None of those 99 people did anything wrong. The banks stole their homes. I wonder how many of that 99 committed suicide or were driven into bad health and still are.
This bank fraud has never been quantified in human terms. None of the damage done to Irish society by FG’s neoliberal policies has ever been quantified.

@Steven Moens: for it to be fraud, it has to be intentional. There was gross incompetence by the banks admittedly but it’s not fraud. Unless you want to change the dictionary.

@Adam O’hEidhin: There were decisions made in the banks to pursue such a policy on their customers. Whether the decision was made collectively by the management of various banks or some individual made the decision, has to be investigated. Those responsible have to face the courts to answer for the wholesale fraud that went on.

@Dave Doyle: I agree with you on the majority of your points. Calling this fraud however is completely incorrect.

@Trust The Chalice: So some manifestation occurred that caused all the banks to engage in “gross competence” all at the same time, to the extent that people were taken off or refused the rates they were entitled to, ended up paying far more to the banks, some even lost their homes. It takes some imagination to come up with that one.

@Dave Doyle: Exactly somewhere in those banks there are minutes to meetings where they discussed this. The decision was likely by the banks board of directors. They offered people a temporarily good rate sand then jacked the price up and gave no indication at the time of agreement what the new rate would be. I would go so far as to say that is extortion similar to the way a drug dealer gives you first few bits for free and then all of sudden you a grand in debt – same tactics.

@Trust The Chalice: Incompetence; ok I agree that may have been the initial cause but the moment you cover up that assumed incompetence, let it carry on and keep taking the money while keeping quiet about it the offence of fraud is completed.

@Steven Moens: You guys seem to be under the illusion they acted illegally all the way. They were legally allowed not offer trackers back at the time and have it in contracts. A judge ruled this as not legal due to how he read the law setting the precedent. That is how it became illegal overnight. So no fraud but a change in law. They didn’t cover it up but handled the identification badly. Don’t forget many of the people getting compensation knew they would lose trackers and it was not hidden and in all the financial advice about altering your tracker mortgage

@Steven Moens: So each bank had an incompetent employee, each of whom came up with the same idea, at exactly the same time ? Not likely. Far more likely is that the banks were operating like a corporate cartel, and that they decided as a group to inflict this pain on tracker mortgage holders. For god’s sake, if evidence is found that a group of petrol station owners in a certain area are colluding to keep prices high they can face serious fines. If the banks are found to have colluded in this matter they should be absolutely hammered as companies and the individuals involved jailed.

@Ibhar Mac Suibhne: I do actually see a lot of the younger population are using N26 and Revolute. Do note that these types of banks carry their own specific risks and downsides too. All is not what it seems if you dig deep into their structures and sources too. Great functionality, but wouldn’t lodge my life savings into them yet.

@David Corrigan: it has already been found not to be fraud by people far more qualified than you.

@Trust The Chalice: Those people are?

@Trust The Chalice: The same prosecuting authority that managed to destroy evidence in view of a CCTV camera by any chance ?

@Trust The Chalice: so please enlighten us as to how you know people are more qualified than Mr Corrigan or are you just trolling for the sake of defending the banking sector??

@Dave Doyle: the Gardaí. The Consumer Protection Commission, the Financial Services Ombudsman and the Central Bank.

@tommytukamomo: I’m not trolling. Genuinely. The banks messed up. Big time. But it’s not fraud. Fraud Has to be intentional. This was not. It was gross incompetence. Fraud it was not.

@Trust The Chalice: so multiple banks experienced identical gross incompetence simultaneously?! And I would hardly call a lack of charges evidence of innocence in this country, sure Michael Lowry has never been charged over the Esat fiasco but we can still all read the tribunal findings.

@winston smith: Actually it was perfectly legal until a judgment made it illegal. People were told they would lose their trackers and accepted that until the judgment changed the situation. This meant people who understood and accepted the situation were now eligible for compensation. So it was never fraud and the original ruling could have gone the other way. So that is why the banks all did the same thing.

@Trust The Chalice: then by that logic, deliberately covering it up was fraud no?

@Trust The Chalice: so this brain box thinks all the banks filled with all the “best” people made the same “mistake” that in every instance favored all the banks?…bahahahahaha

@Trust The Chalice: the investigation into fraud has not concluded yet. This is only the redress amounts that are being paid out. The investigation will conclude later.

@Craic_a_tower: They didn’t tell their customers that they would lose their tracker mortgages… I know this because I am one of those customers and they did not tell me when I asked for their help in a difficult time…
Do you honestly think that if they had said that my mortgage would be €500 cheaper per month on a tracker, that I would have broken out of my fixed rate early to save €90 a month by going on a variable rate…

And they were only too happy to waiver the €1000 charge for breaking out of a fixed rate early… They made it even seem like they were doing me a favour…

See you in court PTSB.

@George McCarthy: people who lost their homes has significant mortgages. That’s why they lost their homes.

@George McCarthy: excellent observation.
The 196k is an average though, so maybe the actual compensations did provide for replacement purchase.
It should do, plus compensation for the stress & dislocation caused by these Shylocks, some of whom should be debarred from what used to be a respected profession.
No longer, only by applying preventative justice can we have any belief that other strokes will not be perpetrated on the dependant public.
That’s what we elect our Dail emissaries, teachta dala, to do.
When , though, that it the outstanding question.

@Martin Molloy: you obviously have not a clue what your crapping on about, shut the front door.

@Bren Guiden: He is actually telling the truth. Most people have no idea of the history of what happened. People think the banks all got together to commit fraud. There is a reason why no reports from the media call it fraud or claim a conspiracy. They don’t actually explain how it came about and why there are no criminal charges. Other countries don’t accept the banks have to offer the trackers back just here.

@sequoia: I accept what I chose. I have a beef with those who chose to move off trackers and then demanded that they be allowed back on them, even when the offer had expired.
And even with those who fell behind on their payments and as such, having breached the terms of their special low-cost mortgages, were told they couldn’t go back to the tracker rate. Terms and conditions, and all that.
There’s no need to feel sorry for me. My mortgage will be paid off before the end of the year. But all those bleating about the poor tracker mortgage holders have misplaced sympathy, in my view. The real victims in all this are those whose rates have been pushed up to subsidise those on trackers. Including young couples with kids and 20+ years to go on their mortgage payments.
When the worm turns, as it will, are you going to campaign for those on variable rates to get a break and not have to endure an increase, or at least a big increase, on the grounds that it’s about time the tracker freeloaders started contributing SOMETHING to the general pot of house payments, or will you continue to insist that the poor tracker holders are the most scandalised and put upon members of the house-owning community?
I will be following all your crocodile tears with interest.

@Bren Guiden: On the contrary, I think your “Tut, humph, roll eyes” response reveals that I’m pretty much on the money.

@Martin Molloy: not so. I took fixed at the start and had tracker option at the end that was in the contract but was never given by bank.

@SFNutters: banks……….there……………… now get off your mammys computer!!