Tracker Redress Evidence Oct 2017

Tracker Redress Evidence October 2017
The Financial Services Ombudsman knew exactly what was going on at the time with respect to the Tracker Redress Evidence Conspiracy, and in the earlier cases on this before his office for adjudication, he sided with the Banks. It was only after threatened Supreme Court Appeal litigation that the FSO and the Financial Regulator came clean & compelled the various offending Banks to set in place Redress Schemes. To date such Schemes are moving ‘in-slow-motion’. See also Consumers let down by Regulator’s dereliction of duty.
Time for Rechecking of Fitness & Probity test results of very many senior Bank Executive policy-makers now that the facts of Tracker Redress Evidence are in the public domain. “ ‘What the Hell is wrong with Bankers?’ ….A Californian bank regulator of the late 1980s who, when investigating yet another banking scandal, observed that ‘the easiest way to rob a bank is to run one’ . This is definitely the case in the tracker scandal.” See more … True nature of Tracker Redress Evidence.
Immediate Vacancies: Consumer Protection Entity & Litigators with no undeclared allegiance to Irish Banks: In further revelations this week with respect to  Tracker Mortgage Redress, “Governor Philip Lane told an Oireachtas committee it was asking banks to write to people they refuse to give trackers back to, and told victims they can go to the courts or the ombudsman ….Prof Lane said that would be a lengthy legal process, and the focus now is on getting the banks to restore and refund people voluntarily. The head of financial conduct at the Central Bank, Derville Rowland, ….advised anyone who believes they have been affected by the tracker scandal , but who have not been contacted, to complain to their bank.”
Consumer Protection Codes’ Guardian as effective as Tin Soldiers

 

TinSoldiersTo equalise offences committed under the Tracker Redress Evidence Conspiracy, financial fines/ levies are counter-productive. Banks ‘like’ fines (which can subsidise their own contributions to Regulatory costs). However they don’t so much like License Suspensions/ Restrictions which hurt. The Central Bank web site states : “Levy (‘the levy’) to be paid by regulated financial service providers to the Central Bank of Ireland. The purpose of this levy is to fund approximately 50 per cent of the cost of the annual budget for financial regulation. The remaining 50 per cent is funded by the Central Bank of Ireland.” Fines dont really hurt Banks

 

In addition to (A) returning the Present Value of their own money back to Borrowers, all offending Banks must (B) recognize valid entitlements to incremental evidenced Consequential Losses. Deflecting this through choreographed proxy Tracker Redress Evidence ‘overseers’ [like EY., Grant Thornton, KPMG & Deloitte] merely adds paraffin to a greed-fuelled & self-inflicted  conflagration. Tracker Redress Evidence can be obtained showing how fifteen licensed Banks, arrived at an identical business strategy to dissuade & cajole Consumer &  Business Borrowers away from Tracker Mortgages. Conduct of Banks inviting serious corrective measures