PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

Ireland · Question · written

PQ 30

30. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the Central Bank’s tracker mortgage review; the number of mortgages involved in the review; the number of persons who have received redress and compensation to date; if he is satisfied that the independent appeal systems put in place by the banks are sufficient for aggrieved customers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23535/17]

askedIreland· Dáil Éireann· EN

Introduced

18 May 2017

Last action

18 May 2017 · Tracker Mortgages Examination

Status

written

Sponsors

McGrath, Michael.

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

18 May 2017

Summary

30. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the Central Bank’s tracker mortgage review; the number of mortgages involved in the review; the number of persons who have received redress and compensation to date; if he is satisfied that the independent appeal systems put in place by the banks are sufficient for aggrieved customers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23535/17]

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

  1. 18 May 2017

    Tracker Mortgages Examination

    30. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the Central Bank’s tracker mortgage review; the number of mortgages involved in the review; the number of persons who have received redress and compensation to date; if he is satisfied that the independent appeal systems put in place by the banks are sufficient for aggrieved customers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23535/17]

    Source: written

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

1 official file

Tracker Mortgages Examination

View fileDownload file

Sponsors

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.