Michael Ashcroft QC appeared for the successful Appellant ("the Borrower") in this high profile representative action affecting over 6,200 policyholders of the West Bromwich Mortgage Company Ltd ("the Lender"). The dispute concerned buy-to-let "tracker" mortgages and concerned the circumstances in which the Lender could vary the applicable rates of interest and terminate the mortgage contracts. Accepting Mr Ashcroft's arguments (and disagreeing with the analysis of Teare J. below and previous decisions by the Financial Ombudsman Service), the Court of Appeal held that clauses in the Lender's standard mortgage conditions, upon which it sought to rely to vary the applicable rates of interest in its discretion and as giving rise to a right to terminate the mortgage contracts on 1 month's notice, were inconsistent with central terms of the mortgage offers and were therefore not incorporated into the contracts. The judgment of Hamblen LJ contains a very clear analysis of the proper approach as a matter of contractual construction to questions of inconsistency and inconsistency clauses. The decision is also understood to be of wide significance in relation to "tracker" mortgages more generally, since several other lenders have apparently sought to vary "tracker" rates, otherwise than strictly in accordance with changes to the underlying base rate, relying upon broadly similar clauses to those that the Lender sought to invoke in this case.