Post by account_disabled on Feb 11, 2024 6:42:37 GMT -5
On January 21, the Technical Office of the Supreme Court reported on the Sentence issued by said Court on December 21, 2015. The relevance of this resolution lies in the great impact and significance that it will have regarding the contracting conditions. of mortgage loans with consumers.
In summary, the aforementioned ruling declares certain clauses included in the mortgage loans of Banco Popular (including the floor clause) and in those of BBVA void. Below I will summarize what these clauses are and what grounds the Supreme Court uses to justify their nullity:
Early maturity of the loan : These clauses are UAE Email List considered legal as long as they respond to justified causes and take into account circumstances such as the duration and amount of the loan and as long as the mortgage debtor is informed of the possibility of rehabilitating the loan, after payment of the amounts actually owed plus their respective interests.
Imposition of all expenses derived from the contract: The ruling declares void those clauses that attribute to the consumer all the expenses derived from the mortgage (notary, registration, taxes corresponding to the financial institution).
Pre-procedural and procedural expenses: Clauses that require the consumer to pay pre-procedural and procedural expenses that the banking entity may incur as a result of non-compliance by the mortgagor with obligations arising from the loan are considered void.
Change of purpose of the property subject to mortgage: Clauses that prohibit the mortgage debtor from changing the purpose of the property without the express consent of the bank are recognized as abusive.
Telephone acceptance: Clauses that equate telephone acceptance of an offer or particular conditions of the loan with written acceptance are also declared abusive.
Floor clauses: Clauses cannot be used that, despite being understandable and legible , imply an alteration of the object of the loan or its economic balance, which may go unnoticed by the mortgagor.
Default or default interest clause: This clause will be declared void when the default or late payment interest exceeds the agreed remunerative interest by more than two points.
Regarding the possible repercussion of the declaration of nullity of the clauses, the ruling establishes that it does not imply the closure of all mortgage foreclosure procedures that are in progress and that may be affected by this judicial resolution. Otherwise, indirect harm could occur to consumers since this situation could lead to a restriction on the granting of credit by banking entities and, consequently, make it difficult for consumers to access housing.
To avoid this circumstance, the ruling provides that in cases of flagrant late payment it is reasonable for the execution procedure to continue even if the contract could include void clauses.
Analyzing the content of the Sentence, it can be affirmed that it puts a stop to certain abusive practices used by banking entities in contracting mortgage loans with consumers. It also projects a more transparent and guaranteeing image of the legal system and sends a message of greater security and protection to citizens, who sometimes find themselves exposed and, in a certain way, defenseless against banking practices such as those described in this article 'Declaration of new abusive clauses in mortgages aimed at consumers'.
In summary, the aforementioned ruling declares certain clauses included in the mortgage loans of Banco Popular (including the floor clause) and in those of BBVA void. Below I will summarize what these clauses are and what grounds the Supreme Court uses to justify their nullity:
Early maturity of the loan : These clauses are UAE Email List considered legal as long as they respond to justified causes and take into account circumstances such as the duration and amount of the loan and as long as the mortgage debtor is informed of the possibility of rehabilitating the loan, after payment of the amounts actually owed plus their respective interests.
Imposition of all expenses derived from the contract: The ruling declares void those clauses that attribute to the consumer all the expenses derived from the mortgage (notary, registration, taxes corresponding to the financial institution).
Pre-procedural and procedural expenses: Clauses that require the consumer to pay pre-procedural and procedural expenses that the banking entity may incur as a result of non-compliance by the mortgagor with obligations arising from the loan are considered void.
Change of purpose of the property subject to mortgage: Clauses that prohibit the mortgage debtor from changing the purpose of the property without the express consent of the bank are recognized as abusive.
Telephone acceptance: Clauses that equate telephone acceptance of an offer or particular conditions of the loan with written acceptance are also declared abusive.
Floor clauses: Clauses cannot be used that, despite being understandable and legible , imply an alteration of the object of the loan or its economic balance, which may go unnoticed by the mortgagor.
Default or default interest clause: This clause will be declared void when the default or late payment interest exceeds the agreed remunerative interest by more than two points.
Regarding the possible repercussion of the declaration of nullity of the clauses, the ruling establishes that it does not imply the closure of all mortgage foreclosure procedures that are in progress and that may be affected by this judicial resolution. Otherwise, indirect harm could occur to consumers since this situation could lead to a restriction on the granting of credit by banking entities and, consequently, make it difficult for consumers to access housing.
To avoid this circumstance, the ruling provides that in cases of flagrant late payment it is reasonable for the execution procedure to continue even if the contract could include void clauses.
Analyzing the content of the Sentence, it can be affirmed that it puts a stop to certain abusive practices used by banking entities in contracting mortgage loans with consumers. It also projects a more transparent and guaranteeing image of the legal system and sends a message of greater security and protection to citizens, who sometimes find themselves exposed and, in a certain way, defenseless against banking practices such as those described in this article 'Declaration of new abusive clauses in mortgages aimed at consumers'.