The banking year 360 days is unfair term

clausulas abusivas

 

The Provincial Court of Pontevedra has declared abusive interest calculation counting one year 360 days, in sentence 5 May 2016.

In that judgment, also considers unfair term customer prohibition of mortgaging, record, sell or lease the property without consent of the bank.

El litigio se inició con una demanda de los clientes contra el Banco Popular solicitando la anulación de una cláusula suelo, así como de una serie de cláusulas que se consideraban también abusive.

The Commercial Court 2 Pontevedra, in sentence 20 January 2016 partially granted the application, but did not consider that the clause of "360 days" of banking year or prohibiting the borrower tax, mortgage, vender o arrendar el inmueble si el consentimiento del banco fuesen abusivas.

For the district court, It not is proven that there was an economic imbalance to the detriment of customers.

Así que los prestatarios interponen appeal before the Provincial Court.

The business year 360 days

Audience for the "banking business year 360 days "is not justified at the present time, as for calculating accrued interest if the calendar month is used 30 or 31 days and therefore:

"It is a practice that generates a significant and unjustified imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties that always hurts the same part, the borrower ".

It is a kind of "rounding down" to the detriment of the consumer.

And in his argument, trae a colación la Memoria del Servicio de Reclamaciones del Banco de España del año 2009 (already questioned the justification of the year 360 days) and Sentencias del Tribunal Supremo de 4 de noviembre y 29 December 2010 and 2 March 2011, sobre el redondeo de intereses. Also, infringe lo dispuesto en la OM EHA/899/2011 de 28 October in Annex V refers to the year 365 days.

The clause of "business year 360 days "is declared void by not exceed transparency control, not proved that the appellant was informed of the negative consequences of their application.

The prohibition of mortgaging, sell, record rent

For the Board:

"It is a restriction on the freedom of property that has no raison d'etre"

La hipoteca es un derecho real con eficacia erga omnes con lo que el banco no se ve perjudicado por la transmisión del inmueble. Y en caso de ejecución hipotecaria, a possible lease shall be terminated in accordance with art. 13 the LAU.

The Court considers that the limitation to the lease under certain conditions which are likely to decrease in the value of housing is justified. In fact, There is no dispute in the litigation.

Lo que no es ajustado a derecho es la prohibición Generic without any limitation or concretion, the prohibition of mortgaging the borrower, record, sell or lease the property without the consent of the lender ".

Such general and absolute prohibition, a clear imbalance causes the exclusive benefit of the lender and the borrower detriment.

In short, the appeal is.

Aquí debemos recordar que la doctrina sobre cláusulas abusivas se aplica a prestatarios que tengan la condición de consumidores pero no a las empresas que actúan en el marco de su actividad comercial.

We will have to wait for other instances speak out, para quede fijado un criterio sobre la abusividad de las cláusulas del año comercial de 360 days and a ban on the borrower.

Consult your case now

Leave a Reply

Language


Set as default language
 Edit Translation


Subscribe to receive a book PDF


Just for signing up receive via email the link to download the book "How to change lawyers" en format digital.
Sign up here

Sígueme en Twitter




Subscribe me

* This field is required