multicurrency mortgage declared void in Barcelona

hipoteca multidivisa


Declared the invalidity of the clauses of a multicurrency loan from Barclays Bank in Mollet del Valles.

Case 4 March 2016 the Court of First Instance number 5 Mollet Del Valles annuls the clauses of the mortgage loan and ordering the return of the amounts received in excess, by recalculating the mortgage indexed to Euribor plus 0,75% differential provisions in the contract, with the bank to pay costs.

Customers, hired one multicurrency mortgage with Barclays Bank in July 2008.

In 2013, filed suit against the bank, requesting the annulment of the clauses relating to foreign currencies, based on the error in the consent of the actors in hiring, caused by the lack of compliance by the bank of the duties of information on the characteristics and risks of the multicurrency mortgage.

Customers had a conservative profile and retail y se encontraban en una posición de inferioridad frente a la entidad bancaria. Also, the burden of proof to be informed properly rests with the bank.

Barclays por su parte, alegó que el cliente tenía conocimientos en la materia, and that the mortgage in yen is not a complex product, but "attractive and advantageous".

At the time of contracting the multicurrency mortgage (July 2008), was in force the Ministerial Order 5 May 1994 He is forcing "Delivery of a prospectus whose minimum content is set out in Annex I to this standard".

Barclays acknowledged that He has not given any information brochure.

The order shall forces a binding offer, to be signed by the representative of the entity and must be able to be examined with at least three days, before granting writing.

The bank said it was not required to make such binding offer. But in the opinion of Judge, para exonerarse de tal obligación no es suficiente con la inclusión de una cláusula por la que la parte prestataria renuncia a la misma. Dicha estipulación no consta negociada individualmente con el cliente, which it has the status of consumer.

Also, considered it is a derivative financial instrument, bringing up the SAP Barcelona 27 November 2015: Therefore, the Securities Market Act applies, as provided in its own article 2.2.

highlighted in the judgment the role of the expert report, which highlights the following points:

  • The contract multicurrency mortgage It does not indicate the costs and risks, in the event of a currency appreciation, no cancellation examples of simulations are presented and no reference is made to the limitation of the commissions. No se informó de la conveniencia de contratar un seguro de cambio.
  • Era previsible una mejora en la economía japonesa que supondría una elevación de tipos que apreciaría la divisa. Dicha posibilidad venía avalada por diversos informes que debían ser conocidos por Barclays. In fact, the Bank of Japan had begun to raise rates in the middle of 2006. At the time there was a likelihood of hiring 90% that damage to the client they occur.
  • The information is not easily accessible, analysis and understanding for a person who is not an expert in finance.

The Bank should have complied with the reporting requirements imposed by the Securities Market Act. Nor did appropriateness test or suitability. Se incumplieron igualmente las obligaciones de información recogidas en el RD 217/2008 (articles 60 a 63).

Ultimately, it is appreciated that there is a fundamental error and excusable, and the provisions of the Multicurrency mortgage cancel relativas a las monedas extranjeras. El Banco es condenado a repay the sums overpaid their legal interests and the mortgage is indexed to Euribor plus a 0.75% Differential coming under the contract.

Consult your case now

Leave a Reply


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