Life insurance and payment protection: BBVA condemned

seguro de vida

The Provincial Court of Palma de Mallorca condemns BBVA S.A. Insurance and reinsurance to full payment of life insurance linked to mortgage loan

Consult your case now

As part of hiring a seguro de vida and Payment protection insurance a mortgage loan, the Provincial Court of Palma de Mallorca has condemned BBVA S.A. Insurance Authority to pay compensation under both policies, validating the active legitimacy of the beneficiaries of the policyholder regarding mortgage insurance and rejecting the application of the definition of risk in respect of life insurance.

The decision was taken in the judgment of Section 3 of the Provincial Court of Palma de Mallorca No. 2/2018, of 9 January.

Antecedentes

D. Borja, He was employed as a policyholder and insured, a seguro de vida y otro de mortgage payment protection; After his death, their assignees D. Ramón, Ms.. Tarsila and D. Isidro sued BBVA S.A. Insurance and Reinsurance requesting compliance with the obligations of the two policies taken, and they demanded the amount of 104,346.03 €.

BBVA S.A. Insurance and Reinsurance acknowledged the existence of insurance but denied breach attributed, since they argued that the plaintiffs did not have locus standi and with regard to mortgage protection insurance payments they were not beneficiaries and He had not paid inheritance tax in the amount claimed.

The defendant added that before the payment protection insurance the policyholder stated that he had suffered no "Chronic disease or condition in need medical management or treatment for a longer time 15 consecutive days" and evidence presented indicated otherwise, as, if already known, It would have meant an additional premium of a 50% or non-underwriting. And in life insurance, the actor was in a cause exclusion because it is a death whose origin is the result of an accident caused prior to the entry into force of insurance, It is an anchor and non-limiting clause.

He also objected to the amounts claimed and the application of legal interest section 20 de la LCS.

Primera Instancia

The Court of First Instance No. 2 Palma de Mallorca in sentence 16 June 2017, substantially she upheld the claim and ordered BBVA S.A. Insurance and Reinsurance payable 97,341.90 €, "With proof of payment of inheritance tax or exemption, unless authorized by the tax authorities on the terms provided also 32.4 of that Act 29/1987, and procedural interests Article 576 LEC from the proof of payment of the tax or exemption, and expressly ordered to pay the defendant ".

Clauses against the existence of disease caused previously stated that they were valid and effective and delineating the hedged risk, but the condition of a cerebral ischemic accident date prior to signing the policy is not found in the cases referred to in clause delimitation risk; so he ordered the defendant to pay entity 97,341.90 €.

BBVA filed an appeal and the plaintiffs opposed. The resource focused solely on the amount of 19,775.49 € of mortgage protection insurance payments, insisting on the lack of standing of the applicants for not being insurance beneficiaries but it was the bank.

Provincial Court

Regarding the lack of standing of the plaintiff the Chamber stated that insurance beneficiary was actually the bank but did not prevent the heirs apply for the payment.

He said the judgment of the Provincial Court of La Coruna 10 November 2016 He is citing the judgment of the Supreme Court 17 December 1994 that, according to the statement by the Chamber "It states that the existence of a beneficiary in the insurance policy does not deprive the promisee interest holder under the contract in the exercise of rights under the same before the courts, without prejudice to its obligations to the beneficiary"And Judgment of the Supreme Court 5 April 2017 he transcribed

This room has been speaking in favor of recognizing standing to bring the policyholder, without prejudice to meet its obligations to the beneficiary, particularly in cases like this life insurance and disability associated with a mortgage loan where the first beneficiary is the lender.

[…]

The judgment itself 1110/2001 consider the Chamber, producido el siniestro (death or disability), good faith and respect for moral ( Arts. 7.1 , 1255 and 1258 CC ) legally determine that is not explicable that the bank does not claim the insurance and decide to continue demanding payment of the outstanding principal insured borrowers: "It does not appear legally understandable that, produced death or disability of the insured borrower, the same bank as at the time the loan conditional to the conclusion of insurance, He hired as group insurance policy holder and designated himself as first beneficiary in the event of death or disability, then you can freely choose to require payment of the outstanding principal and the widowed spouse or own invalid, and the insurance company, the greater the less justifiable choice the business relationship between bank and insurer, if in this case there is no proof it was given to start the process, curiously has ended up giving the insurance belong to the same corporate group in which the Bank subsequently integrated end ».

Sentence 119/2004, of 19 February, qualified life insurance linked to a mortgage loan as a "safeguard clause" in relation to the loan payment, so that both contracts, and loan insurance, "Lead parallel lives'".

De otro lado, in relation to reducing the amount of benefit under the alleged difference between the premium paid and which had been known application entity risk, Hall said at the time of subscription D. Borja of the policy only suffered from hypertension and was unaware of any other pathology heart that related to the cause of his death, so that it was not possible to apply the definition of the hedged risk.

Finally, the applicants challenged the ruling of the lower court decision regarding the Art default interest. 20 de la LCS.

About, Provincial Court cited the judgment of the Audiencia Provincial de Zamora 19 January 2017 who said "There is no clause in the contract or any legal rule setting a start date of the calculation of the punitive interest Article 20 L. C. S. the date of filing and settlement of inheritance tax. Article 20 sets the date of the incident and it is clear that in an accident insurance coverage whose death by accident and orphan's pension, The incident coincides with the date of accident”.

Por lo anterior It could not be invoked as grounds justified for not paying default interest the non-delivery of documents tax assessment every time from production of the claim had to be paid those amounts and did not realize.

Concluded the Audiencia Provincial de Mallorca dismiss the appeal filed by BBVA S.A. Insurance and Reinsurance, confirming the order to pay the amounts for life insurance, by payment protection, with interest the article 20 LCS and to pay the costs.

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