Skip to content

Most abusive elements in the contract of a Spanish mortgage

empresario firma contrato detras de modelo arquitectonico de casa 2379 1670 2 - Most abusive elements in the contract of a Spanish mortgage

It is common to find mortgage loans signed a few years ago that is at the same time referenced to the IRPH, contain floor clauses and the obligation to pay all the formalization expenses. In this post, we detail the most abusive elements in a mortgage contract and where they are located.

Having a floor clause is not an excluding factor for other bank abuses, nor does having a mortgage referenced to the IRPH index avoid having the floor clause or the mortgage expenses between your condition. Moreover, it is common to find contracts of this type with IRPH, clause floor and the obligation of payment to the consumer of all the costs of formalizing the mortgage. A triple somersault for the banking client.

That a mortgage includes some type of clause or index that can be considered abusive does not mean that this abuse has to be exclusive, nor that claiming one of them prevents legal battle for the rest. There may be many mortgages that have already begun their claim, for example, for formalization expenses and that are now considering the appropriate legal actions to recover the overpaid for having a mortgage referenced to the IRPH instead of the Euribor. Both situations are compatible.

Many affected find out that their mortgage has several abusive clauses when they go to professionals to claim for one of them. When analyzing mortgage loan contracts, lawyers and legal advisers detect other bank abuse that can be claimed. All these abuses must appear in the signed loan agreement. In particular, the IRPH usually appears in the third clause, where the applicable interest is fixed. And, although it is infrequent to appear in the deed with the abbreviations, it is also common to find it by its full name: Mortgage Loan Reference Index.

To find out if the mortgage has a floor clause, it will be necessary to go to the section on financial conditions, where it frequently appears as "financial clause 3a". Although, banks have always been very careful when calling this abuse directly as a floor clause. Among other denominations, we can find the floor clause as the minimum limit of the applicable interest rate of (...)%, The applicable minimum annual nominal interest rate will be (...)% o In no case the annual nominal interest rate resulting from each variation may be higher than (...)% or less than (...)%.

In the case of expenses, a specific section usually appears in which each of the concepts is broken down. The abuse is found here in the sentence that attributes, to pay the consumer the notary, agency, appraisal, Land Registry, IAJD, etcetera.

In these situations, the process to claim is identified in any of the cases, since the extrajudicial route must be exhausted first, that is, to try to negotiate directly with the bank so that the abusive clauses are deleted and the unduly paid amounts are returned. If the entity did not respond to this claim within two months, it could opt for the judicial process.

In spite of the above, advised waiting to know the decision of the General Advocate of the European Union, on June 24, to initiate the claim of the IRPH, since the chances of success will be greater.

The average claim for the land clause is 7,700 euros while the claim for mortgage settlement costs amounts to 1,300 euros, not including the Tax on Documented Legal Acts. To these amounts, we should add the return of the IRPH, which, on average, amount to 20,000 euros.

4/5 - (1 vote)
(Visited 166 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.