Portal de Torre Pacheco
www.portaldetorrepacheco.com
The Provincial Court of Murcia has given reason to the holder of a mortgage in his appeal against the formula for calculating the interest applied by "Unicaja Banco" in a subscribed loan, considering it abusive and similar to the upward rounding clause declared void in his day for the Supreme.The plaintiff's lawyer, José F.
Garre, had argued that the clause is abusive because “it causes to the detriment of the consumer a significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties that derive from the contract”.The Provincial Court of Murcia thus obliges to recalculate the loan installments and considers in its judgment, No.
431/2020 issued by the Fourth Section on May 14, 2020, that the formula known as "Reel Formula" (I = CxRxT / 36000) generates an imbalance against the consumer, since the fact of applying the 365-day calendar year parameter for the calculation of days elapsed but not for the calculation base leads to an extra cost for the consumer, since they are charged more interests, of which the consumer had not been informed when the contract was formalized.The calculation system applied in the prosecuted case considers 360 days in the denominator of the interest calculation formula, while in the numerator it uses 365 days of the calendar year.
Thus, the formula Interest = Capital x (interest rate) x 365/360) applies five more days a year to the detriment of the consumer and increases interest on the installments.In this way, as Attorney José F.
Garre points out, this calculation method “causes the bank to obtain an unjustified benefit to the detriment of the consumer, as the Bank of Spain itself says, since we are dealing with a kind of rounding off to the low that is clearly harmful to the consumer ”.When considering 360 days, each year the exact interest rate is not charged, but that interest rate plus those of 5 days, or six if it is a leap year, which means that the interest rate actually applied is higher than that agreed in benefit of the entity, explains the lawyer.Thus, each year the entity charges 5 or 6 more days of interest, so that at the end of the life of the loan the consumer will have unduly paid several more monthly installments than they really were.According to José F.
Garre, in a 30-year loan in which 400.- € / month is paid, the final extra cost with the application of the formula could reach 2,000 euros, although he understands the effects of the declaration of nullity of this The clause could also be others even more beneficial for consumers and, he adds, that there is still a long way to go in these matters.As Garre underlines, "this causes the bank to obtain an unjustified benefit and does so to the detriment of the consumer, as the Bank of Spain itself says, we are facing a kind of rounding down that is clearly detrimental to the consumer".The lawsuit for the existence of abusive clauses in the mortgage was filed on July 15, 2014, thus, after almost 6 years of litigation, both the owner of the mortgage and his lawyer, José F.
Garre, show their satisfaction with this resolution which also considers other clauses of the contract null, such as: the so-called “floor clause”, the default interest clause, the maturity clause, the commission for claiming debtor positions and the expense clause (delimiting its effects), also imposing costs of the First Instance to the defendant bank.Pacheco lawyer José F.
Garre, a lawyer with more than 15 years of experience, has been specialized in matters of unfair terms in mortgage loans for six years since he was a victim of this type of clause and lost his habitual residence.
Source: Agencias / Foto: archivo
Privacy policy
- Legal notice
- Cookies