chapter eight, Alicante Provincial Court canceled the article. mortgage They were hired by a married couple from Alicante and they get life insurance multiple single premiums €4,600 to get your mortgage. A practice considered by the court abusive in this case, for guessing not enough information provided to those affected by the product or its cost – the premium is directly included in the borrowed capital – and there is no evidence that the policy is a claim from the contracting parties, a bank deposit.
The court thus Approved the decision of the Court of First Instance No. 5 repeated It decides on the trial of Alicante and rejects the appeal made by the convicted party Banco Santander, who has declared that he will not appeal this decision.
In particular, the decision obliges the bank. Double refund the 4,640.23 Euro premium, less consumed installmentsthat is, the amount corresponding to the years in which the insurance is valid is officially called “loan amortization on death”. In addition, you should also: return interest The couple had to pay this amount over time, because what was done was to include this amount in the mortgage amount to finance it, so instead of the 69,000 euros he needed, he was given 73,600 euros. According to the lawyer from Unive Abogados, who handled the case, the money from the policy was immediately transferred to the insurer, Sandra Nesteckyte.
In this sense, the decision itself does not explain more than the “immediate transfer order collected to the account from which the loan amount was paid to the debtor,” violates transparency requirements“because” actually hides that this important premium is financed by the loan amount.undoubtedly increases the cost”.
It also states that “it has not been proven that further credit was provided to the lender.” pre-contract information with respect to the premium and insurance in question” and “Unless it can be proven that the insurance contract complies with a request from the lender, we should be deemed to be at odds. consumer tax lawsuit Violation of an unsolicited supplementary service, presumption of abuse foreseen in art. 89.4 of TRLGDCU (Consolidated Text of the General Law for the defense of consumers and users)”.
The Court ultimately concluded that “the debtor did not know the real economic burden entailed by the contract”.
As the representative of Unive Abogados pointed out, this type of single premium insurance common application some organizations that “put the loan as a condition of making” without providing the necessary information or the actual cost of doing so. In this sense, while banks point out to their clients that it will not take any effort for them to capitalize on the loan, in reality it means that those affected will see an increase in the interest they pay. the life of the loan. a higher amount, such as a mortgage. “In this case, the premium was 4,640 euros, but there are others. much higher amountsup to 10,000 and 15,000 euros, as the policy depends on the amount of the loan and the personal conditions of the contracting party,” says Nesteckyte.
In this sense, there are already several courts in Spain that cancel these clauses that require mortgage insurance and encourage more consumers to file a claim in court. By consulting this newspaper from Santander, they assure that they will not appeal the State Court’s decision.