Post by account_disabled on Feb 15, 2024 2:43:24 GMT -6
Erausquin and Ortiz carried out an extensive study commissioned by the General Directorate of Consumer Affairs of the Balearic Government. “We analyzed the features of the IRPH and saw that its calculation method uses APR rates and that makes it more expensive monthly. We also clarify the point of view of the Bank of Spain, which recommends using a negative differential so that the mortgage loan does not become more expensive. It is done in protected housing, but not in free housing because no one supervises its activity.”
For this jurist, “one of the problems for those mortgaged by IRPH is that no banking entity tells them about this 1994 circular from the Bank of Spain that recommends including a negative differential to prevent that loan from becoming more expensive. People do not know the circular and do not enforce it and the bank knows it, but it includes 0.25 in a positive way.”
IRPH as a question of legality
Juan Moreno , an expert lawyer in Singapore Email List banking issues from Seville, believes that “ Europe has already provided a solution to the issue with the latest CJEU ruling . To the preliminary ruling question from Palma de Mallorca he really answered one question, the other four he made clear that they were a matter of ordinary national legality and that they had to be resolved by the judge himself . Regarding transparency, he makes it clear that the financial institution should have reported this circular from the Bank of Spain and that the IRPH requires a negative differential.
This lawyer recognizes that he has had IRPH claims stuck for several years . “The first lawsuits filed in 2018 and 2019 sleep the sleep of the righteous. I have the demands answered and there are still no accusations. Above all, I think it is a question of legality. Some issues from 2020 are scheduled for 2025 and 2026. At the same time, I have a cassation pending in the Supreme Court to give us an answer on the legality of the IRPH.”
Juan Moreno, lawyer specializing in banking issues. of Sevilla. (Photo: Own transfer)
For this expert, the IRPH as a clause does not comply with legality. “If a positive differential is set, the consumer is already being charged more, which in the market price can reach double. There is bad faith there from the moment the need to incorporate a negative differential is hidden . In fact, there are very few IRPH with a negative differential, some with zero and the majority with a positive differential.”
From this perspective, “this jurist believes that all the requirements are met to have the IPRH annulled as abusive . At the moment, from what we see, the Supreme Court still does not know the substance of the matter well. We know that there are issues that are not being admitted in cassation because they allege that with the four Plenary rulings that we know of, it has already been resolved and there is no cassation interest.”
Regarding those affected who have gathered in different Spanish cities and are now studying holding a next call in Madrid all together, he recognizes that they are desperate. There are people who can no longer pay that rate and have notified the bank , others pay principal and not interest. What we have seen is that no entity has offered its client a change to the Euribor. They continue to have the client trapped.”
In his opinion, “ the problem has been generated at the mortgage level because the Government did not dictate the appropriate regulations and as much litigation as there is now would have been avoided. The bank plays with the fact that there are many of its clients who do not complain, this is what happened with the issue of preferred ones, which only 40% claimed. The Supreme Court, due to the blocking of the CGPJ and its renewal, is in the picture, and the solution will take time to reach this problem but it should be proposed through a legislative reform that would annul this mortgage index.