The banking ceases to use the soil clauses of mortgages and accepts negotiate

Banking is resigned to paying some bills for his performance in the crisis. The terms soil, a minimum amount that is included in the interests of many mortgages, are one of them. The entities are losing more than 90% of the demands in the courts and in the provincial hearings in the last year. Banks consulted agree that the judgment of May of 2013 of the Supreme Court in which he condemned the BBVA, Cajamar and Novagalicia by abusive clauses have soil has completely changed the picture. "We lose almost all of the resources. Good part in the courts of first instance, almost all of them in the provincial hearings," admits with resignation the executive of a large entity.

Two of the more militant organizations in this area supports the assertion that banker. Adicae, the Association of Users of Banks and savings banks ensures that has won the vast majority of the lawsuits in calling for the nullity of clauses soil. Manuel Meadows, president of this grouping, recognizes, however, that there is less voluntary agreements with the larger communities that in the cases of individual claim. For his part, Javier Gaston, responsible of the Colectivo de Abogados Denunciascolectivas.com, asserts that in the 95.34 % of the 560 cases that they have achieved a favorable judgment, of which 77% has been by covenant.

But the lawyers and the partnerships have opened now another battle with billions at stake: ensure that, in addition to nullify the clauses, judges do so retroactively. That is to say, that the banks return the money charged by the clauses from the start of the mortgage. The sector is pending in a forthcoming ruling of the Supreme, by an appeal of the BBVA, which the High Court should be positioned on the retroactivity. Some banks have criticized the step taken by the BBVA because they believe that if you lose, it could be a cascade of claims by an immense economic value. In fact, Badajoz and Castilla La Mancha have withdrawn their appeals to the Supreme to avoid receiving a blow. "We are still presenting resources of appeal to the Supreme Court normally. We use only the decisions that, in our view, contradict what decided the Supreme, that is to say, that are separated from a jurisprudential doctrine that we believe clear," say sources of the BBVA.