17.2 C
London
Friday, May 24, 2024

Franc loans. Judgment of the CJEU. Cancellation of the contract. Consequences. [PRZYKŁADY I WYLICZENIA]

Must read

- Advertisement -


The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that in the event of annulment of the agreement, the bank has no right to demand compensation from the borrower that goes beyond the return of the paid-out capital. What does this mean from the point of view of a frankowicz? Tens of thousands of zlotys, which he will not pay as installments. Here are the calculations for specific cases from previous years.

The CJEU issued last week two judgments in cases brought against banks by consumerswho took loans denominated in Swiss francs.

1. the bank has no right to demand compensation from the consumer beyond the return of the paid-out capital in the event of cancellation of the contract; 2. the courts may order an interim measure in the form of suspension of the repayment of loan installments during the proceedings to determine the unfair nature of the terms of the contract.

What are the consequences of these judgments? What does this mean for franchisees? We asked Votum Robin Lawyers for some examples regarding the effects of invalidating a contract.

- Advertisement -

Benefits of CJEU judgments – calculations for franchise holders

“Each example is presented on a similar diagram and contains data and values ​​of benefits that the borrower obtains as a result of a judgment declaring the loan agreement invalid,” Paweł Wójcik, president of Votum Finance Help, explained to TVN24 Biznes.

He also indicated the main benefits that “the frankowicz obtains from a favorable judgment:

1) reducing the current debt balance to PLN 0, 2) saving interest on the remaining capital to be repaid, 3) reducing the current installments to PLN 0, 4) returning the overpayment above the principal granted (i.e. the difference between all payments to the bank and the value of the loan disbursed), 5 ) return of statutory interest for delay – calculated on the amount to be paid indicated in the judgment, which usually consists of the value of all payments to the bank, 6) deletion of the mortgage from the land and mortgage register and data from BIK.

20-year loan for PLN 450,000 from 2008 (marriage)

As the first example, the law firm Votum Robin Lawyers presented a married couple who in 2008 obtained a 20-year Swiss franc loan in the amount of PLN 450,000 from the bank. “On May 11, 2021, they filed a lawsuit, on August 4, 2022 they obtained a judgment of the court of first instance declaring the loan agreement invalid, and on May 15, 2023 they obtained a judgment of the court of second instance, which upheld the first judgment,” they described for TVN24 Biznes lawyers.

According to them, the first installment was PLN 1,774.95, and the last one before the sentence was PLN 4,828.39.

They explained that “as a result of the final judgment:

1) the debt balance was reduced to PLN 0 from PLN 255,843.20, 2) the interest saved until the end of the loan period amounts to approx. PLN 17,756, 3) the loan installment was reduced to PLN 0 from PLN 4,828.39, 4) due to the fact that frankers paid a total of PLN 692,461.38 to the bank and took out a loan of PLN 450,000, the bank is obliged to return the difference, i.e. PLN 242,461.38, 5) the value of the statutory interest awarded for the delay amounts to case PLN 53,007.48″.

As calculated by the law firm, the sum of benefits amounted to PLN 569,068.06, although it is necessary to pay attention to the two most important components of this amount – the debt balance, i.e. the amount to be repaid in the amount of PLN 255,843.20which the borrower they don’t have to payand the second most important element is the return of payments that exceeded the value of the loan taken – PLN 242,461.38which one the bank is to return.

Votum Robin Lawyers

30-year loan for PLN 300,000 from 2006 (marriage)

The second example concerns a married couple who in January 2006 took out a 30-year Swiss franc loan for PLN 300,000. The first installment was PLN 879.48, and the current one – PLN 1,393.81.

Here are the effects of the favorable verdict for frankowiczów:

1) debt balance reduced to PLN 0 from PLN 160,166.85, 2) interest saved until the end of the loan period amounts to approx. PLN 18,784, 3) loan installment was reduced to PLN 0 from PLN 1,393.81, 4) franchise holders paid the total of PLN 446,728.50, and they took out a loan for PLN 300,000, so the bank is obliged to repay them PLN 146,728.50, 5) the value of the statutory interest awarded for the delay is PLN 38,599.18″.

The sum of benefits in this case is PLN 364,278.52.

Votum Robin Lawyers

30-year loan for PLN 420,000 from 2008 with partial overpayments (marriage)

Another case is a married couple who in September 2008 took out a 30-year loan in francs for PLN 420,000. The first installment was PLN 866.07, and the current one – PLN 1,636.19.

The effects of a favorable judgment for borrowers are:

1) debt balance reduced to PLN 0 from PLN 283,059.50, 2) interest saved until the end of the loan period amounts to approx. PLN 44,605, 3) loan installment was reduced to PLN 0 from PLN 1,636.19, 4) franchise holders paid the bank in total PLN 556,908.71, and they took out a loan for PLN 420,000, so the bank is obliged to repay them PLN 136,908.71, 5) the value of the statutory interest awarded for the delay is PLN 90,627.61″.

The sum of benefits in this case is PLN 555,200.82.

Votum Robin Lawyers

30-year loan for PLN 1.36 million from 2007 – fully repaid (single)

The last example concerns a single who in June 2007 took out a 30-year loan in francs worth PLN 1,359,097.35. The first installment was PLN 47,643.64.

Since the loan was fully repaid, in this example, the franking borrower received benefits only as a result of the overpaid loan and statutory interest for delay.

The borrower paid a total of PLN 2,890,992.20 to the bank and took out a loan for PLN 1,359,097.35, so the bank is obliged to return PLN 1,531,894.85. As for interest, their amount is PLN 819,766.07.

The sum of benefits is PLN 2,351,660.92.

Votum Robin Lawyers

Read more: What do the judgments of the CJEU mean for franchise holders? >>>

Frankowicze – is it worth going to court?

Is it worth going to court in connection with the judgments of the CJEU? – It depends on what the alternative is – said in an interview with TVN24 Biznes economic journalist Maciej Samcik, author of the blog “Subiektywnie o finance”.

“If the alternative is a settlement, which is not much worse than what you can get in court, it’s always better to settle.” As far as I know, banks do not issue such settlements yet. After the recent judgments of the CJEU, the state of the game is such that basically every CHF borrower can get a loan without interest. So an alternative settlement would have to be very good to be an option for annulment of the contract, he explained.

In his opinion, from the customer’s point of view, the downside is that it costs money. – Lawyers who specialize in franc cases, due to the huge demand, price their services quite expensive. I heard about 20-30 thousand zlotys per case. And, of course, it takes a long time – if you go to court today, it would be difficult to count on a final judgment before 3-4 years, and perhaps longer – said Samcik.

– On the other hand, the judgments of the CJEU also show the possibility of suspending the payment of installments. This is an argument to go to court, because if the court takes into account the security of the claim in the form of non-payment of installments, and there is a good chance for this, then from the point of view of someone who has already repaid the loan principal, the mere non-payment of installments is beneficial – he added.

The number of cases in courts and the reaction of banks

Aneta Wiewiórowska-Domagalska, an expert on EU consumer law from the Institute of Legal Sciences of the Polish Academy of Sciences and the law firm Hoffman Taborowski i Wspólnicy, recently told TVN24 that there are currently about 130,000 cases in Polish courts in connection with CHF loans. – At the moment, consumers win about 97 percent of cases. This is impressive. They started with 25 percent.

Read more: “It was the biggest deterrent to suing the banks” >>>

On Tuesday, the president of the Polish Bank Association, Tadeusz Białek, announced that banks, in order to avoid the limitation of claims in court disputes with franchise holders, will file countersuits.

– An element of these counterposes, instead of the so-called remuneration for the use of capital, will most likely be the issue of demands for the valorization of these funds, i.e. taking into account the cost of money over time – Bialek said.

According to attorney Radosław Górski, who represents franchise holders before courts, ZBP misleads the public. – Being the author of the C-520/21 lawsuit and the initiator of the preliminary references to the CJEU, to which the Court replied on June 15, I declare that the CJEU in the C-520/21 case also resolved the right of banks to index the capital of the loan disbursed. Both the Advocate General in his opinion and the CJEU in the judgment of June 15 this year, answer the question about indexation, stating that the banks are not entitled to any kind of compensation, emphasized Górski, quoted by PAP.

Read more: Reaction of banks after the judgments of the CJEU. “The lawsuits and countersuits will continue” >>>

Author:Krzysztof Krzykowski

Main photo source: Shutterstock



Source link

More articles

- Advertisement -

Latest article