Post by account_disabled on Mar 6, 2024 23:27:58 GMT -5
In the opinion of this expert, the national judge must compare the method of calculation of the IRPH Cajas rate provided for by the clause and its resulting effective rate, with the method of calculation and rate resulting from the use of other indices, such as Euribor, for loans. of similar amounts and terms.” From his point of view, “ it is a comparison that is highly clarifying , since while the Euribor rate represents the average price for which financial institutions acquire the money that they subsequently lend to their clients, the IRPH rate represents the average final cost.
That the clients have paid for that money and all the concepts associated with the loan , making it indisputable that the imposition of an IRPH rate on the consumer generated a Fax Lists special imbalance of benefits, in terms of the CJEU, which the entity was well able to neutralize in accordance with the indications of the Bank of Spain, but, far from doing so, it aggravated it by incorporating a positive differential” Erausquin also points out that this latest CJEU ruling “also obliges the national judge to verify whether, given that the IRPH rate is determined based on APR rates and the consumer also pays the elements of his own APR, the existence of an overlap or duplication of payments .
In fact, this verification has also been overlooked by the Provincial Court of Palma de Mallorca, and whose result would also connect with the good faith trial." For Erausquin "if the professional, aware that the IRPH rate that he imposed in the contract was prepared through an average of the APR rates of the reference operations, also aware that the consumer also paid his own APR, and aware "Since the Bank of Spain, to avoid the extra cost that this would entail, warned of the need to use a negative differential to neutralize this extra cost, it still imposed a positive differential, it seems difficult to defend that it had acted in very good faith.
That the clients have paid for that money and all the concepts associated with the loan , making it indisputable that the imposition of an IRPH rate on the consumer generated a Fax Lists special imbalance of benefits, in terms of the CJEU, which the entity was well able to neutralize in accordance with the indications of the Bank of Spain, but, far from doing so, it aggravated it by incorporating a positive differential” Erausquin also points out that this latest CJEU ruling “also obliges the national judge to verify whether, given that the IRPH rate is determined based on APR rates and the consumer also pays the elements of his own APR, the existence of an overlap or duplication of payments .
In fact, this verification has also been overlooked by the Provincial Court of Palma de Mallorca, and whose result would also connect with the good faith trial." For Erausquin "if the professional, aware that the IRPH rate that he imposed in the contract was prepared through an average of the APR rates of the reference operations, also aware that the consumer also paid his own APR, and aware "Since the Bank of Spain, to avoid the extra cost that this would entail, warned of the need to use a negative differential to neutralize this extra cost, it still imposed a positive differential, it seems difficult to defend that it had acted in very good faith.