The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled today on the deadline to claim mortgage expenses (notary, agency, registration and appraisal), establishing that said deadline will not begin to run before the consumer becomes aware of the abusive nature. of a contractual clause.
That is to say, no matter how much jurisprudence exists, the consumer knows the abusiveness of his clause when he obtains the final judgment. It is that fact, and no others, that makes the deadlines run.
The ruling also highlights that the consumer, in addition to knowing his rights, must have sufficient time to prepare and effectively file an appeal in order to invoke those rights against clauses of an abusive nature.
To all this, as indicated by ASUFIN, Association of Financial Consumers, there is an important reflection that the CJEU makes regarding the responsibility of entities: when there is consolidated national jurisprudence in which the abusive nature of certain standard clauses has been recognized , it is to be expected that banking entities are aware of it and act accordingly. That is to say, the bank would have to be paying the expenses to its clients for years. However, a similar attitude cannot be expected from consumers, given the exceptional nature of the conclusion of this type of contract for them.
First reviews
Patricia Suarez, President of ASUFIN celebrates the European ruling that “corrects the Supreme Court, the Provincial Courts, and even the banks themselves, by establishing that the consumer did not have to know the jurisprudence to complain. It is great news for all those affected who, now, will be able to exercise their rights with peace of mind and we hope that the banks who learn of this news will start to return the amounts to their clients because we continue to saturate the courts unnecessarily.”
For its part, Irene Becerra, legal director of reclamador.es, stated: “The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which as we already know, does not oppose the prescription of the action relating to the restitution of mortgage expenses, has been forceful today in its ruling establishing that this period must begin to count when the consumer knows that the expense clause is abusive and its effects.” With this, the reclamador.es directive clarifies, “the CJEU rejects the options that banking entities have always defended: On the one hand, it opposes the term starting to count when the clause exhausts its effects, that is, when the consumer paid the costs of establishing his loan. On the other hand, he also rejects that the term begins to count when there is consolidated jurisprudence on the nullity of the clause, since the consumer does not necessarily know the jurisprudence that protects his rights. In this sense, “The CJEU recognizes that the consumer is in a situation of inferiority with respect to the professional profile of banking entities.”
