The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union that establishes the total retroactivity of the floor clauses has supposed a judicial setback for those banks that have commercialized mortgages with these abusive clauses. The total outlay that the sector will have to make is between 5,000 and 7,500 million euros, according to estimated calculations. AND The most affected entities will be Liberbank, CaixaBank and Banco Popular.
The bank will have to face an additional invoice of up to 7.6 billion euros, according to the Bank of Spain. In a confidential report, this body assured that the total retroactivity of the floor clauses could undermine the ability of banks to contribute to the recovery and well-being of citizens. He added that returning the money overcharged by these types of clauses would have negative consequences from the point of view of financial stability and growth of the Spanish economy.
Renta 4 confirms that the failure of the CJEU has been unexpected since last July the attorney general of this court stated his agreement with the Supreme Court’s resolution to the complete non-retroactivity of the floor clauses, limiting to May 2013 the return of the amounts collected. The firm recalls that, although this opinion was not binding, the market had assumed that it was a good indicator of the possible ruling of the European Court, which has finally negatively surprised the Spanish banking sector.
Specifically, this judicial setback has affected the financial sector on the stock market. The falls have become double digits in the case of Banco Popular and Liberbank. The most affected banks, according to the figures estimated by Renta 4 Banco, they would be Liberbank, Caixabank and Popular due to the weight of the money that they will have to return to those affected with respect to their market value.
Yes, Joaquín Maudos, professor at the University of Valencia, stresses that you must first know the term that the bank will have to face the return of the amounts affected by the judgment. “Until those details are given, we don’t know what exercise or exercises it impacts, and it is essential to know this to assess the potential impact on profitability ”.
As the official statement issued by the entities suggests, it will be key to know how and when the Spanish judges and courts apply the decision. “Now it is essential to wait for the details of the resolution and its adaptation by the Spanish judges, including the period for the affected banks to make the payment of the anticipated amounts,” said Popular. BBVA, for its part, has stressed that “it will comply with the judgment made public, confirm the criteria determined by the Spanish judges and courts.”
On the other hand, the professor insists that also it is important to know what part of the impact is already provisioned, “Because what is problematic for the result is the non-provisioned part. And of course, knowing the impact entity by entity, because not all of them have the same capacity to cope ”, he adds.
In any case, Maudos estimates that this is bad news for the profitability of Spanish banks, which is at levels below the cost of raising capital. “It is one more reason for banks to continue reducing costs in order to gain efficiency,” he says. In that sense, Enrique Quemada, President of ONEtoONE, ensures that the most affected banks will be Popular, Unicaja and Liberbank, entities that “will try formulas to seduce their clients by improving the conditions on their mortgages and other products.”
Santiago Carbó, director of Financial Studies at Funcas, points out that “it is a news item that can undoubtedly have a negative impact on some Spanish financial institutions due to its importance and magnitude. It is a non-appealable judicial decision and, therefore, it must be respected and must be valued It already makes sense. Now, it was a contingency to which the affected entities gave a certain probability and, therefore, they have a plan and provisions to cover the costs that this circumstance carries. It is part of the legal risk that financial entities now have so important ”.
As for the mortgaged, Carbó estimates that “many will no longer be affected because they have reached agreements with their entities and, as for the rest, it will be necessary to see what steps and what deadlines are handled when transposing this decision to Spain, something that it has not had a comparative precedent. “
The European Court’s reasons for saying yes to full retroactive accounting
The European court argues its decision noting that Spanish jurisprudence that limits in time the effects of the declaration of nullity of the floor clauses contained in the mortgage contracts is incompatible with European Union law, since the European directive establishes that unfair terms will not bind consumers.
In other words, it considers that the consequence of the ground clause being ruled abusive is the reestablishment of the situation in which the mortgaged would find himself if there had been no such clause. Thus, it guarantees total retroactivity.
These clauses provide that, even though the interest rate falls below a certain threshold (“floor”) set in the contract, the consumer will continue to pay minimum interest rates that are equal to that threshold and without a rate lower than the applicable one. same.
With this long-awaited sentence, a chapter that has lasted several years and that has given many headaches to Spanish lawyers and judges closes. Especially since the Supreme Court declared the floor clauses null and void in May 2013. This nullity came from having been included in the mortgage contracts without clear and transparent prior communication to the consumer. The Supreme Court ruled that they were unlawful clauses.
Everything you need to know about the floor clauses and how to claim your money
–
