Kavanagh
You appear to be overlooking Banking abuses with regards to mortgages, as this is not so simple or black and white as you suggest. Plus mortgage abuse has also highlighted some sensitive issues with regard to the impartiality of the SC....
.https://www.spanishpropertyinsight.com/2019/06/21/a-summary-of-spains-new-mortgage-act/
“The controversial ruling from Spain’s Supreme Court was clearly biased towards lenders with only one much-lauded dissenting vote from a brave magistrate that spoke up against them. The magistrate that broke rank from his peers was the only one who in fact had NOT worked for lenders in the past nor had any professional ties to them; Mr. Francisco Javier Orduña Moreno. So, kudos to this bold magistrate for his forward-thinking and making a stand.
The ECJs ruling corrects this glaring mistake from Spain’s Supreme Court and sets the record straight for consumers at large.”
Also the following has been expressed which may assist the OP...
On June 17, 2019, Spain introduced long awaited changes to existing Spanish mortgage laws. This was done to bring them in-line with an EU Directive to provide increased consumer protection, post the 2008 financial crisis.".
"Now, consumers have much more protection. New Spanish mortgage laws allow homeowners to be twelve months in arrears before lenders can begin repossession proceedings. Specifically:
In the first half of the mortgage term, lenders cannot repossess a property until the borrower is 12 months late in their mortgage payments, or the total amount of their arrears is more than 3% of the total capital loaned.
In the second half of the mortgage term, lenders cannot repossess a property until the borrower is 15 months late in their mortgage payments, or the total amount of their arrears is more than 7% of the total capital loaned.
Late payment fees can be no more than 3% of the amount in arrears. Before the new mortgage laws, late payments fees were up to 12%."
There are difficult areas to address here in so much as where the balance lies with regard to consumer protection, as similar questions are now being asked with regard to recent unreasonable rulings relating to Bank Guarantee law, which then inevitably begs the wider question are some recent SC rulings now compromising the rule of law which calls for judicial impartiality, or are they too a symptom of "glaring mistakes"?
In which case pity the poor purchaser who is expected to find the monies yet again to continue the pioneering endeavour to gain justice at even higher levels of litigation (Constitutional and/ or ECJ) having previously won lower court and appeal court hearings, then being subjected to a SC ruling which undermines all previous successes to date ( including previous supportive SC rulings ) in order to finally achieve justice according to a law intended to protect from the outset, and make the Bank fully accountable.
Once again this scenario requires comprehension and great resolve to ensure the Spanish justice system remains fit for purpose. It goes far wider than just individual cases when trust in the justice system is brought into question in this way.
Not easy when mortgagees or purchasers are caught in the interim crossfire, scapegoated until such time as trusted final rulings at ECJ level are achieved.
If these forms of overturning of supportive doctrine and case law established to date are increasingly required to be reviewed by the ECJ, then has the time come therefore for ALL good legal professionals to recognise the risks to the rule of law here, and use a far more "common approach" and come together to request the SC judiciary to reassess their rulings where necessary, in order to safeguard the reputation and trust of a Spanish Justice system at such odds with itself?
This message was last edited by ads on 27/01/2020.
This message was last edited by ads on 27/01/2020.