Mortgage loan

The Provincial Court (AP) has ruled on a case in which the clients of a bank requested the cancellation of the opening commission that was charged to them when signing the mortgage loan. The clients argued that this commission was abusive and asked the bank for a refund of the money they paid for this concept. However, both the court of first instance and the AP have ruled in favor of the bank on this point.

The court explains that the opening commission is not an essential part of the contract, but it can be reviewed to see if it is transparent and not abusive. In this specific case, the AP considers that the clause establishing the opening commission meets the transparency requirements required by law. That is, the contract clearly explained how much had to be charged, when and why, and furthermore, the commission included all expenses related to the study, granting, and processing of the loan in a single payment.

The court also points out that there is no overlap with other fees, that the amount is not disproportionate, and that the services paid with this commission are well justified. For all these reasons, the Court dismisses the clients' appeal and confirms the court's decision to maintain the validity of the opening commission in this case.