|
|
Information the fact that the appellants hired a financial advisor with specialized knowledge to seek financing for them in the banking market through a mortgage loan, obtaining them the best offer, and to be in charge, directly and on its behalf, of managing and arranging the loan. That is to say, the Civil Chamber points out that such intermediary “ took care of everything ”, limiting consumers “to going to the notary to sign the contract”. Facade of the Supreme Court.
(Photo: Economist & Jurist) Citing STS 642/2017, of November 24 , the First Chamber recalls that, both the sufficiency of the pre-contractual information and that provided at the time of signing the contract, so Phone Number Data that the duty of transparency can be understood as fulfilled, is You must be attentive to circumstances such as the consumer being a person with expert knowledge in this type of contracts . Thus, the Supreme Court considers that, “since the wording of the clause is clear and simple and its adequate understanding by the person with specialized knowledge hired by the borrowers to act in their place, representing them, before the lender, is presumed,” it is “ logical and "reasonable " that the AP of .
Pontevedra, by virtue of these extremes, "considers that the transparency control has been overcome as it is excusable, due to its unnecessary nature, an added explanation of the economic burden implied by said clause in the contract when its interlocutor must be presumed to be knows it , and in such a situation is representing the plaintiffs who must assume the same because precisely they hired the services of the financial company for the search and negotiation of the contract due to their specialized knowledge, which, for the purposes at hand, must be taken into account. consideration to assess the contractual position of the plaintiffs.”
|
|
發表於 13:53:50