Judge condemns BBVA to return the money they paid 71 customers

Question

Judge condemns BBVA to return the money they paid 71 customers

Answer 1

The Commercial Court number 1 of Bilbao has not taken more than 120 hours to convict the BBVA vs. 71 investors who claimed at the time that the entity had sold them On product, called subordinated financial contributions, without informing them of the consequences. Judge Marcos Bermudez has proved them right. The judgment notes that " BBVA has had the opportunity to select the best branch managers informed their customers" and nevertheless " has failed to prove that the information was correct moved them." Consequently declaring the nullity of contracts and condemns BBVA reintegar amounts received for the purchase of Subordinated Financial Contributions (AFS) in their emissions in 2004 and 2007, the 71- end three let down, but the magistrate considers affected - represented in the lawsuit by Adicae Corporate body. A Eroski, the issuer of the product, it absolves the petition against misleading advertising.

" Declared the nullity of the contracts, Contracting (BBVA and client) must interact restrituirse the amounts paid and received, accrued to date with legal interest from the cash receipt or payment fechadel to also return to the situation preceding the holding contracts canceled, as if from the beginning had not existed, " the magistrate summons.

The resuluci judge was notified this Monday the parties, after last week 's judgment by the Class of the Association of Users of Banks, Savings Banks and Insurance (Adicae) was held. The association requested the annulment of contracts and returning the savings to consider an "undue commercialization " of this product was made and there was " misleading " and "Abuse of consent." The financial institution has responded to the statement that " respects and abides by court decisions." Official sources said that legal services are studying the possibility of filing an appeal.

Meanwhile, Eroski defended the legality of the issue and referred the publicity about the product, while BBVA said he communicated to customers the features and the "risk" of contributions with a "clear " information. The prosecutor, in the last session of the trial, was in favor of that and Eroski was acquitted, however, felt that they should be declared invalid for a "lack of transparency and disclosure " contracts concluded by the BBVA and the entity be liable to return amounts invested.

The judge explained that " the bank would have been enough " to get acquitted, provide a written contract, signed by plaintiffs, where recogiesen clearly enough product features buying, including its risks. " But their commercial interests, the entity elects otherwise placement of this complex investment product among its retail customers (consisting of the verbal information of commercial bank and signature of the purchase order by clinetes absence of a contract writing of purchase stating understandably conditions "criticizes the magistrate.