The Supreme Court has condemned

Credit Cooperative Society to return the amount of euros to a client of the. Gipuzkoan entity by declaring the nullity of the floor clause in a trap agreement. That the bank forced to sign and in which the consumer.The Supreme Court  renounced to exercise actions.The legal representation of the plaintiff has been in charge of Vanessa Ortiz firm , who considers the ruling issued by the TS a great achievement for the consumer, who was forced to sign an agreement in exchange for eliminating the floor clause.

Without being explained

The true economic and legal repercussion of said agreement. Since the year in which the Bergara Court fully upheld our claim we have defended the lack of transparency. The Supreme Court of said agreement in the Courts until, finally, the Supreme Whatsapp Number List Court has ruled in favor of the consumer.”In 2006, the borrower and the bank signed a mortgage. Loan deed with a variable interest rate , although with a clause. Limiting the variability of the agreed interest rate.

Years later in a novation agreement

Was signed between the parties. By which the limitations on the variability of the ordinary interest rate were eliminated, the differential for its calculation. Was increased by points and also conditioned the elimination of the floor. The Supreme Court clause to the consumer’s renunciation of claiming. The amounts B2C Lead unduly paid. That is, in the agreement the original floor clause is eliminated and with it the right of the consumer to claim. The interest charged in excess in application of said clause.