judges have begun to rule against banks taking charge of the fee on documented legal acts. It means savings of up to 14,000 million Turkey Phone Number List signing a mortgage. Signing a mortgage. the banks have begun to get rid of returning up to 14,000 million, about 2,000 euros on average for around seven million mortgage holders, in taxes paid by the client when formalizing the loan. The judges are ruling in favor of entities not assuming the fee on documented legal acts. The estimated savings for banks of up to 14,000 million is, in any case, a calculation of maximums, since the tax on documented legal acts is subsidized in some autonomies for the purchase of a first home. On december the supreme court issued a historic ruling.
It imposed on banks that they must also assume the expenses derived from opening a mortgage. If until then the disbursement had been made by the client, the door was opened for financial institutions to take charge of part of those amounts . Requires reimbursement of notary and registration expenses given this criterion of the supreme court, as el confidencial digital has learned from financial sources familiar with the process, the courts are not expressing a unanimous criterion when determining which are the specific expenses that the bank is obliged to return. The ruling establishes that, “with regard to the formalization of notarial deeds and their registration (necessary for the constitution of the real guarantee - that is, the mortgage), both the fees of notaries and that of registrars of property, attribute the payment obligation to the requester of the service in question or in whose favor the right is registered.
The main interest in the documentation and registration of the mortgage loan deed is the lender. It thus obtains an executive title , constitutes the real guarantee and acquires the possibility of special execution. Therefore, the judges agree in interpreting that, by not allowing a minimum reciprocity in the distribution of the expenses produced as a consequence of the notarial and registry intervention, making the entirety of it fall on the debtor, an imbalance is generated against the consumer . Thus, they conclude that the clause is abusive. But it forces customers to pay taxes however, according to the sources consulted, the discrepancy has begun to arise, basically, with regard to the settlement of the tax on documented legal acts , which represents de facto the largest charge when formalizing the loan. The 2015 supreme court ruling determined that the bank should also be seen as a taxpayer and that, since the costs clause was considered abusive, the borrower had the right to recover the money.