- Among the prohibited provisions in the contracts relating to loans frankowych there was also a question of spread, that is, the formation of the Bank’s selling rate of exchange for the transfer of payments – assesses FZ Brands he didn’t want that presented a substantial point of view of his Department on the matter.
As he said on Wednesday during a speech in Katowice, Chairman of the office for Protection of Competition and Consumers, a significant glance-has been applied from this year, a tool to Control the presentation of its position in matters lying within its competence, for example, to litigation.
Wednesday-FZ stated this point of view the fifth time and is going to provide. As the President said, the existence of a representation of a significant glance UOKiK analyzed currently, about 50 questions – not only about frankowiczów, or so-called polisolokat.
he didn’t he explained that in a case that ended Wednesday with the release of the fifth substantive opinion, the Agency has analysed the credit agreement with the Bank for the presence of prohibited provisions, drafting contract provisions already recognized for are not allowed.
“One of these prohibited provisions, was the question of the spread. If it is equal or very similar to what is among those already prohibited, we acknowledge that this article was also forbidden – in this case, this part of the agreement is invalid and not binding for the consumer,” – said the President.
he Added that he incorrectly formed the currency must be other than given by the Bank on the basis of invalid locations, closer to the rate of the national Bank.
In the final press UOKiK pointed out that the fifth significant opinion on frankowiczów was a dispute between the borrowers with mbank. The authority has agreed with consumers that the provisions that determine the height of interest and the method of exchange rate determination, they are too General, that is not allowed.
the Case went before the Court of the district court in łódź. “Related dispute with Amazon and the mortgage contract waloryzowany the Swiss franc. Consumers are questioning two provisions that, too, in General, determine the causes of changes in interest rates, as well as the rules for determining the selling rate of exchange for the remittance of contributions. Demanded that the court recognized the contested provisions with them are not allowed, and to have determined that this will be followed consequences for them”, – stated in the message of the UOKiK.
the Agency decided that the disputed items are not permitted because: contain ambiguities violates the contractual balance between the parties to the contract do not allow consumers to test operations of the Bank.
“in addition, the Authority did not agree with the verdict of the District Court, in a Boat from 16 March 2016. Unlike a court, the Department stated that the recognition proposals for unacceptable no matter if consumers suffered still damage. According to UOKiK, as is the position does not matter, because abuzywna article shall not apply to customers from the very beginning”, – said the UOKiK.
the Previous four important views of UOKiK expressed in connection with the processes frankowiczów with mbank and the Euro Bank. The first significant conception of the office for frankowiczów connected with the dispute in relation to interest rat contracts. The second concerned the contractual clauses used in the mBank loan agreement waloryzowanego for the Swiss franc. The third significant opinion, the Authority has recognized that the provisions, which do not accurately indicate reason for changes in interest rates on the loan are not permitted. The fourth important opinion concerned a dispute frankowiczów with Euro Bank UOKiK agreed with consumers that the provisions concerning the principles for determining the currency are not accurate and therefore not allowed.
No comments:
Post a Comment