They prepare the presentation of the first class action lawsuit against the IRPH of mortgages

Stop Desahucios se manifiesta frente a la sede de Kutxabank

Members of Kaleratzeak Stop Desahucios and IRPH-STOP of Guipúzcoa participate in a rally in front of the Kutxabank headquarters in San Sebastián. Juan Herrero / EFE

When hiring a mortgage almost all families opt to do so at a variable rate and linking to the Euribor. But this index is not the only one in the market. The second most used mortgage index in Spain is the Mortgage Loan Reference Index, the IRPH. However, this has been a trap for more than 1,300,000 families . Now comes the first class action against IRPH.

A family with IRPH pays about 200 euros more per month than the one that opted for the Euribor In November 2013, the Ministry of Economy repealed the old IRPH-Cajas and reformulated the calculation method of the IRPH-Banks, renamed IRPH -Entities . The IRPH fixes its value based on the interest applied by the financial institutions on mortgages granted for more than three years, including commissions.

In recent years has quoted around two points above the Euribor. For example, according to data from the Bank of Spain, the Euribor closed in July at -0.056% and IRPH did so at 2.007% after three months of increases. The consequence of all this is that each family that has signed their mortgage with IRPH pays at least 200 euros more per month than the one that opted for the Euribor.

In this scenario, the affected people were soon grouped. After many demonstrations, the first class action now comes. The Association of Financial Users (Asufin) completes the one that would become the first class action in Spain to demand the nullity of the IRPH and the return of the interest charged “in excess” . The association, which includes more than 2,000 people, has argued that the legislation is “absolutely clear” in this regard, so if the IRPH is considered abusive, its effects are “null” from the first moment and corresponds to the return of the money paid as interest.

The boxes imposed an abusive index on mortgages Asufin refers to several judicial rulings that have been given. In 2013, a judge in Collado Villalba (Madrid) suspended the execution of a home for non-payment of the mortgage, considering that the loan contract had abusive clauses. Among the conditions considered injurious to the mortgaged one, the magistrate included the IRPH , the index to which the credit was referenced. The sentence considered it abusive. It was the first time that a judicial ruling considers it so.

This same year, the Provincial Court of Álava annulled in a judgment the IRPH Entities to which the mortgage of a client was referenced and the IRPH Cajas established as a substitute index. The sentence condemned Kutxabank to return , retroactively, all the interest charged on the loan.

“The boxes not only abused the preferred ones, they also imposed an abusive index on the mortgages, the IRPH, which is causing serious damage to families,” denounces Asufin’s president, Patricia Suárez. The association foresees that the demand groups thousands of people affected . To facilitate this, he has created a website dedicated to the demand.

The IRPH reaches the parliaments

Last week ten parliamentary groups of Podemos registered in their respective chambers an initiative claiming to the Government of Spain the derogation of the Reference Index of Mortgage Loans , interest rate that they consider a “big scam” for “abusive, manipulable and opaque”. According to Podemos, banks raise this index to compensate for the drop in the Euribor, which means that people who have their mortgage referred to IRPH “pay more between 200 and 300 euros per month”, since they are at least two points above the Euribor, becoming “in many cases the gateway to eviction.”

The initiative of the purple party has already been approved in Cantabria and La Rioja , in both cases unanimously, and has also been presented in Aragon, the Balearic Islands, the Canary Islands, Castilla y León, Alava, Guipúzcoa, Murcia and the Valencian Community, pending debate .

More information about:

  • IRPH

The judge of the Invercaria case files the case against two accused for the aid to EDM

The judge in Seville investigating the irregularities in Invercaria has filed the case against two of the six charged for the participative loans worth 1,180,000 euros that this public venture capital investment company granted in 2008 to the company Electronics Devices Manufacturer SA (EDM).

The judge in Seville investigating the irregularities in Invercaria has filed the case against two of the six charged for the participative loans worth 1,180,000 euros that this public venture capital investment company granted in 2008 to the company Electronics Devices Manufacturer SA (EDM).

In this sense, sources of the case have indicated to Europa Press that the judge of Instruction number 16 of Seville, Juan Gutiérrez Casillas, has filed the case against Manuel Jesús Rodríguez Rodríguez, former director of investment analysis of Invercaria, and against Diego Ignacio Fernández Ramírez , who was part of the board of EDM.

The magistrate considers that none of them "has any connection or relationship" with the facts that are investigated in this separate piece, in which the former president of Invercaria Tomás Pérez-Sauquillo is accused.

Last week, Pérez-Sauquillo defended that Invercaria acted "correctly" by granting EDM two participative loans for a total of 1,180,000 euros, stating that it granted these grants "when the company had the best economic data", with eight million euros. euros of own funds and a turnover of around 52 million.

In this sense, Pérez-Sauquillo said that, against this, other entities granted loans for a total value of between 15 and 20 million euros to EDM, a company already extinct, at a time when it "presented worse economic data "that when Invercaria granted the two referred participative loans.

"I've been imputed for three years" and I still do not know why "

For all this, the former president of Invercaria asked himself "what economic interests" could be behind all this and said, likewise, that he has been imputed for three years in the case "and still does not know why".

We must remember that Pérez-Sauquillo is charged in the six separate pieces that the judge of the Invercaria case has opened up to now, as are the main cause and the pieces opened for the aid granted to Fumapa, Juana Martín, EDM, International Virtual Fairs of Andalusia (FIVA) and Andalusian Air Operators.

Three representatives of EDM are also charged in this case, among them the one who was the company's top shareholder and CEO, Juan Ruiz Cobo, who in his statement stated that he "knows" the former president of the Board of Directors Gaspar Zarrías – cited as imputed by the Supreme Court in the case of irregular EREs- and that "only maintained" with him "a conversation in July 2006" to the effect of EDM "

Specifically, and as he stated before Judge Juan Gutiérrez Casillas, he spoke with the ex-counselor "to set in motion the special employment centers," although he specified that in that conversation "Invercaria was never mentioned."

The police report

According to the report prepared by the Money Laundering Group of the National Police of Seville, consulted by Europa Press, Pérez-Sauquillo granted a first participatory loan of 450,000 euros to EDM, while the board of directors of Invercaria agreed to grant a second loan. participative amount of 730,000 euros on the same day as the first one.

According to the instructor, "for the granting of the analyzed loans has not been found, in the analyzed documentation, any investment proposal prepared by Invercaria, as well as no positive report of the investment committee", adding that, in the analysis documentation for this investment made by Invercaria, "the sales figures provided by EDM for 2008 are valid, despite the strong deviation observed in the first four months."

After noting that "this deviation is omitted in the proposal submitted by Invercaria for authorization to the IDEA Governing Council", the judge asserts that the first operation progress report (IPO) "is prepared the same month that EDM submits the declaration of competition of creditors and eight months after the granting of the loans ".

"serious irregularities"

This report, commissioned by Invercaria to Deloitte after the granting of the loans, "shows that, two months after said concession, the management of EDM and its group of companies show serious irregularities, as well as its precarious economic situation" , noting that said report "should have been made prior to the granting" of the loans.

In addition, the judge indicates that the commercial activity of EDM "was the object of investigation by the Tax Agency when detecting serious irregularities in billings with third parties", facts "that were brought to the attention of the judicial authority".

The instructor concludes that Invercaria granted two loans for an amount of 1,180,000 euros to EDM "without the preparation of a proposal and without a positive report of the investment to a company in which, in a report requested by Invercaria, it is detected, little more than two months after the financing was granted, serious irregularities in its management and an economic situation of such precariousness that, eight months after the financing, it presents bankruptcy. "

All this "without that both circumstances have been previously warned by Invercaria, and in which the commercial activity of the managers has had to be submitted to the judicial procedure," says the judge, who considers that there are indications that the accused may have incurred in crimes of embezzlement and falsehood.

Check here more news of Sevilla.