So far, the hotelier Robert K. had no particular thoughts about his problems in serving his loan on time. He had been lagging several times over the past two years with the interest and repayment installments of his real estate loan. Since his bank always took this more or less patiently, these liquidity problems were quickly forgotten at K. again. The owner of a small hotel in Lower Saxony, however, would be much more sensitized if he knew the current judgment of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on “credit sales”.
The resale of loans to financial investors, which has been very emotionally debated by allegations of premature foreclosures by at least some of these financial investors in recent years, is still an apparently endless topic for courts.
No special treatment
After the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) confirmed the practice of private and cooperative banking institutions to resell loans in 2007, another BGH ruling now provides additional clarity. The XI. Civil Senate has made it clear with this decision (AZ: XI ZR 225/08) that there is no special treatment in this regard for loans from savings banks. In this case, a couple had sued as debtors of a mortgage loan. After the loan installments were no longer paid, the savings bank announced the loan and sold it in a package with other claims to another creditor . The couple did not agree and argued that such a transfer was unlawful because of the “secret betrayal” involved. In contrast to the BGH decision from 2007, in which the judges regarded a transfer as effective even if the banking secrecy was violated, according to the plaintiffs, a different assessment had to be made at a public-law savings bank.
On the other hand, the BGH judges did not want to follow these theses. According to their assessment and assessment, bank data are not among the most protected private secrets in this way.
In any case, this judgment once again makes it clear that the discussion about the sale of loans for a large number of bank and savings bank customers and therefore also for Hotelier K. is far from over, should he not change his payment behavior. This obviously also applies against the background of the so-called “Risk Limitation Act”, which came into force in 2008 and contains various provisions on the protection of borrowers in the sale of credit. Above all, this law is intended to provide borrowers with better transparency in loan sales and adequate protection in the event of loan arrears, as in the case described by Hotelier K.
Talk to the bank
This should now use his future bank talks primarily to bring the attitude of his house bank on loan sales. For example, there are still a large number of banks that do not have any problems with rejecting loan sales and confirming this with the customer. But even with banks , which are difficult to do with such explanations, their behavior does not immediately lead to irritation or even to Kontoündigungen by the customer.
If the relationship of trust between the bank and the customer actually exists, possible loan sales should not be an issue, even in the case of a temporary default of payment by the respective borrower, as in the case of Mr K. However, this requires a close exchange of information between the bank and the customer. However, the author’s experience also shows that the communication between bank customers and bank employees is still often able to be improved.