The variable interest rate limiting clauses, popularly known as the ground (down) or ceiling (upward) clause, were introduced massively in mortgage loan contracts from the late 1990s until the middle of this decade.
The reasons for declaring the abuse of this clause are not that it is in itself illegal, for example it is not declared abusive in mortgage loans of commercial or local companies destined for business activity, but that it is declared abusive when a series of circumstances concur.
These specific circumstances of each are those that our department specialized in banking contract law studies in detail to give total viability to the claim, a method that until now has given us 100% success in all our resolved demands.
Logically, our analysis does not focus solely on the ground clauses but we extend it to the other potentially abusive clauses such as the clause for imposing all consumer expenses or the interest clause for late payment due and in fact we use a sole demand to claim the nullity of all these clauses.
Our method is also constantly updated adapting the demands to the latest jurisprudential developments. This permanent update, together with the Office's experience of taking almost a decade specialized in winning lawsuits against banks in all instances, makes 100% success in nullity judgments of abusive mortgage loan clauses. In any case, we record that we always try to reach a friendly agreement with the bank first to avoid legal action. Last but not least, given the high volume of cases handled, we allow ourselves to offer unsurpassed economic conditions, with 3 premises:
1º.- We do not charge if the client does not charge
2nd.- We charge when the customer charges
3º.- Of what is charged, 85% for the client, 15% for the Office.
In addition, we offer the possibility to verify through an expert that the amounts entered by the bank for the return of the land clauses, plus their legal interests, correspond to the actual amount.