Follow Revocation Real Estate Loans

Consequences of the revocation of the real estate loan

Consequences of the revocation of the real estate loan

The legal basis of the right of withdrawal and the consequences of incorrect instructions from. As a result, the loan is still revocable. Revocation loan – consequences of declared revocation.

Cancellation of false credits

Cancellation of false credits

Credit institutions must provide their customers with certain mandatory information when taking out a home loan loan as of 31 December 2010. If they make a mistake, there is a risk that the real estate loan will be terminated today. For the start of the lock-up period, the mandatory information is required. “Conversely, this means that the opposition period for inaccurate mandatory information has never got off the ground and the revocation can still be used years after the contract is concluded,” explains lawyer Jessica Gaber from the law firm of Cäsar-Preller in Wiesbaden.

The information required for real estate loans also includes the duration of the contract. For some contracts concluded between 2010 and 2014, the central bank ING-DiBa has not set the duration. “This mistake can also occur in loan agreements with other banks and the orders are revocable,” says Gaber. A further error in the disclosure obligation has been made especially the health insurance companies.

This error also means that the document is still revocable. For many real estate loans completed from the middle of 2010, the cancellation joker can still count. Thus, the consumer can still save a considerable amount by a successful cancellation and rescheduling depending on the loan amount and the interest conditions.

“Real estate financing, which has been concluded since the deadline of 31 December 2010, is essentially unaffected by the end of the so-called unlimited right of objection, which means that the revocation can be deducted with false data or revocation instructions,” explains lawyer Gaber. However, some credit institutions still refuse to take out older loan agreements that were terminated in time for the 31 December 2016 deadline.

Lawyer Gaber: “However, the legal situation is clear in many cases, so that the revocation can also be enforced.” The law firm of Caesar-Preller checked free of charge, whether the conditions for the loan withdrawal are fulfilled. This is made possible by the size of the company, which guarantees holistic and individual support.

Explanation of the loan waiver

Explanation of the loan waiver

Anyone who has purchased a property (real estate loan) with the loan can save several thousand euros in interest this year. Incorrect revocation instructions have in the previous practice contributed to the fact that borrowers could terminate the loan agreement cost-effectively. The one who wants to get out of his credit by giving notice of termination should do so as soon as possible. The background is a change in the law that severely limits the possibilities for terminating old contracts.

While the previous legislation provided for a “perpetual” right of withdrawal, so that an order could still be lifted well from 2002, it is now being severely restricted. Therefore, a loan agreement concluded between 2002 and 2010 can only be terminated until June 21, 2016, even if the information is incorrect.

Consumers who want to terminate their lending business should, as soon as possible, be sure that the instruction is incorrect or not and pronounce the withdrawal as soon as possible. That should happen for an order until 2010 before 21.06.2016. With good prospects: The statement made by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on February 23, 2016 (Az 10 II 549/14) that the Savings Banks instructions will be effective after 2010 is geared to a specific application and has no influence on orders completed before 2010.

In the cases decided on, the savings banks had informed the consumers in the same objection about the consequences of a revocation in real estate financing and in other cases and leave it to the consumer to choose which version is the “right”. In the opinion of the Office, however, this clearly goes too far, an instruction must be exactly the applicable facts and can now be repealed.