Cluj Attorney – Abusive Clauses Unicredit Țiriac Bank SA: finding the abusive nature of the loan origination fee, administration fee, and early repayment commission
Case Study: Abusive Clauses, Objectives Achieved
The court found that in a personal needs credit contract concluded in 2006 with Unicredit Țiriac Bank SA, the clauses regulating:
- the loan origination fee
- the loan administration fee
- the early repayment commission
were abusive. Accordingly, the court ordered the bank to reimburse to the borrower:
- 1,200 lei charged as the origination/processing fee
- 550 lei as the early repayment commission
- All sums collected as administration fees of 0.53% of the outstanding balance, to be calculated extra-judicially
- In addition, the bank was ordered to pay the legal penal interest on each reimbursed sum from the moment they were collected until payment.
Factual Background
In 2006, the client entered into a personal-needs loan contract with Unicredit Țiriac Bank SA (formerly HVB Tiriac) in the amount of 30,000 lei, over 120 months. The loan was repaid early on 28 November 2007.
Legal Reasoning & Court’s Decision
The court accepted the arguments advanced (by the Brisc Legal team — Cluj attorneys for bank litigation) and held the following:
- The origination fee of 4% of the loan amount, but not less than €150, was abusive. The court considered that this fee represented an artificial gain to the bank, without real counterperformance. Also, the fact it was defined as a percentage rather than a flat amount is unjustified, because the cost of processing should remain the same regardless of the loan size.
- The administration fee of 0.53% of the monthly outstanding balance was also abusive. The court found that monitoring and managing the loan is a service that benefits the bank, not the borrower, and that the interest paid by the borrower should already cover such costs. Therefore, this clause created a significant imbalance and was contrary to good faith.
- The early repayment commission of 2% of the repaid amount, but not less than €150, was abusive. The court held this cannot be used to cover a hypothetical gain the bank would lose from early repayment.
Because those clauses were found to be void ab initio, the sums collected under them were considered undue payments, and the bank was ordered to reimburse them to the claimant.