Post by account_disabled on Mar 7, 2024 1:31:00 GMT -6
In the wake of the real estate crisis, European directives have focused more on loan responsibility to avoid possible over-indebtedness.
We consider that, in this case, the bankruptcy reform does not obey the European guidelines , as it merely evaluates the conduct of the debtor.
After reading article 487.1 6th TRLC we see that this Fax Lists responsibility resides exclusively with the debtor, by depriving him of the exoneration of unsatisfied liabilities.
It is shocking, and at the same time ironic, that the creditor himself, who has possibly failed to comply with the duty of assessing solvency in granting credit, can prevent access to the second chance .
Ultimately, the creditor is the one who is entitled to oppose the granting of the exoneration alleging the reason of acquiring debt in a reckless or negligent manner.
In this last part of the analysis we wish to point out what we consider will crown the understanding of these lines.
The consumer loan is a synallagmatic contract , as it generates obligations for both parties; because it is a bilateral business.
Good work easily clashes with the interest of both parties, but there must be minimum requirements for both.
When the applicant deceives the lender about his situation, we are faced with a case of irresponsibility that must be punished with the impediment of access to the exoneration , since this directly and unjustifiably reveals the dishonesty of the debtor.
However, this impediment should not be automatic when, having provided true data, the lender has responded to your request irresponsibly and acting in its own interest.
Sending the over-indebted consumer due to possible credit irresponsibility on the part of the creditor to a culpable bankruptcy contradicts the purpose and objective of the bankruptcy reform.
We consider that, in this case, the bankruptcy reform does not obey the European guidelines , as it merely evaluates the conduct of the debtor.
After reading article 487.1 6th TRLC we see that this Fax Lists responsibility resides exclusively with the debtor, by depriving him of the exoneration of unsatisfied liabilities.
It is shocking, and at the same time ironic, that the creditor himself, who has possibly failed to comply with the duty of assessing solvency in granting credit, can prevent access to the second chance .
Ultimately, the creditor is the one who is entitled to oppose the granting of the exoneration alleging the reason of acquiring debt in a reckless or negligent manner.
In this last part of the analysis we wish to point out what we consider will crown the understanding of these lines.
The consumer loan is a synallagmatic contract , as it generates obligations for both parties; because it is a bilateral business.
Good work easily clashes with the interest of both parties, but there must be minimum requirements for both.
When the applicant deceives the lender about his situation, we are faced with a case of irresponsibility that must be punished with the impediment of access to the exoneration , since this directly and unjustifiably reveals the dishonesty of the debtor.
However, this impediment should not be automatic when, having provided true data, the lender has responded to your request irresponsibly and acting in its own interest.
Sending the over-indebted consumer due to possible credit irresponsibility on the part of the creditor to a culpable bankruptcy contradicts the purpose and objective of the bankruptcy reform.