I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
(2017/C 178/08)
Language of the case: Romanian
Applicants: Liviu Petru Lupean, Oana Andreea Lupean
Defendants: OTP BAAK NYRT, acting through OTPBANK SA, acting through Sucursala Sibiu, OTP BAAK NYRT, acting through OTPBANK SA
—which grants the borrower a sum of money expressed in a certain currency (foreign currency) and requires the borrower to repay the loan in the same currency (foreign currency) but it is apparent from the circumstances attending the conclusion and execution of the agreement that the funds were in fact provided to the borrower in an entirely different currency and that the accounting currency is used only virtually and for the purposes of calculation;
—under which the entire risk of appreciation of the external and/or internal value of the accounting currency used virtually (the foreign currency) is borne by the borrower (consumer), even though the consumer drew down a different payment currency, being the currency actually used;
—which does not explain clearly how the exchange mechanism for the accounting currency used virtually actually works, that is, in such a way that the consumer is able to assess, on the basis of clear and intelligible criteria, the financial consequences of signing the agreement;
—which imposes a pecuniary obligation on the consumer to pay, in respect of loan instalments, sums arising from the difference between the instalments calculated in the accounting currency made available virtually to the borrower and the instalments calculated in the payment currency actually used:
may be unfair?
3. May the terms described in the first question be regarded as being unrelated to the main subject matter of the loan agreement?
Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ L 95, 1993, p. 29).