I have a mortgage with Raiffeisen (in french, so I’m translating, beware!)
They structure it with a base contract for the mortgage, then one or more product agreement(s), one per each loan (e.g. one for a fixed term part, one for a saron part) and then collateral(s) given.
The base contract states that each party can terminate the contract with a 6 months notice (art. 3 which seems to be your case), no reason needed (the bank can also do this for the reasons given in art. 4 and 5) but it also says that the product agreement(s) continue until their respective end dates.
So you should check the end date in the product agreement(s), unless they can claim some infringement on your part (the collateral documents) the loans should continue until their end date.
It would be interesting to know what you find out…
Not a lawyer, just a multi-recidivist Raiffeisen customer.
You absolutely correct I had missed this clause, thanks so much for raising. We have:
“3. Kündigungsfrist/Fälligkeit
Der Basiskreditvertrag Hypothek bzw. der Kreditbetrag ist jederzeit gegenseitig unter Beachtung einer Kündigungsfrist von 6 Mona-
ten ganz oder teilweise kündbar.
Von Produktnutzungen mit fester Laufzeit betroffene Teile des Hypothekardarlehens sind bei einer Kündigung des Basiskreditver-
trags Hypothek mit Ausnahme der in Ziffer 4 und 5 genannten Gründe am Schluss der jeweiligen festen Laufzeit durch den
Schuldner zurückzuzahlen. Sie sind während der vereinbarten Laufzeit weder rückzahlbar noch rückzahlungspflichtig. Für diese Teile
des Hypothekardarlehens gelten die Bedingungen dieses Vertrages bis zum Ablauf der festen Laufzeit weiter.”
3. Notice period/maturity
The basic mortgage loan agreement or the loan amount may be terminated in whole or in part at any time by either party, subject to a notice period of six months. Parts of the mortgage loan relating to products with a fixed term must be repaid by the borrower at the end of the respective fixed term upon termination of the basic mortgage loan agreement, with the exception of the reasons set out in clauses 4 and 5. They are neither repayable nor subject to repayment during the agreed term. The terms of this agreement shall continue to apply to these parts of the mortgage loan until the end of the fixed term."
They have demanded repayment after notice period, so they seem to want to use one of clause 4 or 5. However clause 4 is related to change of ownership - not valid.
Clause 5 is a fault clause (on our part) copied earlier none of which can possibly apply in our case.
So somehow they are seeking to terminate the relationship and then activate another clause in the mortgage agreement, overriding the fixed term, even though none of the reasons apply in any way.
The deeper I go the more it seems a lawyer is required.
Just to make sure: did they specifically state this? What about the repayment of the loan?
Again, pointing to the other thread. USB terminated the relationship but keeps the mortgage until the expiry in 7 years. In your case, Raiffeisen cancels the mortgage agreement by September (as part of the complete client agreement) but repayment of mortgage is due only upon expiry of the mortgage contract. So you could keep the mortgage at Raiffeisen until it expires.
In other words: „We are cancelling your mortgage with immediate effect - please cough up a couple of hundreds of thousands by Friday“.
I guarantee you that this Art. 17 of their T&C alone wouldn’t hold up in a court of law as grounds for terminating this fixed mortgage. Not even in Switzerland, where there are little consumer protection laws that require longer notice periods (as in the EU).
You can include your demand for compensation „oh, and also, just in case, I reserve the right to demand compensation“.
Since I see no legal ground to demand that, it‘s just not the first priority thing to ask for.
The think you should ask for - the bank, and also the ombudsman - is honouring the term agreed on.
I’d also make it clear that you’d local media about such shenanigans that can’t be expected by customers.
you should look at the product agreement(s), they have other reasons for calling back the loan and you should also look at the collateral agreements (I have two “Garanties” documents in one case), in some cases they might have asked you for a declaration of subordination (deepl says Nachrangklausel)
yes the letter cites 6 month notice and we must repay the full amount. So no running it to termination. This means they are somehow trying to invoke a clause (5) that doesn’t in anyway apply to us
As said the product agreement is just a single page letter with the amount, rate, period on it and note about renewal after expiry. It doesn’t have any legal clauses etc, just references the standard basic loan agreement one. So it’s a ‘extension’ for specific fixed term case but doesn’t seem to add new legal terms to it (aside from the product terms)
They’ve terminated it with (much more than) 6 months notice - with your obligation to repayment triggering at the end of the agreed term.
Write them a short, registered letter asking them to confirm the date that your repayment is due (at the end of the agreed term), if and since no. 4. and 5 don‘t apply to you.
PS: actually, I wouldn’t so much „ask“ them. Just confirm that you‘ll pay back at the end of the agreed term (in 7 years) and are going to continue to make any interim payments as required.
They already did, it seems, by referring to art. 17 of their T&C.
Which don‘t give them grounds for early termination IMO.
I think you need a proper lawyer advice and obdusman case open.
Having read that almost 5x of your loan amount has passed through your account on one go, I imagine they are simply trying it on because they know you have the cash to pay it up. But there is absolutely no reason for a bank to do that, your circumstances haven’t changed and they need to honor the fixed mortgage rate to the date you initialy signed for.
I was the one that UBS simply kicked out without touching the mortgage, I contacted the obdusman and they told me a bank has no obligation to give a reason for terminating an account but the mortgage are different story, I was told as the load is not touched I had no grounds to do anything. But I believe you have if you want to kick a fuss, which frankly if I were in your shoes would absolutely do.
The ombudsman is intended to be contacted even without (or before obtaining) legal representation, isn’t it? The case not only seems fairly clear-cut, an early termination with “immediate effect” very obviously violates the principle of good faith, and the ombudsman office already “implied” to OP that such an early termination would not be correct, I’m not sure, why/if a lawyer is needed.
Then again, if it’s free due to legal protection insurance, why not?
The ombudsman only makes recommendations and acts as a mediator. The bank is not required to follow him. If you have legal protection insurance, I would talking to both, the ombudsman and the insurance. After that, you can still choose to proceed with one or combine both.
drafted a respose based on my views + those here, which was reviewed quickly by a lawyer - whio shortened it but kept essentially same key point: general banking T&Cs doesn’t permit termination of fixed term/rate mortgage as that is seperate contract with it’s own termination clauses
demanded evidence from bank on why they believe they can do this / evidence to support
stated in meantime will not accept termination, and under no circumstances attempt by bank to apply any early termination penalties (interest) - just in case
We wait 10 days for reply and if none/don’t agree to honour mortgage then we go to Ombudsman as next step. I might activate more legal process in parallel but generally I believe the order is:
complain to bank
complain to Ombudsman
legal action
so we will see.
In meantime the offers we’ve had from another bank are:
7 Jahre = 1.70%
10 Jahre = 2.05%
The previous mortgage was 1.1% for 10 years. 7 years is roughly the ‘lost’ time due to early termination. So depending on how you view it we are looking at a 55% or 86% increase in the rate (first is probably more accurate).
Those rates seem pretty high to me, so if someone has recommendation of other banks / brokers that would be good to know.
… or any over the counter trade done between the bank and you in fact.
If this weren’t true, parties would just terminate relationships all over the place whenever they get sufficiently underwater on their trades, or change their minds for other reasons.
You may also want to check who your legal counterparty is for the actual mortgage contract - your local Raiffeisen bank, or Raiffeisen Schweiz (they are not the same), and which entity sent you the letter.
There are 200+ Raiffeisen Banks, each with their own banking license. You might be able to just go to another Raiffeisen bank for a new mortgage, if you get a signal that it was a local decision.
In theory, yes, but is that really the case in practice? As a Raiffeisen customer, I’ve gotten the impression so far that they’re extremely dependent on the parent bank. So I’d be surprised if the decision came from that small regional bank.
Mit dem Lesen und der Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestätigst du, dass du die Forum-Richtlinien gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist sowie den Haftungsausschluss auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ akzeptierst.
I guarantee you that this Art. 17 of their T&C alone wouldn’t hold up in a court of law as grounds for terminating this fixed mortgage. Not even in Switzerland, where there are little consumer protection laws that require longer notice periods (as in the EU).
