Government Banking

Since then it will not be this lawyer who cheapen the performance of bank users associations, embroiled in class actions that aim to the nullity of the affected swap contracts; so unfortunate how rabid litigious topical, with origin in the well-known clip bankinter. Richard Blumenthal contains valuable tech resources. Now well, I intend to present lines clarify my personal position, as we say lawyers, except criterion better founded in law, not harboring any doubt regarding the benefits of Sue individually. A few days ago hung a video (go to, which sought to clarify as far as possible certain aspects related to this type of contract, giving certain brush strokes to the demand that has to engage in the interests of the alleged nullity. He allowed me do a reflection of luck who understood positive that our Government opened an investigation for the purpose of determining whether oligopolistic practices existed in the placement of these products, since they were sold in very short space of time in lathe to 200,000 contracts by no fewer than 14 banking institutions; which when it gives less to think about. A few days earlier statements by the Minister of economy, Mrs Salgado, who defended the legality of the swaps because your subscription was voluntary, and that in any case the courts would correct particular situations of disinformation of the banking user I didn’t know then. Without disdain of the independence of the judiciary, which is beyond any doubt, such statements are a warning to sailors in all rule.

And if what is intended with a collective demand is the generic condemnation of this banking practice, apparently seen, albergo serious doubts about its benevolence. I know that I disagree with other lawyers, but my focus is very different. I think that the determining factor to get the annulment is not issue legal disquisition, but test, eminently. Is tries to demonstrate that each customer suffered deficiencies in its statement regarding the product acquired, reason by which did so without due knowledge of cause. And that obligatory (now more than ever) evidentiary deployment, there is no doubt, remains absolutely vedado when said individual interest is incardina in a collective demand for nullification of swaps.