Almost all loan agreements can be revoked - European Court of Justice

For this reason, loan interest rates are higher than deposit interest rates to cover the default risk. This is basically the insurance premium for the loan default insurance, which you essentially conclude with the bank.

To be able to kick out people who pay all installments on time at will or impose worse conditions on them is unbelievably asymmetrical. So shabby that many banks don’t even dare to apply it on a large scale for fear of outrage. But they definitely want to keep the right as a threat...

People who pay all installments punctually, can be thrown out of the contract virtually at will or be imposed worse conditions, is unbelievably asymmetrical.

Terminating contracts with banks, which have been fulfilled impeccably by both sides for decades, and imposing worse conditions on the bank, is unbelievably asymmetrical.

It should be identical on both sides. At least it should be.

It is identical on both sides. It should be at least.

Great, then you are practically giving your blessing to the termination of loan agreements based on the ruling because it is balancing justice :-p

Super, then you are basically giving your approval to the termination of credit agreements due to the ruling because it is compensatory justice

No way, of course! Contracts must be upheld and not undermined by dodgy loopholes.

Giving away money ...

They are not!

According to a friend (who works in the field), the banks are protected against these "sudden" legislative changes.

And then get upset when the bank terminates the loan due to a deterioration of economic circumstances (e.g. the wife loses her job) ==> which the bank, however, kindly does not do as long as the installments are still being paid.

Well, kindly ... I doubt they do that out of pure charity. As long as they get their money, they will stay quiet. Anything else would be almost professional suicide.

No, yeah, sure! Contracts are to be kept and not exploited through shady loopholes.

I do not see this as a shady loophole. Whether consciously or unconsciously, an attempt was made to make it difficult for the consumer to understand their right of withdrawal. They could have just written it clearly. No, it was made as complicated as possible. Also not a nice approach.
And when I look at how cleverly banks use their loopholes, then I, as a poor little worker, am allowed to do it too. Especially when there are a whole lot of zeros behind the amount I can save.