Can the intermediary be held liable for recourse due to inadequate submission?

  • Erstellt am 2023-07-04 11:24:15

Ari_tau

2023-07-04 11:24:15
  • #1
Hello everyone,

I might have a legal issue here, maybe someone has experience with this:

We were looking for financing for our new build and came across a very attractive offer from a large, surely well-known broker. The contact was good, and at first, the broker seemed competent. Everything was discussed by phone or by email.
We wanted to accept the offer made to us and submitted documents. Here and there something was missing or had to be replaced by newer versions, but that was actually not a problem. Since you can only upload once in the online portal, newer versions had to be sent by email. We were in very intensive exchange and eventually the time came: we delivered everything that was requested, signed every document and asked several times if everything was now okay. Not wanting to be rejected or the like... especially since interest rates kept rising.
The advisor then submitted the documents to the bank and went on vacation... a few days later came the notification from the substitute with a rejection.
We were very surprised because we knew that it “actually” should have been a slam dunk.
We asked the representative why we were rejected and he told us that among other things, the signatures were too old (max 10 days), the construction cost overview did not match the offer, the building savings contract had not yet been shared, the floor plans did not match the living area calculation, etc. etc. etc.... We were flabbergasted and asked to see what had actually been submitted. A complete mess! Of course, we were rejected if the documents were submitted in total chaos. Since, for example, the floor plan had changed in the meantime, there was an updated living area calculation, which we sent, but he—for example—did not submit it, but the old one. So there were some points where we saw that he simply submitted anything without checking for sense and understanding. Exact details would go beyond the scope here. But for example, the fact that signatures may only be a maximum of 10 days old, the advisor should have known. The representative (his team leader) also confirmed this to us.
So everything was prepared again and submitted, but the interest rate was now 0.4% higher. The old offer had expired, but due to the circumstances, they could make an exception and so the interest rate was only 0.25% higher than the original offer. Actually, we no longer wanted to work with the broker, but it was still the best offer due to the otherwise increased rates. So we prepared the documents (in doing so, we realized what illogical nonsense had been submitted regarding own contributions), everything new, submitted and approval!

So far so good, we now have everything securely in hand, BUT ultimately we suffered several thousand euros in interest losses due to the sloppy work of the first gentleman. Because it is undisputed that a) unprepared rubbish was submitted (confirmed by the team leader) and b) it would have been approved with correct documents.

What can be done about this? The advisor has a duty, also according to the terms and conditions, to check the documents for plausibility before submission, and we are not talking about minor trifles here. Does anyone have experience whether the broker can be held liable?

Thanks and best regards!
 

KarstenausNRW

2023-07-04 11:33:52
  • #2
Nothing. Just bad luck. Tough break. Paid the price. But yes, there is one thing you can do. Look forward to the new home ;-)
 

Ari_tau

2023-07-04 11:44:29
  • #3
That anyway, but I can't imagine that. There is such a thing as a duty of care and advisory errors.
 

Ari_tau

2023-07-04 11:48:30
  • #4
An excerpt from the broker’s terms and conditions:

3.2. XYZ provides personal brokerage and advisory services for the customer regarding their individual financing needs, namely:


    [*]Analysis of individual financing needs
    [*]Support in the collection of application data and documents
    [*]Determination and optimization of individual conditions for loans
    [*]Comparison of financing products and providers
    [*]Advice on and mediation of alternative financing options and products
    [*]Assistance with the conclusion of loan agreements
    [*]Receipt and review of all necessary documents for the mediation of loans
    [*]Preparation of a complete financing file for submission to the financing partners
    [*]Support in the restructuring of existing liabilities
    [*]Information on existing loan agreements
    [*]Information on current or new offers and special conditions for loans
    [*]Advice on and mediation of follow-up financing and increases
    [*]Sending of the current electronic customer magazine
    [*]Advice on and mediation of installment protection


Further on the topic of liability in the terms and conditions:

9.2. XYZ is fully liable for intent and gross negligence as well as for damages resulting from injury to life, body, and health. In the case of a slight negligent breach of essential contractual obligations, XYZ’s liability is limited to the contractually typical damage foreseeable at the time of contract conclusion. Essential contractual obligations are obligations whose fulfillment first enables the proper execution of the contract between the customer and XYZ and on whose compliance the customer regularly relies and may rely. Otherwise, XYZ is not liable.
 

KarstenausNRW

2023-07-04 12:25:54
  • #5
Assistance? I read from your posting that it took place. Receipt and review of the documents? Apparently yes, since documents were requested afterward. Creation of a file for submission to the bank? Also done (although with incorrect documents). Intent or gross negligence? No. Slight negligence? No, I don’t see that either. In your application process, practically everything changed (areas, costs, building savings contract, etc.). Mistakes can happen there.
 

kati1337

2023-07-04 12:59:25
  • #6
I'm not a lawyer, but submitting some documents to the bank for a construction loan without double-checking that they are the right ones sounds a bit negligent. Due diligence looks different. Especially since the advisor was aware that things had changed. That's not necessarily unusual in such an early phase. In my opinion, it's part of his duties to sort it out properly before submitting it.
Caution, my private opinion is not legal advice.
 

Similar topics
10.04.2012Financial plan with a building savings contract or with risk?12
18.04.2015Is a building savings contract still worthwhile with the current interest rates?10
28.06.2015Building a house - building savings contract with bad interest rates23
14.07.2020Beginnings of a possible property | Questions about the building savings contract72
22.06.2016Is a TA loan sensible? Interest and loan offer are okay13
27.03.2017Forward loan - Secure interest rates now?53
22.01.2017Which financing option, TH or building savings contract?23
18.01.2018Annuity loan vs. home savings contract - comprehension questions47
06.03.2018Building savings contract and Wohnriester - Where is the catch here?28
17.09.2018No special repayments possible with loans. How to save money?15
21.06.2019Larger loan with only 5 years interest fixation14
31.07.2019Is a bullet loan and ETF currently worth considering?27
14.05.2020Financing Land & House - 2 Different Loans34
11.01.2021Financing offer: TA loan with building savings contract24
06.05.2022Construction financing through intermediaries or local banks92
06.07.2022How secure is the collateralization of the remaining debt via a home savings contract?17
29.09.2022High interest rates with fixed interest, alternative flex loans?54
15.12.2022Follow-up Financing 2030 Prepare Now Building Savings Contract/Special Repayment/Fixed Deposit64
06.03.2023Is a building savings contract with a high outstanding debt sensible as partial security?17
22.03.2024Home purchase financing despite high interest rates?24

Oben