toxicmolotof
2018-03-10 09:05:22
- #1
You are mixing up two things that can coincide but fundamentally have little to do with each other.
First, a bank always earns the same amount on a fixed interest loan, regardless of how interest rates develop.
A sale of receivables almost always has one of two reasons: to reduce risk or to increase liquidity (or both).
The borrower is only indirectly involved with both because the bank manages its own risk or liquidity with them.
Therefore, the sale of receivables is not a problem for the borrower at all. If he always adheres to the contract, nothing happens. And if he does not adhere to it, enforcement occurs. And in that case, it does not matter which bank or company enforces it. So nothing changes in that regard.
For other receivables, factoring (sale of receivables) is more the rule than the exception, of course without collateral by land charge.
And regarding the term and the correlated risk, you are not wrong, but also not right. You have ignored Par. 489 [Baugesetzbuch].
First, a bank always earns the same amount on a fixed interest loan, regardless of how interest rates develop.
A sale of receivables almost always has one of two reasons: to reduce risk or to increase liquidity (or both).
The borrower is only indirectly involved with both because the bank manages its own risk or liquidity with them.
Therefore, the sale of receivables is not a problem for the borrower at all. If he always adheres to the contract, nothing happens. And if he does not adhere to it, enforcement occurs. And in that case, it does not matter which bank or company enforces it. So nothing changes in that regard.
For other receivables, factoring (sale of receivables) is more the rule than the exception, of course without collateral by land charge.
And regarding the term and the correlated risk, you are not wrong, but also not right. You have ignored Par. 489 [Baugesetzbuch].