"Fifteen years of worrying (...) that they sleep badly, that they wonder for some if they are not going to die with this debt or if they are not going to have to bequeath it to their children", began Me Charles Constantin-Vallet. "It's fifteen years of a life and there are those who hold on, resist, and also those who crack".
The consumer credit subsidiary of BNP Paribas, known in France via the Cetelem brand, has been retried since May 15 for misleading commercial practice and concealment, suspected of having concealed the risks of this loan marketed in 2008 and 2009.
Denominated in Swiss francs, this loan intended for tax-exempt rental investment was repayable in euros, which allowed a low interest rate. However, in the wake of the financial crisis, the euro collapsed against the Swiss currency. Result: the amount outstanding has exploded for borrowers.
Sentenced in February 2020 to the maximum fine of 187.500 euros and more than 100 million euros in damages, BNP Paribas Personal Finance appealed, claiming via its legal representative that it had provided "clear information" and that the collapse of the euro was "perfectly unpredictable".
The borrowers were "average households" who "wanted to build up a heritage", "prepare for their retirement, their children's studies, even finance their first purchase", described Me Charles Constantin-Vallet.
Intermediaries, often wealth management advisers, offered them a "package" with real estate and, "at the very end", "the Helvet Immo loan".
They were "inexperienced borrowers, who did not want to run any risk", he insists, contesting the presentation of the bank which speaks of relatively "advised" customers.
"What do they blame the bank for? Having marketed a loan in foreign currencies in a period of economic crisis, without ever having warned customers of the risk (...) Having sold Helvet Immo as a secured loan, like the best on the market" : "in reality, all the arguments are false", maintains the lawyer.
"Sacrifices"
The subsidiary "deceived the intermediaries, who then replied to this commercial speech" and wrote an "unintelligible loan offer", accuses the council. "One of two things: either the bank didn't see it coming as it says" and "it's a bank for amateurs, for handymen. Either BNP has made these informed choices".
"My conviction is that they are not amateurs", he slices.
According to him, the company had "perfectly anticipated" an appreciation of the Swiss franc, although not of this magnitude, but this financial product, "very profitable", was "vital" so that the subsidiary "does not lose its footing on the home loan".
For Me Constantin-Vallet, BNP Paribas Personal Finance "voluntarily concealed the existence and the importance of the risk from consumers".
After him, his colleague Hugo Delage pleads for the “full compensation for the financial damage” of the borrowers, as well as for the granting of a “damage resulting from the infringement of the freedom of heritage” and moral damage.
The civil parties have lived "fifteen years with a loan that robs you of any possibility of a project. It's daily sacrifices (...) the impossibility of going on vacation, buying a car, changing residence, it's also family dramas," he said.
"They pay, without any effect on their debt, huge monthly payments", some have had to sell their main residence or attend "seizures" on their accounts, continues Me Delage, arguing that the court would have a "useful effect" in ordering the bank to pay these damages, which would "also have a deterrent effect".
At first instance, the court had imposed the immediate payment of compensation, even in the event of an appeal. These sums can nevertheless be canceled or modified by the Court of Appeal.
The indictment is expected Tuesday, June 6. The bank's defense will follow.