The Court of Cassation reminds that the bank must always give information about insurance to a borrower, even if it refuses insurance.
A borrower has the right, from his bank, to the information in terms of insurance, even if he refuses the insurance that offers him with the credit. The Court of Cassation therefore rejected the argument that the bank’s obligation to provide information on the extent of the risks to be covered would cease as soon as the customer refuses to subscribe.
It is up to the insurer to whom this loan will eventually contact, to provide information on the adequacy between his personal situation and the contract that he proposes, said the banker.
It was the subject of a lawsuit brought by an individual who had engaged in the purchase and renovation of a dwelling to rent but who, after refusing the insurance offered by the bank, had fallen seriously sick, could no longer work and was having difficulty paying back.
The bank must enlighten the customers
The banker is only required to provide information on the insurance that he offers, answered this lender who was accused of a violation. This client preferred to seek insurance from other organizations and it is therefore up to them to advise him to adapt his contract to his personal situation. Regarding the principle of insurance or not insurance, it is about the management of the client’s business in which the lender should not interfere, the bank concluded.
Nevertheless, according to the judges, the bank had to inform this client about the risks and the adequacy of the insurance it offered, and that seeing him refuse this insurance, it had to “enlighten him about the risks of a lack of insurance. And he must be able to demonstrate that he has respected these obligations. If this is not the case, the request for significant compensation, which in this case resembles an amount close to the credit to be reimbursed, must be examined.