Property Registrar Is it a guarantee to have knowledge in complex financial products?

A property registrar acquires a series of complex financial products while their children subscribe subordinated obligations. A few years later, father and children receive a letter from the bank stating that they were going to proceed to the compulsory repurchase of the products with a loss of 10% and their immediate reinvestment in bonds convertible into ordinary shares. A property registrar acquires a series of complex financial products while their children subscribe subordinated obligations. A few years later, father and children receive a letter from the bank stating that they were going to proceed to the compulsory repurchase of the products with a loss of 10% and their immediate reinvestment in bonds convertible into ordinary shares.

The clients sue the bank requesting the nullity of the contracts and compensation for the damages caused by the bank’s failure to comply with its information obligation.

The JPI estimates the demand by noting that the bank had not accredited the delivery of risk information. It also highlights that the condition of the property registrar did not mean that it was an expert client with specific knowledge in this type of product.

The bank appeals the ruling and the AP revokes it considering that although the obligation to provide information was not fulfilled, the status of registrar made him a deep knower of the law. Thus, even if he were not an expert, his technical knowledge allowed him, with a reading of the brochure and the context of the real estate market, to have enough information about the state of the economy.

The clients appeal in cassation the judgment of the AP before the TS that reiterates that in the scope of the stock market and the investment products, the breach of the duty of information, although it does not prevent that the nature and the risks of the product are known. , leads to presume the lack of sufficient knowledge in the client.

The Chamber states that the status of the client’s registrar does not, on its own, turn it into an expert investor with specific knowledge about the nature and risks associated with complex financial products, even though his professional qualification can be presumed a thorough knowledge of the Registration law and patrimonial traffic.

In addition, in the present case, where there is no evidence that the client had the external advice of experts in risky financial products, nor with previous experience in investing in these complex financial products.

Finally, the information obligation established by the legal regulations is an active obligation that binds the bank, not an obligation of mere availability; so that compliance with this obligation can not be left to the initiatives presented by the clients themselves, because without expert knowledge in the securities market, customers can not know what specific information they should look for themselves, or require the professional.