Kancelaria procesowa Warszawa | Rachelski & Wspolnicy

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I request suspension of repayment of a Swiss franc loan for the duration of the process with the bank?

Yes, it is possible that a person with a loan may ask the court to suspend repayments while the court case is ongoing. For this purpose, an appropriate application for security must be submitted, which may be presented simultaneously with the lawsuit or even before its submission. After receiving such security, the debtor is obliged to file a lawsuit within two weeks. When the court grants security, repayment of loan and insurance installments are suspended, and the bank has no right to terminate the loan agreement due to delays in repayment. Suspension of loan repayment by the court does not result in negative consequences for the debtor, and the bank has no right to report the debt to the Credit Information Bureau in such a case.

I have repaid the loan in full and have no obligations to the bank. Is there anything to fight for?

Yes, full repayment of the loan does not exclude the possibility of claiming repayment of overpaid amounts that exceed the repaid principal amount. In this situation, you also have the right to request the cancellation of the loan agreement or the recognition of certain provisions thereof as invalid. However, in the case of claims after full repayment of the loan, it is important to remember the limitation period. As previously explained, you can only make claims against the bank for a period of up to ten years. So if the loan was repaid more than a decade ago, the bank may successfully invoke the statute of limitations, which will prevent your claim from being processed. Therefore, delaying filing a lawsuit against the bank is not recommended.

Can I sue a bank for a Swiss franc loan even though I live abroad?

Your location does not constitute an obstacle in the process of pursuing claims against the bank, but it is important to bear in mind that matters related to loan agreements in Swiss francs are considered by courts in Poland.

I concluded an annex with the bank that I would be able to repay the loan in CHF. Is this an obstacle?

No, signing the annex in response to the so-called the anti-spread law does not affect the assessment of the validity of the contract. The moment of conclusion of the original contract is decisive.

If the Swiss franc loan agreement was concluded more than 10 years ago, am I entitled to any claims?

Yes, the fact that ten years have passed since the conclusion of the contract does not prevent you from pursuing claims against the bank, although this may affect their amount. Pursuant to the provisions of the Civil Code, the standard limitation period is six years, however, for cyclical claims and those related to business activity, this period is shortened to three years. The limitation period ends on the last day of the calendar year, unless it is less than two years. Therefore, there is a six-year deadline for claims against the bank, although it should be remembered that the current regulations entered into force less than two years ago, so a ten-year period may still apply for earlier claims. This means that theoretically you can demand a refund of funds unduly collected by the bank for the last ten years, because each installment has a separate limitation period counted from the moment of its payment. As for situations where the loan has already been fully repaid, you can still seek repayment of the overpaid amounts, provided that the repayment was made no more than ten years before the lawsuit was filed.

Does divorce prevent you from suing a bank for a loan in Swiss francs?

On Thursday, October 19, the Supreme Court issued an important judgment that is important for borrowers with loans in Swiss francs. According to this ruling, after separation, the spouses will be entitled to individually pursue their rights in cases against the bank regarding the invalidation of the loan agreement. The appellate court emphasized that after the spouses separated and the property was divided, the former husband "that after the divorce of the borrowers and the division of property, the former husband "is no longer interested in the outcome of the proceedings, but also in participating in them." Therefore, if the court found that the presence of both ex-spouses was necessary in this case, it would be intended to prevent the woman from obtaining legal protection.” The resolution of the Supreme Court is a decisive step in resolving the issue of the invalidity of the loan agreement. An important conclusion from this resolution is that in cases against banks to determine the invalidity of a loan agreement, the participation of all borrowers on the plaintiff's side is not necessarily required.