Frankowicz sold a claim for a fraction of the value. A surprising judgment on the assignment

According to Business Insider, the Bielsko court stated that the assignment agreement, concluded between Frankowicz and the company buying a claim, grossly violates the principles of social coexistence, which leads to its invalidity. The court in the oral motives of the judgment indicated that while maintaining 90 percent effectively. The value of the claim sold, the company reserved too high benefits. The verdict is invalid (reference number XC 972/24).

Our information shows that the case concerns a mortgage in mBank, and the buyer of the claims is one of the companies from the Help Find group (interestingly, it is a company registered in Texas, USA). She bought them from a consumer who has already repaid the Frankowy Housing Credit. The company demanded that the mortgage agreement be annulled and made a claim for a refund of installments paid by the consumer.

This may affect the wider view of the assignments of the claim

– The court referred to the so -called The principle of equivalence, i.e. the rule, according to which the benefit from the contract should correspond to the value of what the other party receives in return. He referred to experiences related to the assignments in insurance, where the risk of losing is very high, and the seller obtains remuneration exceeding 30 percent. value of the claim sold. Here the salary was significantly lower. For now, this is the oral themes of the decision, we will know the written justification in a few weeks – says Bartosz Miąskiewicz, a lawyer from CMS Polska.

He adds that there are still not many decisions in similar matters. – The judgment of the court in Bielsko-Biała may affect the shaping of the jurisprudence, because it presents a wider view on the equivalence of the assignment. Importantly, the court granted our application for a deposit to secure the costs of the trial. This is important because the enforcement of obligations outside the European Union can be difficult – indicates Mc Miąskiewicz.

– The issue of consumer debts will be assessed next week by TUSE. It is difficult to predict what judgment will give the tribunal. If he stated that domestic courts are not obliged to examine such contracts ex officio, it would not mean that there is no obligation to examine them in response to the defendant's allegations. The assessment of the effectiveness of the assignment is one of the basic elements of the right to defend the defendants in this type of disputes, it concerns whether the buyer of the claim has the right to sue the bank at all-adds Right Advisor Anna Wonder-Wagner, a partner at the CMS Polska office.

“Judges evaluate the rates in isolation from market conditions”

Mariusz Plichta, a partner in the CGO Recovery Plichta and Wspólnicy Law Firm (cooperates with the Help Find group, representing it in court disputes), estimates that In the context of the issue of “Non -Annicated Price”, the problem results from the misunderstanding by many judges of several key aspects. He claims that the judges assess the purchase rates in isolation from market realities.

– Courts, analyzing market rates, currently at the level of about 10 percent. the potential value of the claim, they make a simple calculation. Therefore, if we juxtapose PLN 1,000 and PLN 10,000 with us, it seems shocking how you can “sell 10,000 for 1000”. But it is obvious that the disputed claim is buying for a relatively low percentage of its valueAnd – says Plichta.

In his opinion, in this rhetoric, not only the significant costs of such an investment (purchase), but also the entire logistics behind the analysis of documents, obtaining evidence, the work of employed lawyers, the service of the process (currently two -instance), payment of costs and ultimately debt collection. IN His opinions are also ignored by the risk aspect – it is forgotten that in addition to the said costs, the investment may not give the expected profit at all. The latter may particularly apply to the so -called Free loan sanctions, although in the case we describe it is a franc mortar, and here the case -law is unambiguous, i.e. unfavorable for banks and customers win much more often.

Large assignments of claims under the magnifying glass of the CJEU

The assignment of claims in the case of loans (as a result of which the office is not in the interest of the client) is a phenomenon that banks assess very critically. -Law firms operate in their own interest after they purchased for a small amount, usually 10-20 percent. values, claim from the consumer. Therefore, they work to achieve a much greater benefit than a consumer could obtain, and this is an abuse of subjective law – said Tadeusz Białek, president of the Polish Bank Association, in an interview with Business Insider.

In this statement he referred to SKD, or “penalty” imposed against the bank, resulting in depriving him of the possibility of obtaining any interest on the loan, if the provisions of the consumer credit agreement violated the law. According to ZBP data, about half of the court cases regarding SKD are those in which the consumer's debt was assigned from the consumer to a compensation company.

Court of Court of Justice of the European Union deals with the purchase of claims under SKD. I am talking about the case we described under the C-600/24 ​​reference number. The Gdynia court, which sent questions to the CJEU, expressed fear that The consumer may not have sufficient knowledge and cannot rationally assess whether and for what remuneration he would sell the claim And as if he came out financially if he came to the claims himself.

In a week, the CJEU will issue a judgment in case C-80/24

There is also other proceedings in the CJEU in this respect (reference number C-80/24), which will be settled on October 9. According to lawyer Wojciech Wandzel, the leader of the Banking & Finance KKG practice (he works for banks), the CJEU should say that The assignment of a monetary claim by a consumer to a compensation or debt collection company based on SKD means prohibited by the EU directive on consumer loan (2008/48/EC) waiver of rights granted to the consumer this directive. In turn, in the scope of the second question, he expects, contrary to the opinion of the General Ombudsman of 30 April 2025,, The CJEU will decide on the obligation of domestic courts an ex officio of the dishonest (illegal) nature of the provisions of the assignment agreement concluded between the consumer and the compensation company.

– Even if the CJEU would say that the Court of the Office of the abusiveness of assignments is not obliged to examine, it should be borne in mind that The abusiveness of assignment agreements is a different defect than the absolute invalidity of assignments resulting from national law. Hence, in my opinion, regardless of the judgment of the CJEU in case C-80/24, national courts will examine the validity of the assignment contracts for the allegation of lenders, as the CJEU judgment will only concern the examination of the abusiveness of the provisions of the assignment contracts ex officio by the court-says Wandzel.

Points out that The invalidity of the assignment contracts is already found in his cases concerning SKD, and the motive is, according to the courts, a violation of the principles of social coexistence (Article 58 § 2 of the Civil Code) when shaping the price for the sale. – The courts check whether the company buying a claim from the consumer takes over most of the potential benefits, and in case of recognition that this is the case, the court dismisses the action in the absence of an active ID of the compensation company – he adds.

Compensation companies present their arguments …

However, a representative of the compensation office has a different view. He argues that judges very often do not understand the essence of the processes about SKD, i.e. the potential division of profits between the company and the borrower.

– Most SKD cases relate to still repaid loans, in this situation the assignment concerns the costs of credit already arising and realistically paid by the borrower. These costs are transferred. This does not change the fact that the effectiveness of the SKD declaration confirmed in the process conducted by buying companies will lead to a reduction in future installments of the borrower – says legal advisor Mariusz Plichta.

He adds that with long -term loans often profits for the borrower significantly exceed the received (non -returnable and independent of the outcome of the process) price. – The judges without feeling these issues only look at the price, and yet the borrower, by making a decision, estimates all their profits. The price is only one and most often the least momentous element. The judges seem not to let their awareness that many people prefer not to get a lot of people in person. At the same time, they are fully satisfied with the express payment of the price, they do not have to invest anything, they do not have to wait for years at the end of the trial – says Plichta.

He adds that judges forget about hard data and evidence. He argues that STawki are fair if they are market. In his opinion, this market should define price integrity – not a court.

… and they are already looking for a way out of possible trouble

Due to the risk of examining the validity of the assignment contracts, some Compensation companies withdrew from the so -called cssion model (assuming the conclusion of the consumer's assignment with a compensation company) for the benefitin which the reason is formally the consumer, with a compensation or debt collection company with a consumer contract for the provision of legal services (or other equivalent for services), in which he reserves an analogous remuneration (benefits) as in the case of an assignment agreement.

According to Wojciech Wandzel, the judgment of the CJEU, assuming that the court is obliged to examine from the office of abusiveness of assignment agreements, would limit to a minimum of the so -called The empire model and in his opinion could threaten the activities of those entities that operate on the basis of this model. – However, this judgment cannot have a direct impact on those compensation companies that do not use a imperial model, but are based on the so -called legal service agreement. In this case, it would be intentional to study contracts for legal services concluded by compensation companies with consumers by the President of UOKiK – believes Wojciech Wandzel.