Addenda can be scrapped only with the customers' consent, says Constitutional Court
Bankers need to have the customers' consent in order to scrap the addenda created based on Ordinance 50, on making retail loan costs more transparent, even if they were not signed by the debtors and were considered as tacitly accepted, say Constitutional Court judges.
"The provisions stating that addenda not signed by customers
will produce their effects in line with their terms, barring the
situation where consumers or lenders notify the other party to the
contrary (...) need to be interpreted as requiring the consumer's
consent to the above-mentioned notification," note the judges of
the Constitutional Court in the decision on the claim of
unconstitutionality of law 288/2010 connected to Ordinance 50,
brought by several deputies.
They filed a claim to the Constitutional Court, saying the law does
not comply with the bicameralism principle because the original
form of the ordinance was modified through amendments that were not
also submitted with the Senate (only with the Chamber of Deputies
i.e.). The law was declared unconstitutional, with judges ruling
that the amendments in question did not bring a radical change to
the original text.
The law based on the ordinance however no longer applies to ongoing
loans, with the exception of provisions on capping the early
repayment fee. From the customers' perspective, this was in fact
the most important provision of the ordinance.