Revolving cards continue to be surrounded by controversy and controversy, due to their high interests and lack of clarity in the conditions. These cards, now popularly known as revolving cards, use a form of credit that allows the holder to have a renewable credit limit. In this way, as credit payments are made, part of it is recovered for use. The conditions of the revolving cards, in return, usually apply very high and even abusive interest. For their part, banks continue to defend the validity of these commercial products.
The new sentence of the Supreme Court recently published, establishes for the first time the usury criterion in revolving card contracts: it appears when the applied interest exceeds the average market rate for credit cards by six percentage points according to data from the Banco de España, published monthly. In the case of the ruling, a revolving card at 23.9% APR compared to 20% at which the average loan was in 2004, the Supreme Court considers that the agreed interest is not "significantly higher". This ruling lays the foundations for the positions of the judges from now on. However, the nullity of the contract can be required if there are clauses that could be abusive, such as the lack of transparency. Therefore, those affected must continue to exercise their right to claim.
According to the latest ruling of the Supreme Court, the calculation of abusive interest is carried out with the sum of six points above the average rate of card loans in the same period. Information on the average price can be obtained through the publications of the Bank of Spain.
It is very important to take into account that, even considering the scale established with the recent sentence, the claims of this type of product continue and the jurisprudence is just taking its first steps. In the same way, it is worth noting the importance of any clause that may be abusive, and for this reason the lack of transparency is more than enough reason to start the claim process. Legal advice will provide in these cases a much safer approach to the procedures and the procedure to follow to claim the invalidity of the revolving card and also the possible debt contracted with it.
It is worth highlighting the importance of specialized legal advice during the claim. Even considering that the established usury criterion is not met, there is the possibility of nullifying the revolving card contract alleging a lack of transparency, even being able to cancel the debt.
As long as there are suspicions of abusive interest on a revolving card, it is advisable to consult with an expert professional. It should be remembered that usury is not the only reason why the contract can be declared void and the debt cancelled. In this context, the Supreme Court has so far ruled on the condition of usury: once this criterion is determined, it is easier to focus on future judgments on the lack of transparency of the contracts. This could make resolving card claims already in progress and future ones easier to resolve in favor of the claimant.
