Paris (AFP)
By confining itself to an unusual neutrality, the prosecution left Thursday at the discretion of the Paris court the decision to condemn or not the main credit subsidiary of the BNP for the marketing of its loan "catastrophic" Helvet Immo, to the despair of borrowers .
"If the court decides to sentence the bank," "a fine of 500,000 euros would make sense, as well as the publication of your decision," said the prosecutor.
These requisitions, which have consistently highlighted the exculpatory elements for the bank, case law in support, have prompted murmurs of protest - "It's a shame," "sold!" - in the ranks of the borrowers, of whom 2,300 are civil parties at the trial.
The civil parties have asked this week a "dissuasive sanction" against the bank, accused of having "hidden the incredible financial risk" inherent to the real estate loan tax exemption Helvet Immo.
The particularity of this loan, marketed in 2008 and 2009 by BNP Paribas Personal Finance, was to be denominated in Swiss francs but repayable in euros. When, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, the euro stalled against the Swiss currency, some 4,600 borrowers saw the outstanding amounts flaring up.
Many of them still have to repay more than the amount borrowed while they have been paying for more than ten years.
The bank, judged for "deceptive commercial practice", refutes any illegal practice and pleaded the acquittal.
- "Credit Camelots" -
In this extraordinary case because of the number of plaintiffs and the proven toxicity of the loan over the past eleven years, the suffering of small borrowers crippled by debt comes up against the aridity of the law.
"The prosecutor's office has not been bought by the BNP," said the prosecutor from the outset. She called for "doing the right" and not to consider this file "on the only examination of disastrous balance of Helvet Immo".
"The catastrophe in this case is that credit hackers (...) have persuaded thousands of sensible borrowers that Helvet Immo was the ideal loan," said Francoise Denezech.
But, she added, "risk-free speculation does not exist".
Anticipating the defense's case, she said the 2008 financial crisis and its impact on exchange rates were not predictable, so the bank could not be blamed.
She also pointed out that while the credit risk marketed by the bank was "banned in 2013", it was "legal at the time of marketing".
Noting that the BNP had never mentioned a "currency risk" in its offer, it nevertheless considered that it had given no "false information" and that it was up to the court to decide whether the information provided, in part and complex, were "likely to alter the understanding" of the borrowers.
Going further, the magistrate rejected the intermediaries - who are not prosecuted - the main responsibility for any misleading information.
A position totally opposed to that of the prosecutor who had required the referral of the bank before the court, and an interpretation of the offer - which according to the investigating judges multiplied formulas "particularly unintelligible" - which made the happiness of the defense of the first French bank.
BNP lawyers recalled the "80 favorable decisions" to the bank on the 83 already made in civil, defending the clarity of its offer Helvet Immo.
"To say that the bank would have tried to hide the currency risk is meaningless: it is the heart of the contract," said Philippe Métais, believing that the understanding of this risk was within the reach of a "consumer reasonably informed means ".
"We can talk about the technicality of the loan but not the complexity of the offer," added his colleague Ludovic Malgrain, causing nervous chuckles in the room. "There is no deception," he said, saying that the "stall" of the euro against the Swiss franc had intervened "in 2010".
The decision will be made on February 26.
"February, it is far, when one suffers since ten years", reacted a complainant to the exit of the hearing.
© 2019 AFP