Destruction of existence through loan termination?

How bank customers can protect themselves

Economically, financing often only makes sense if the money is invested profitably, i.e. the borrowing costs are lower than the return on the investment. But even if this is the plan, credit customers are repeatedly lured into financing traps. Then loan termination and destruction of existence are just around the corner.

Case 1: Lack of matching maturities

Those who take out a loan to purchase business equipment often realize too late that they are still paying off their loan, even though their investment will not yield what would be needed to pay off the remaining debt if they were to sell it on the spur of the moment. When a replacement investment is purchased, debt is then accumulated.

2nd trap: follow-up financing risk

The situation is similar for real estate owners who have fixed their loan term to 10 years, for example – but the money from a repayment vehicle (e.g. a life insurance policy) is only available after 12 years, i.e. 2 years later: The two-year time difference can be exploited by the bank to enforce almost usurious interest rates. This is especially true if the equity invested and the loan repayments have been so low so far that no other bank is willing to participate in a debt restructuring. The lower the equity capital, the more important it is to have legally secure agreements with the credit institution so that the follow-up financing can also be obtained later at the usual market conditions.

3. trap: arrears, missing, incorrect or manipulated documents on creditworthiness

Termination without notice is provoked by the customer if due interest and redemption payments are not made, if documents for assessing creditworthiness are not submitted or are submitted in a manipulated form, or if the creditworthiness has objectively deteriorated. Indications for this can be enforcement measures or the repeated exceeding of agreed limits.

4. trap: tolerated overdraft

No bank is obliged to accept constant overdrafts if it has repeatedly warned you. The case is different if the overdraft has been repeatedly accepted without objection. Then a surprise loan termination comes “at an inopportune time,” and puts the bank in a liability for intentional unconscionable injury.

5. trap: under-securing and over-securing

Banks can re-evaluate loan collateral at any time; a sudden under-collateralization then prepares for loan termination. This right also applies to banks that have previously worked fraudulently with investment brokers or junk real estate agents. In this respect, the credit customer is well advised to have the intrinsic value of his investments or capital assets checked himself in advance for his own account – and to stipulate the valuation standards objectively in the credit agreement. If the bank has more than 120% of the assets as collateral, it is obliged to release them: However, this must also be regulated in the contract, because otherwise the bank can choose which collateral it wants to waive first.

6. trap: fixed loan with life insurance for redemption

It is not only since the financial crisis that some bankers have been blackmailing customers by saying that they will only get a loan if they also take out a life insurance policy at the same time. This commission maximization model is not only often disadvantageous from a tax point of view. An expert opinion will be able to prove the financial loss for which the credit institution will then be directly liable. Annuity loans are always cheaper or paid off faster. But the customer was often deceived about this by unrealistic sample calculations of the insurer: only on paper would the loan have actually been repaid by the maturity benefit of the life insurance. In reality today, however, the borrower finds that he is left with a substantial residual debt after offsetting it against the maturity benefit of the life insurance policy.

7. trap: house bank without alternatives

It’s not just a good rule of thumb with investments to spread your risk. In the case of credit financing, it is also advisable to maintain a connection with at least two other banks – ideally these should be located in two different countries. If a dispute arises with an institution, it is at least possible to maintain solvency and thus avoid the often certain insolvency.

Case 8: Intervention by the Bank in the management of the company

Banks often impose “their own” management consultants on commercial loan customers to manage their businesses. The owners or managing directors then mutate into the “straw man of the bank”, as it were. What appears to be well-intentioned sometimes only turns out to be a measure to obtain further loan collateral or to be given preferential treatment as a bank vis-à-vis other creditors. It is better for entrepreneurs themselves to carry out regular internal and external monitoring of business relationships. A qualified in-house tax advisor or auditor can help to identify and restructure uneconomical business areas.

9. trap: “shark bite” for banks and related parties

Time and again it can be observed that persons from the bank’s board of directors or supervisory board already know who could take over the assets available with a loan customer. “Good friends” are sometimes informed in advance and put in place – even before a loan notice has been issued. Such indiscretions violate banking secrecy and data protection. Such collusive “booty-sharing” can often only be countered by strategic loan contract design.

10th trap: locusts and collection agencies

Major banks and savings banks have demolished their reputations with larger traders by passing on credit claims to “hedge funds” and “Moscow debt collection”. Neither the courts nor the legislature offer any protection here for the self-employed, especially commercial businesses. Occasionally, the customer advisor then regrets that a million-dollar loan had to be cancelled without real need in order to sell it on to a grasshopper.

Rarely does the comment “Yes we know this was illegal – but the end of a lawsuit will be something your heirs can experience at best.” come.

by Dr. Johannes Fiala and Dipl.-Math. Peter A. Schramm

by courtesy of

www.handwerke.de (published in Computern im Handwerk, issue 10/2009, pages 5-6)

and

www.fleischerei.de (published in The Butcher’s Shop, issue 11/2009, pages 62-63 under the headline: Watch out for credit traps!)

and

www.der-siebdruck.de (published in Der Siebdruck, issue 12/2009, pages 51-52 under the headline: Credit traps lead to insolvencies)

and

www.arzt-wirtschaft.de (posted 12/16/2015 under the headline: Avoiding credit traps when starting a practice)

Link: http://www.arzt-wirtschaft.de/kreditfallen-bei-der-praxisgruendung-vermeiden/

and

www.bbr.de (published in (bbr tapes sheets tubes, issue 01-02/2010, pages 58-59 under the headline: Caution, credit trap!)

and

www.elektropartiker.de (published in Elektropaktiker issue 12/2009, page 950 under the heading: Avoiding credit traps).

and

https://gundv.de (published in Designing and Selling, issue 12/2009, pages 42-43 under the headline: Beware “Credit Traps”!)

And

www.marktundmittelstand.de (published in Finanzierung im Mittelstand, issue 03/2009, page 12 under the headline: Without credit traps insolvencies can be avoided)

And

www.professional-production.de (published in Professional Production, issue 08-09/2010, page 26 under the headline: Watch out for credit traps – avoid insolvencies

and

www.dmk.de (Published in DMK, Issue 06-2009, pages 74-75 under the headline: Destruction of existence by loan termination).

and

www.brauwelt.com (published in Brauwelt, issue 17-12-2009, pages 1562-1563 under the headline: Destruction of existence by loan termination)

Our office in Munich

You will find our office at Fasolt-Strasse 7 in Munich, very close to Schloss Nymphenburg. Our team consists of highly motivated attorneys who are available for all the needs of our clients. In special cases, our law firm cooperates with selected experts to represent your interests in the best possible way.

About the author

Dr. Johannes Fiala
PhD, MBA, MM

Dr. Johannes Fiala has been working for more than 25 years as a lawyer and attorney with his own law firm in Munich. He is intensively involved in real estate, financial law, tax and insurance law. The numerous stages of his professional career enable him to provide his clients with comprehensive advice and to act as a lawyer in the event of disputes.
»More about Dr. Johannes Fiala

On these pages, Dr. Fiala provides information on current legal and economic topics as well as on current political changes that are of social and/or corporate relevance.