Floor clauses, mortgage costs, revolving cards: the bank claims courts still uphold

The great Spanish banking-litigation wave began more than a decade ago, and a common assumption is that the tide has passed. It has not. Courts — Spanish and European — continue to strike down abusive terms, and several families of claims remain very much alive in 2026.

Floor clauses (cláusulas suelo)

The classic. If your variable-rate mortgage contained a clause preventing your instalments from ever falling below a set rate, and it was not transparently explained, the courts have consistently declared such clauses void — with restitution of what was overpaid. The action to declare an abusive clause void is not subject to an expiry date, which keeps older mortgages, including long-repaid ones, worth reviewing.

Mortgage set-up costs (gastos hipotecarios)

Notary, registry, agency and valuation fees that banks charged wholly to borrowers have generated years of litigation over one question: when does the claim expire? The EU Court of Justice pushed back against restrictive Spanish readings in 2024, and the practical consequence is that many claims once assumed dead are arguable again. Whether yours is still in time is a document-by-document question — the escritura and the fee invoices decide it, not a headline.

Revolving cards

The Supreme Court's usury and transparency doctrine on revolving credit consolidated through 2023–2025. Two independent attack lines exist:

• Usury — where the card's APR (TAE) significantly exceeded the market average for that product at the time of contracting; and
• Lack of transparency — where the revolving mechanism (minimum payments that barely amortise, interest compounding on interest) was never truly explained.

A voided card means the borrower returns only the capital received — every euro of interest and fees is set off or refunded.

IRPH and other fronts

Mortgages indexed to IRPH remain the most contested front; recent EU rulings have kept the door open and Spanish courts are re-examining transparency case by case. Multi-currency mortgages and mis-sold financial products continue to produce consumer wins as well.

What a realistic claim looks like

1. We review your escritura and statements and tell you plainly whether there is a claim and what it is worth.
2. Out-of-court claim to the bank first — a growing share settle here.
3. Court, where the numbers and the bank's stance justify it, with costs rules that in consumer cases often favour the claimant.

Banks count on inertia. The documents in your drawer are the only expert the case needs at the first step.

Our banking-law team reviews your documentation and gives you a straight answer — book a consultation.