The Banco de España agreed with you and the bank does not pay

The case, in five lines

What is brought

Civil claim against the bank for payment of the sum, or to void the term that supported the charge, supported by the report of the claims service as qualified documentary evidence.

Before which court

The Civil section of the Tribunal de Instancia (the first instance court). No contencioso administrativo appeal lies against the supervisor's report, because article 30.2 of Law 44/2002 denies it the character of an appealable administrative act.

Deadline

The report does not by itself interrupt any civil period. A claim for a sum of money is a personal action subject to the five years of article 1964.2 of the Civil Code, running from when performance could be demanded, so the time spent before the supervisor works against you.

Who can bring it

The financial services user who bore the charge or the loss, and any co holders of the account or contract affected. In business contracts, the company holding the relationship with the bank.

Financial risk

A favourable report does not guarantee that the claim will succeed, because the court assesses the evidence entirely freely. If the claim is dismissed there may be an order to pay costs, which is why the amount claimed and the cost of the case are weighed before it is brought.

The report is reasoned, but the statute denies it enforceable force

Article 30.2 of Law 44/2002 says that the claims services of the Banco de España, the Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores and the Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones shall resolve complaints and claims by reasoned reports, which are in no case administrative acts open to appeal. That sentence explains at once why the bank can ignore it and why you cannot challenge it.

An operational conclusion follows, and it is best accepted early: there is no administrative or court appeal against the report, and no enforcement route to collect on it. Pressing the supervisor with further letters changes nothing, because the service has already exhausted what the law allows it to do, which is to issue a reasoned finding.

What the statute does impose on the bank is a duty to report. Article 30.3.c) provides that, where the report is unfavourable to the bank complained against, it must inform the competent claims service whether it has voluntarily rectified within a period of no more than one month from notification. Obliged to report, not obliged to pay.

Winning before the supervisor does not get you paid, but it prepares the case

The report has real evidential value in civil proceedings. It is issued by a specialised and independent body, it describes the bank's conduct and measures it against transparency rules and good financial practice and usage, which is precisely the field article 30.1 assigns to it. Taking it into the claim saves argument about the facts and moves the debate onto legal ground.

It also puts your file in order. To reach the report you first had to complain in writing to the bank and wait a month, so by the time a claim is brought there is already a complete paper trail: your complaint, the bank's answer or silence, your submission to the service and the supervisor's finding.

The limitation clock does not stop while you wait for the report

Article 30.3.b) sets ninety calendar days as the maximum period to resolve the file, counted from the submission of the complaint or from when it is recorded that the complete documentation was received. In practice, adding the prior complaint to the bank, the month of waiting and that period, close to half a year goes by before the report is in your hands.

Meanwhile, the civil action follows its own calendar. Article 1964.2 of the Civil Code subjects personal actions with no special period to a five year prescription from when performance of the obligation can be demanded. It is therefore wise to keep the claim alive with written demands to the bank, which do interrupt that count, rather than entrusting the matter solely to the supervisor's file.

In older matters this decides the case. A complaint brought at the edge of the period and resolved six months later can reach the court with the action already prescribed, and then a favourable report is worth nothing. That is why the first thing done on taking the case is to date the birth of the obligation and calculate how much margin is left.

What the supervisor examines is not always what is sued upon

Article 30.1 delimits the scope of the service: it deals with complaints and claims relating to users' legally recognised interests and rights arising from alleged breaches of transparency and customer protection rules, or of good financial practice and usage. It is a review of the bank's conduct, not a calculation of what you are owed.

The civil claim, by contrast, is built on a specific cause of action with its own legal basis: nullity of the term that supported the charge, breach of contract or unjust enrichment, with a defined sum and its interest. Translating the report into that structure is the work that turns a moral finding into an order to pay.

For the same reason a report unfavourable to you does not close the door either. The service reviews conduct in the light of transparency and financial usage, while the civil court applies the contract and the law with full freedom of assessment. The same facts may not breach good banking practice and still amount to a breach of contract that can be sued upon.

The supervisor's file is also a warning shot for the bank

Article 30.1 provides that the claims services shall inform the corresponding supervision services where they see signs of serious or repeated breaches of transparency and customer protection rules, or of good financial practice and usage, by the same entity. An unfavourable report is therefore not a harmless piece of paper for the bank.

Article 30.4 adds publicity: the Banco de España and the other supervisors publish annually on their websites a report on their claims services with the statistical summary of the queries and complaints handled, the criteria applied and the entities affected, indicating where appropriate whether the finding was favourable or unfavourable.

Those two facts are used in negotiation. A bank accumulating unfavourable reports on the same practice has a real incentive to close the matter before a judgment consolidates the criterion, and that is the moment when a claim already prepared and announced in writing achieves more than a year of correspondence.

How we run the case, step by step

1. 1

   We read the report looking for the civil action inside it

   We identify what conduct is criticised and which legal category it fits: a void term, an undue charge, a breach of contract. The report describes facts, and the claim also needs a cause of action with its legal basis and its amount.

2. 2

   We calculate the time you have left

   We date the birth of the obligation and count the five year period of article 1964.2 of the Civil Code, deducting the time spent before the supervisor. That calculation decides whether to sue at once or whether there is room to negotiate.

3. 3

   We demand payment in writing with the report attached

   The demand sets out the sum, the interest and a deadline, and it interrupts prescription. Many banks rectify at this point, because the unfavourable report is already on their file before the supervisor and they prefer to close the matter.

4. 4

   We prepare the evidence beyond the report

   We gather the contract, the statements and the correspondence, because the court assesses the evidence freely and is not bound by the supervisor's view. The report strengthens the claim, but does not replace it or prove the amount on its own.

5. 5

   We sue for the sum before the Civil section

   The claim seeks the amount with its interest and produces the report as a document. That is where the supervisor's route ends and the only one that yields a title enforceable against the bank if it does not pay begins.

The law that applies

• Art. 30.1 de la Ley 44/2002. Assigns to the claims services of the Banco de España, the CNMV and the Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones the complaints and claims of financial services users arising from alleged breaches of transparency and customer protection rules or of good financial practice and usage, under principles of independence, adversarial process and legality, with a single window, and a duty to inform the supervision services where they see serious or repeated breaches. BOE-A-2002-22807
• Art. 30.2 de la Ley 44/2002. Provides that those services resolve complaints and claims by reasoned reports which are in no case administrative acts open to appeal. Hence the report does not bind the bank, cannot be enforced, and cannot be challenged before the contencioso administrativo courts either. BOE-A-2002-22807
• Art. 30.3 de la Ley 44/2002. Requires a prior written complaint to the customer service department or the Customer Ombudsman, which must acknowledge receipt and resolve it with reasons, and proof that a month passed without resolution or that it was refused or dismissed. It sets ten calendar days to complete the information and ninety calendar days as the maximum period to resolve, and obliges a bank with an unfavourable report to state within a month whether it voluntarily rectified. BOE-A-2002-22807
• Art. 1964.2 CC. Subjects personal actions with no special period to a five year prescription from when performance of the obligation can be demanded. It is the period for the claim for payment against the bank, and it keeps running while the file before the claims service is being processed. BOE-A-1889-4763

Each article checked against the consolidated text published in the BOE (the Spanish official gazette).

Frequently asked questions