This isn’t the first time that from Del Canto Chambers, we inform on the disadvantages of the creation of Ad Hoc Courts for floor clauses. In our article published last month #MortgagedJustice. The bank claims: a hard journey. We highlighted the inconveniences for those consumers who, for example, must commute to capitals of provinces just to reclaim their floor clauses instead of being able to attend their local courts. This practice undoubtedly breaks the fundamental right “to a predetermined ordinary judge”.
In the article titled “Spanish courts collapse with floor clause demands”. On the 29th of June, we already showed the high amounts of claims filed in just one week after the creation of these specialized floor clause courts.
This week we highlight the importance of the appeal presented by OCU (Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios) before the administrative section of the supreme court against the decision made by CGPJ (Congreso General del Poder Judicial) to create these courts in the first place.
According to the data published a few days ago by LegalToday from the first of June that these courts were created, around 16,000 demands have been presented that will reach 192,000 at the end of 2017, therefore collapsing the courts and improperly delaying consumers claims.
The OCU considers that these delays go against the law and that it is necessary to take “urgent measures” before this situation, requesting the extension of means to avoid collapse and to diminish the damages to those who are simply claiming what is theirs.