The Multi-Member Court of First Instance of Nafplio issued Decision No. 977/2024, which accepted the lawsuit of a debtor and reduced their debt from app. 500.000€, as determined by the credit institution under special liquidation, to €200,000.
Specifically, the court ruled that the plaintiff, at the time of signing the disputed loan agreement, was a professional farmer. Therefore, the maximum limit of their debt should be set at double the originally borrowed principal, according to Law 3259/2004. It was also recognized that interest accrual on the servicing accounts of the loan should be suspended from that point forward.
It should be noted that, under this law, the total overdue debt from any type of loan or credit cannot exceed three times the borrowed principal. In the case of an open credit account, it cannot exceed three times the outstanding amount at the time of the last disbursement. Any payments already made are deducted from the calculated amount. A point of contention exists only for open credit accounts, where there is disagreement about whether all payments or only those made after the last disbursement should be deducted. Specific provisions apply only to individuals who are professional farmers.
In this decision, the court found:
"[...] The first plaintiff, at the time of signing the disputed loan agreement and its addendum, was a professional farmer who operated a pig farm in the Argolis region. The loan obtained was intended to support and further expand this activity. Consequently, [...] the defendant erroneously recalculated the disputed debt under the loan agreement based on triple the total debt amount, instead of double the debt amount as provided under Article 39(5) of Law 3259/2004, as this was a farmer’s debt, for which a multiplier of '2' applies. [...] It is therefore recognized that the debt owed by the plaintiffs to the defendant under the disputed loan agreement and its addendum amounts to €200,000, with the suspension of interest accrual on the servicing accounts of the loan remaining in effect."
In rare cases, credit institutions independently apply the law on excessive interest rates and correctly recalculate debts. Even when they do take such actions, errors often occur. In this case, the credit institution under special liquidation proceeded with the recalculation only after the lawsuit was served, during the stage of the reply, but, as noted in the decision, it was done erroneously.