Court of First Instance 1 in Fuengirola has declared an Equity Release mortgage loan valued at €1.4 million null and void.

According to the ruling, Nykredit Realkredit A/S (largest lender in Denmark) and Sydbank (Investment bank) teamed up to create the Spanish Equity Release Package (SERP), a complex financial product designed to reduce the value of Spanish properties by registering a mortgage loan against them and intended, based on generous and explicit advertising, to mitigate or reduce Spanish inheritance tax.

Of the Nykredit loan only a small sum was given to the property owner/borrower whereas the rest, the larger part of it, would be invested in a SICAV (translated as Investment Company with Variable Capital) promoted by Sydbank. As we all now know, not only did the investments go terribly wrong but the tax break offered by the mortgage was a not true, i.e., a scam.

Nykredit and Sybank, working closely together as shown on signed mutual agreements, offered around a dozen of such mortgages to Spain-based properties owners.

In spite of the above a cynical and insolent Christel Mark Hansen, working for Nykredit since before her employer peddled these toxic banking products and now branch manager of Nykredit’s Marbella office, shamelessly appeared in Court and after saying she had no interest in the case, proffering an orchestrated litany of lies, half-truths and manipulated statements despite being…under oath.

According to Christel:

• When asked if Nykredit and Sydbank did work together, she said it was the borrower who put them in touch (despite both being Danish, the former holding a stake in the latter’s shareholding and the various meetings between the managers of both companies and the client).
• When asked if Sydbank had to give a guarantee to Nykredit for 33% of the loan, she shamelessly answers “YES and NO” (despite it being a contractual obligation of the former to the latter).
• When asked if Nykredit paid a commission to Sydbank, she dodged the question a very arrogant Danish-bank style (despite it being a contractual obligation of the former to the latter).
• When asked if she knew if Nykredit’s loan had to go to Sydbank she said that yes, but only because she had seen it in other Court cases, and not because there was an agreement signed by both banks.

Nykredit had already foreclosed on the loan and repossessed the property at the time of the ruling although it is not known if they have sold it on. If they have, the bank will have to pay compensation of €1.7 million to the victims of their fraud.