Tag archives for Danske capital Assurance Equity Release


Euan Armstrong, President and Founder of the Equity Release Victims’ Association, has finally succeeded in having his 2004 mortgage loan rendered illegal by a Spanish Court.

When in 2010 Danske Bank foreclosed on the loan and attempted to rob Euan of his Alhaurin home, he could not imagine what a long road lied ahead; immediately upon being served Court papers, Euan’s lawyers instituted criminal proceedings at the Fuengirola Court denouncing the scam he had been a victim of.

When 5 years later the Courts dismissed all criminal proceedings -as a result of a controversial decision by Spanish judiciary governing bodies to not pursue bank contracts criminally- and Danske Bank attempted to foreclose again, lawyers acting for Euan made an almost unheard -and very risky- legal decision: they filed a criminal case against a judge in Coin for admitting a loan foreclosure claim with blatantly insufficient documents.

The Granada High Court in charge of reviewing the case against the judge dismissed the allegations in 2018 -they were described as merely civil- but not before noting, in a short paragraph, that Euan’s allegation of a flawed civil procedure had merits in it. So whilst no charges were brought against the judge, a new Coin judge dealing with the case -who had replaced the previous one for unknow reasons- dismissed all foreclosure procedures on the basis of a technicality.

In 2019, with the threat of loan foreclosure all but eliminated, lawyers for Euan filed the definitive civil claim against Danske Bank International S.A. and The One Life Company S.A. for devising, promoting and selling a misleading and illegal complex financial product, requesting that both the mortgage loan contract and the insurance policies were ruled null and void by the Courts, which is exactly what the ruling has granted.

Lawbird Legal Services S.L.P. (Antonio Flores in the initial defensive actions and Juan Martinez Soler in the latter -and hopefully definitive- Coin Court of First Instance ruling) have acted for Euan Armstrong.

(to be continued)

Conversation between DANSKE BANK INTERNATIONAL and Son of a Victim

Søren Glente

This conversation was taped by the son of a Danske Bank International S.A. victim, and Soren Glente, at the time one of the bosses in charge of selling the Capital Assurance. The conversation had already been postedin this site but now, we have the most relevant parts in writing.

In the recording Mr. Glente, a classic Luxembourg-based Danish banker, has a rare fit of honesty and sings like a canary: 


Minute 15:00 onwards

S.B.: How would you describe the risks of this product?

Soren Glente: Well ehhh depending on how aggressive the client would like to be then, I mean if you did it only for the purpose of optimize your tax situation. Then the risk is quite small, it will cost you something each year, I mean the difference between what you paid and the interests of the loan and what you could achieve on interests of the       and if these were place cautionally  the income from the assets would be less than what you paid on the loan, and that would be the price of …

S.B.: and was that made clear to the client?

Soren Glente: oh yes sure, for the

S.B.: so the income from the loans, sorry the income from the assets and investment would never cover the loan? Ehh?

Soren Glente: no , if you wanted to have a very cautious investment profile, then you couldn’t you couldn’t have , the income couldn’t achieve the cost of the loan, no. if you wanted to to achieve that on the loan , then you had to be take some kind of risk, like buying more risky assets

S.B.: so it was really ehh

Soren Glente: and so on and so on

S.B.: so in order to be low risk it was loss making

Soren Glente: yes, that’s for sure

S.B.: and loss it was going to accumulate every year

Soren Glente: yes, not by much, but yes, it would, it would accumulate each year because you would be ehh, you would be able to get an income from, let’s say your deposit or your short term bonds which would be ehh, the income would be less than what you paying interests on the loan, so therefore it would accumulate each year, yes it would

S.B.: do you think my clients understood that?

Soren Glente: yes they did, because I explained that to them, when I had meetings with them, I explained them , because I was, when I spoke  with clients ehh or with your parents ehh, they were, in the beginning the investments was very conservative  placed by me in an agreement with them, and then each year they could see that the capital actually degrees value, that the assets couldn’t provide income which would pay the interests of the loan, so therefore they came to me actually and ask whether I, we should consider changing the assets to more risky assets, in order to achieve a higher income, so I had a long dialog with your clients, ohh with your parents  about that, because I had to tell them that if they wanted that, the risk would increase and as far as  I remember we agreed to take a small portions of your parents’ assets and place them in a slightly risky assets, in order to at least break even, that is as far as I remember, but you could see, but you should be able to see that on the notes or… so that’s what happened. So  I remember I had a dialog with your clients, with your parents  in the bank sometime

S.B.: mmm mmm

Soren Glente: but we are going many years back now

S.B.: right, well I think that they did not understand it, I don’t think that they understood that from the beginning when they signed up to this contract, that this was going to run it to loss, if it was going to be lowerer QQ  

Soren Glente: no, you might be right. That they didn’t because, you might be right that they didn’t understand that

S.B.: mmm there were…

Soren Glente:  many many clients on the costa del sol didn’t understand that you can’t just, you can’t you can’t just automatically make money out of the negative equity, which it actually was, without taking risks and that has been the case for many many unfortunate clients down there that they are they have placed assets on too risky assets too risky assets like equities and things that were having a loan on both the house and the assets

S.B.: did you know the others, do you know,   how many other clients did you have like my parents?

Soren Glente: several

Up to minute 20:00


Minute 32:50 onwards

S.B.: and do you still sell this Company insurance scheme product?

Soren Glente: yes, by all means if people they are wanting to tax optimize their situation then that is one of the best schemes you can sell in.it really is

S.B.: but there is dispute about whether it does actually protect against Spanish inheritance tax, not everyone says, not everyone says it protects

Soren Glente: yes, but I have got a legal opinion saying differently

S.B.: from who, may I ask who from?

Soren Glente: it was from several other companies Price Waterhouse Coopers in Spain in Madrid, we have a legal opinion from these guys

Minute 34:03

Soren Glente: Yo have to do it right to have it to work, but it does work, you just have to know that the reason for doing this is not to release your equity from the property to in order to buy a new car or whatever you want to, the reason for doing this is to optimize your situation for wealth tax and yeah mainly inheritance tax, wealth tax was also an issue, but it is a lesser issue today

Danske Bank Luxembourg to be Deposed


Following a recent visit by Euan A. lawyers to the Criminal Court 1 in Fuengirola, it has been established that Danske Bank Luxembourg is now to be finally deposed via the European Judicial Network in criminal matters (EJN), in Luxembourg.

Danske Bank lawyers have been persistent in attempting to avoid, at all cost, the interrogation of the defendant parties. The tactics have so far been unsuccessful save for achieving a delay of a few months; the implications, however, could be expensive to its perpetrators for Court officials are of the opinion that there is a clearly defined strategy to maliciously prevent the normal progress of the proceedings and hamper the efforts of the claimant to obtain, via the Spanish Courts, a defendant’s statement within a criminal case.

Notably, Danske Bank insists that this is a purely civil dispute that should be conveniently ventilated by Civil Courts and yet, cannot and willl not explain why is their publicity false, fraudulent and proposes tax evasion openly. Surely, if they had nothing to worry about they would sooner be giving a clarifying statement than hiding behind slow EU cross-border plaintiff interrogation mechanisms.

Finally, it is worth noting that  the claimant’s counsel has indicated that both Mr. Morten Runo Waaben and Mr. Henrik Hjerrild Hansen should be deposed via the appropriate channels but that, if they felt a compelling desire to come out clean they could, through their advisors, request an appointment with the Fuengirola Court to give their statements.


Skip to toolbar