'Borrower escapes 5 billion debt' case: VPBank says 'customer is responsible for paying debt'

Regarding the case of the People's Court of Region 7 declaring the loan contract between VPBank and a customer to buy a semi-detached villa at Novaworld Phan Thiet null and void, VPBank stated that 'the lending and receiving of assets as loan collateral is in accordance with the law'.

Novaland's Novaworld Phan Thiet project in Lam Dong (formerly Binh Thuan province) - Photo: NGOC HIEN

On the afternoon of October 3, Vietnam Prosperity Joint Stock Commercial Bank ( VPBank ) continued to respond to Tuoi Tre Online regarding the People's Court of Region 7 - Ho Chi Minh City declaring the credit contract between VPBank and the customer, Mr. and Mrs. Tran Hong Son, invalid to buy a semi-detached villa at Novaworld Phan Thiet.

Why does VPBank lend billions to customers who don't have a house yet?

According to VPBank, this bank lends capital to customers to pay deposits according to the agreement in the written document between the customer and Novareal Joint Stock Company, a unit with the function of real estate consulting and brokerage.

According to this agreement, Novareal will introduce and consult information about real estate products in Binh Thuan province invested by a real estate business unit (investor) and receive consulting and brokerage service fees.

At the same time, the customer has to deposit to ensure the implementation of the commitments in this agreement, proving financial capacity so that when the investor has enough conditions to sell real estate according to the provisions of law, he/she can sign a real estate sale and purchase contract with the investor.

Based on customer needs, VPBank has lent customers capital to pay the deposit.

VPBank believes that based on the needs and documents provided by the customer, VPBank assessed and provided a loan with the purpose of using the loan capital being "payment according to the agreement in the written agreement".

"Novareal is a company with the function of real estate brokerage and consultancy, and the parties use the deposit as a measure to ensure the performance of contractual obligations as stipulated in Article 328 of the 2015 Civil Code.

Therefore, VPBank's lending to customers to pay deposits according to written agreements is a loan purpose in accordance with the provisions of Clause 2, Article 7 of Circular No. 39 of the State Bank of Vietnam regulating lending activities of credit institutions and foreign bank branches to customers," VPBank informed.

VPBank said 'lending according to regulations'

According to VPBank, the panel of judges' citation of Clause 2, Article 8 of Circular No. 39, which stipulates that credit institutions "are not allowed to lend to pay expenses or meet financial needs of transactions and acts prohibited by law" to determine the bank's lending in this case, is incorrect.

In addition, to ensure the performance of debt repayment obligations, the customer and VPBank have signed a property rights mortgage contract and registered the secured transaction in accordance with regulations.

VPBank believes that even in the hypothetical case that the content of real estate consulting and brokerage in the agreement is canceled or invalid, the property rights arising such as compensation and refund related to the deposit according to the provisions of the 2014 Civil Code (if any) will be the secured assets according to the signed agreement.

"Customers have a legitimate need to use capital and have collateral in accordance with the provisions of law, so VPBank's lending and receiving collateral as the above-mentioned property rights is in accordance with the provisions of law on lending.

The loan contract and mortgage contract were signed voluntarily, without any coercion or force. The customer has accepted the debt, therefore the customer is responsible for repaying the debt to VPBank," VPBank affirmed.

VPBank believes that based on the records and documents provided by the customer, the records stored at VPBank and the provisions of law, the lending and receiving of loan collateral is in accordance with the provisions of law.

Previously, as reported by Tuoi Tre Online (please follow the developments here), the People's Court of Region 7 - Ho Chi Minh City declared the loan contract between the plaintiff, Vietnam Prosperity Joint Stock Commercial Bank (VPBank), and the defendant, Mr. Tran Hong Son and his wife, null and void because the agreement to purchase a semi-detached villa at Novaworld Phan Thiet used as collateral was determined to be invalid.

The Trial Panel believes that there is sufficient basis to determine that Novareal Company, on behalf of the investor of the Ocean Valley project, signed a contract as the exclusive consulting and brokerage unit for real estate products of the project.

Novareal Company is only a real estate brokerage unit, therefore it does not have the right to receive deposits from customers. Its scope of operation is to act as a broker for people who want to buy real estate so that investors and buyers can sign contracts.

In addition, the documents provided by the bank do not show any information about the Ocean Valley project provided by the investor, Delta Valley Binh Thuan Company Limited. There are no documents, minutes, or evidence showing that the real estate mentioned in the agreement dated November 5, 2020 has completed the foundation.

The trial panel determined that in the case file there was no document showing that the future real estate, a semi-detached villa belonging to the Ocean Valley project, had completed its foundation.

Delta Valley Binh Thuan Company Limited is strictly prohibited from authorizing Novareal Company to sign deposit contracts for housing transactions. Because this real estate does not exist, Novareal Company's receipt of deposits from customers is a violation of the law, showing signs of the crime of "fraudulent appropriation of property".

NGOC HIEN

Source: https://tuoitre.vn/vu-nguoi-vay-thoat-no-5-ti-vpbank-noi-khach-hang-co-trach-nhiem-tra-no-20251003164904732.htm