Citas bibligráficas
Flores, S., (2021). Informe para la sustentación de expedientes: N° 442-2011- N° 270-2008/CPC [Trabajo de suficiencia profesional, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/656069
Flores, S., Informe para la sustentación de expedientes: N° 442-2011- N° 270-2008/CPC [Trabajo de suficiencia profesional]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2021. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/656069
@misc{sunedu/3093505,
title = "Informe para la sustentación de expedientes: N° 442-2011- N° 270-2008/CPC",
author = "Flores Puga, Stefania Alexandra",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2021"
}
Case No. 442-2011 deals with the foreclosure of a mortgage guarantee in which the financial entity states that its client defaulted on the payment obligation of a credit card, which is contained in a demand draft. Likewise, the financial entity points out that such obligation was guaranteed in the loan agreement and mortgage constitution, the same that guarantees the mortgage loan and also the obligations derived from the monetary loans that in the future or eventually the Bank may grant, as well as overdrafts in Current Account, obligations derived from credit cards, discounts or promissory notes, advance account, letters of credit or letters of guarantee, factoring or financial leasing operations, among others. Being in default of a credit card obligation, BCP decides to terminate the mortgage loan agreement and request full payment of the mortgage loan and the credit card debt contained in the demand draft. The controversy lies in elucidating whether the allegation of the unpaid obligations made by BCP determines the termination of the contract and as such, the enforceability of the payment of the full balance of the debt.
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons