Questionable fees, a poorly disclosed loan, abusive listing, refused borrower insurance: disputes with a bank or insurer are common and technical. The challenge is to pinpoint the breach, quantify the loss and choose the most effective route — mediation or court. My role is to restore the balance.
These situations warrant a review of the file — and often a simple lawyer's letter is enough to unblock matters.
A banking dispute is won on precision. The firm reviews the statements, the loan offer, the general terms and the correspondence to characterise the breach: irregular fees, an APR error, a failure to warn a non-expert borrower, a disproportionate guarantee, an unfair term. The loss is then quantified item by item — the condition for both credible negotiation and solid litigation.
In most cases, banking mediation is a mandatory step before any court action. Free of charge, it often resolves the dispute without trial — provided the file is presented on solid legal grounds. The firm prepares the complaint, refers the matter to the competent ombudsman and follows the process.
If the deadlock persists, the matter is brought before the judicial court (representation by a lawyer mandatory above €10,000). The firm handles the specific actions: APR challenge, nullity of a disproportionate guarantee, removal of an unjustified listing, liability for breach of the duty to inform and warn.
Three steps: 1) a detailed written complaint to customer services; 2) referral to the banking ombudsman (free, mandatory before any court action in most cases); 3) if the deadlock persists, an action before the judicial court with a quantified, supported file. The firm assists with all three.
Yes. Irregular fees or a miscalculated annual percentage rate can be challenged, as can a failure to inform when the loan was taken out. Reviewing the loan offer and statements determines the exact nature of the breach and the compensable loss.
An unjustified or wrongly maintained FICP or FCC listing can be the subject of a removal request, or even a liability action against the institution. The firm examines the lawfulness of the listing and takes the appropriate step.
Representation by a lawyer is mandatory before the judicial court above €10,000, and before the Court of Appeal. Below that, assistance remains strongly advised: a poorly presented banking file weakens even a well-founded claim.
Yes. Admitted to the Metz and Luxembourg Bars, I act on both sides of the border. The rules differ (consumer law, mediation), and the cross-border France-Luxembourg practice is integrated from the first meeting.
The first meeting is free and confidential. It assesses the breach, the loss and the most effective route — mediation or litigation. Offices in Metz (Metz Bar) and Luxembourg City (Luxembourg Bar) — cross-border practice France · Luxembourg.