In order to preserve and increase the value of wealth, the purchase of bank consignmentFinancial product, Did not want to lose more than 10 million, Mr. Hu for this bank sued the court. Recently, the Shanghai Intermediate People's Court concluded this property damage compensation dispute case, found that the bank in the consignmentFinancial managementProduct process, did not comply with the appropriate promotion obligations, there is infringement of the fault, the ruling bank compensation Mr. Hu total loss of 18 million yuan.
Claim 18 million and interest
March 2011, Mr. Hu in the bank to subscribe for the bank consignment of fund products. In the delivery of 1 million yuan subscription, Mr. Hu signed on the fund transaction receipt, signed below: "I am fully aware of the risk of investing in open-end funds, voluntary banking agents of the fund business, at their own risk of investment" and Sign under the "risk letter" on the back of the transaction receipt.
Later, due to the loss of the fund products, Mr. Hu then the bank as the defendant, the fund company for the third person to sue, requiring the bank to compensate for its loss of 18 million yuan and interest during the investment period.
During the trial, the bank confirmed that the sales competition for financial products, Mr. Hu did not risk assessment. However, before the occurrence of financial products trading, Mr. Hu had a risk assessment in the bank, the assessment results: Mr. Hu's risk tolerance rating and suitable for the purchase of products for the robust type.
Court of First Instance of the court that the bank as a wealth management agency, has done a reasonable risk to inform the obligation. Mr. Hu signed the contract that should be regarded as the contents of the text of the contract to read and know that as a multi-investment experience with financial investors, investors should be able to prejudge the degree of risk of financial products, the resulting investment Loss should be borne by yourself. The first instance verdict dismissed all the petition.
Mr. Hu refused to accept the verdict, filed an appeal.
Only to support the loss of principal
According to the relevant provisions of the Interim Measures for the Administration of Personal Financial Management of Commercial Banks and the Guidelines on Risk Management of Personal Banking Business of Commercial Banks, the Bank has the ability to bear the risk in the financial services legal relationship Financial status and other obligations to promote appropriate products. Mr. Hu, although signed to confirm the relevant risks, but can not be exempt from the bank before the contract assessment and appropriate promotion obligations. Mr. Hu is a stable investor, the risk tolerance is poor, but the bank in violation of "the appropriate product sales to the appropriate investors," the principle of the relatively high risk of sales of products to Mr. Hu, so Mr. Hu's The loss has a major fault.
In this case, Mr. Hu's own financial situation, investment ability and risk tolerance should also have a corresponding understanding, but its failure to make a reasonable investment in accordance with their own situation, but choose to buy contend for financial products, the corresponding loss also has Corresponding to the fault, according to the "Tort Liability Law" corresponding provisions, the bank's tort liability can be reduced accordingly.
So Mr. Hu asked the bank to compensate for its principal loss of the complaint may be supported, compensation for the loss of interest in the complaint is not supported. The second instance of the bank compensation for Mr. Hu's total principal loss of 18 million yuan, dismissed the other petition.
Banks should fulfill their obligations under the proper assessment and appropriate referral
In the present case, the bank in the case of Mr. Hu to promote the financial products before the assessment of Mr. Hu did not have the fault; and based on the previous assessment of the bank, Mr. Hu is a stable investor, risk tolerance The ability to weak, generally only want to ensure the safety of the principal on the basis of value-added income, the Department of financial products for non-guaranteed financial products, there is the possibility of falling net worth, obviously not suitable for Mr. Hu, but the bank is still active to Mr. Hu suggested that the bank could not be able to fulfill the above-mentioned correct assessment and appropriate referral obligations, with the corresponding fault.
Judge Kim Seng also pointed out that in the general commercial conduct, should follow the buyer's own risk, the risk of their own principles. However, in the legal relationship of financial services, investors and financial institutions exist professional and information and other objective inequality, investors as the lack of professional knowledge of the main body, does not of course know what kind of financial products meet their own needs, and For the pursuit of maximizing the benefits, investors are often likely to choose not suitable financial products.
In order to compensate for this inequality, it should be appropriate to the professional financial institutions to require financial institutions to assume the responsibility for the initial selection of financial products for investors in order to avoid investors because of their lack of professional lead to unnecessary losses, To prevent financial institutions in the pursuit of their own interests, improper investors will be improperly introduced into the capital market, ignoring the interests of investors and profit from.