A new wave in the fight for homebuyers’ rights has erupted in Spain: the country’s Supreme Court has handed down a landmark ruling that could set a precedent for the entire real estate market. CaixaBank, one of Spain’s largest banks, is at the center of the scandal after several families were left without both apartments and the savings they had invested in a cooperative housing project that never materialized. The court ordered the bank to return nearly 95,000 euros plus interest—a serious blow for the financial giant and a clear signal to others in the market.
The story dates back to 2013, when a group of citizens deposited substantial amounts—ranging from 10,000 to nearly 19,000 euros—in hopes of securing a home through a cooperative. The money was carefully transferred to CaixaBank accounts, with payment purposes marked as “reservation” and “housing financing.” However, the promises did not turn into action: the cooperative failed to carry out the project, and the land intended for construction was returned to the control of the Parla municipality.
The families, left with nothing, began a fight to recover their funds. Their main argument was the absence of bank guarantees and insurance policies that should have protected the contributors’ investments. This issue became central to the court case, which dragged on for several years and went through all levels of the judicial system.
Bank liability
In its ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized that banks accepting funds for property construction are required to ensure compliance with all legal formalities. If money is deposited into regular accounts instead of designated ones, and no guarantees are issued, the financial institution bears full responsibility for any potential client losses. In this case, CaixaBank not only accepted payments but also issued documents explicitly stating that the funds were intended for a home purchase.
The judges noted that the bank could not have been unaware of the purpose of the incoming funds. Moreover, the lack of oversight by the financial institution was one of the reasons why the investors were left unprotected. The Supreme Court made it clear: if a bank neglects its obligations, it cannot evade responsibility, even in complex arrangements involving long-term land use rights rather than direct property purchases.
Right to protection
The court paid particular attention to issues surrounding the protection of homebuyers’ rights. Law 57/1968, which governs advance payments for housing construction, covers not only standard purchase agreements but also cooperative projects and properties built under long-term lease or usage rights. The main criterion is not the type of ownership but the actual intended use of the future dwelling — if it is meant for residential purposes, the law’s protection applies in full.
Interestingly, the bank tried to dispute its liability, arguing that some members already owned other properties. However, the court rejected this claim, stating that ownership of other real estate does not negate the citizen’s right to protection when investing in a new home. Even if it concerns a second apartment or house, the bank is still required to comply with all legal obligations.
Consequences of the ruling
As a result, CaixaBank will have to return not only the invested sums but also all interest accrued over the years. The total payout will exceed 100,000 euros, which could serve as a serious warning to other banks involved in cooperative housing projects. The judgment effectively establishes that financial institutions cannot turn a blind eye to violations, even if the arrangement is not a direct sale but rather a long-term use right.
For the real estate market, this could be a turning point. Banks will now have to scrutinize projects more thoroughly, require guarantees and insurance policies to avoid similar lawsuits in the future. For shareholders and homebuyers, this provides extra security, while for unscrupulous developers and banks, it’s a new reason to consider the consequences of their actions.
Legal details
Legal precedent for such cases in Spain has been developing for several years, but this particular case stands out as especially significant. The Supreme Court not only reaffirmed the bank’s liability, but also broadened the definition of protected transactions to include cooperative projects with long-term usage rights. This means that even if a shareholder does not become a full owner, their investment must be protected on par with traditional buyers.
The court ruling specifically emphasized: if a bank receives funds labeled “for housing,” it is obliged to ensure that all legal guarantees are in place. Otherwise, the financial institution bears responsibility for any loss of funds. This approach could shift the balance of power in the market and force banks to revise their internal procedures.
If you weren’t aware, CaixaBank is one of the largest banks in Spain, established in 2011 as a result of the merger of several financial institutions. The bank actively serves both private and corporate clients, and holds a leading position in the mortgage lending and real estate financing market. In recent years, CaixaBank has repeatedly been involved in high-profile legal cases related to consumer protection and housing market regulation.
