According to the Ombudsman, it was proven that the defendant, although it was obliged to do so, did not provide the consumers with all necessary information regarding the estimation of the evolution of the product and of its possible risks.
The defendant omitted to inform the consumers about the gradual degradation of the creditworthiness of Lehman Brothers. This way, the defendant did not allow the consumers to evaluate the risk associated with the titles. Although the defendant was obliged to act accordingly, it failed to inform the consumers regarding essential characteristics of their investment, which were necessary for them in order to accept or to reject the proposed investment.
As a result, according to the Ombudsman, the consumers did not understand the risk of losing their capital. This way, the defendant had impaired the consumers' freedom of choice.
For these reasons, it was held that the defendant had committed unfair commercial practices.
The misleading actions and omissions were related to the damage of the consumers, since the investments took place because the defendant created the impression that there was no risk. If the consumers had been in any way aware of the risks, they would have refused the investment.
Πλήρες κείμενο: Πλήρες κείμενο