“Okaz” learned that the Banking and Financial Violations Committee ruled to compel a local bank to transfer ownership of a villa to the heirs of a Saudi trader, who are 5 sons and two wives, one of whom he married secretly (Misyār) a month before his death, and the ruling has become final.

According to the details published by “Okaz,” the heirs of the trader filed a lawsuit before the Financial Disputes Committee stating that a new villa north of Jeddah, which was owned by the deceased, was purchased for 5 million as housing for the new wife through financing from one of the banks. The villa remained mortgaged to the bank, which refused to transfer its ownership to the heirs under the pretext of demanding the heirs to pay the remaining installments.

The heirs' lawyer reported that the deceased left behind 5 sons and daughters and their mother, along with a wife he had married secretly through an official and legal contract 120 days before his death. He informed his eldest daughter about the marriage details since she was a college friend of his secret wife, and that the deceased left a collection of properties in several cities, including a villa for which he had entered into a financing contract with one of the banks to purchase the villa as housing for the new wife, provided that the bank would waive the remaining due installments and transfer the property to the heirs in case of death according to the terms of the contract between them. However, the bank refused to execute this after the buyer's death, despite his commitment to payment until the date of his death.

The lawsuit indicated that the financing contract with the bank stipulates an exemption from any installments in the event of the borrower's death, and the claim concluded by compelling the bank to transfer the property ownership to the heirs.

The Insurance Company Refused the Exemption

The bank representative responded to the lawsuit with a memorandum stating that the intermediary insurance company refused the exemption due to the heirs' delay in providing the required documents and the death certificate within the statutory period specified in the insurance policy. The bank representative requested the dismissal of the heirs' lawsuit and the annulment of the financing contract in dispute, obliging the heirs to complete the payment of the remaining installments on the property. In response, the heirs' lawyer stated that the heirs had no relation to the insurance policy concluded between the bank and the insurance company, which stipulated a specific period that is not recognized and was not mentioned in the financing contract between the buyer and the bank, considering it an excuse to evade the responsibility of enforcing the contract. The heirs' lawyer concluded by insisting that the bank should immediately transfer the property to the heirs.

The Banking and Financial Violations Committee reviewed the lawsuit and examined the documents submitted by both parties and considered the defense memoranda. After study and reflection by a committee composed of 3 specialists, it unanimously concluded to issue its decision obliging the bank to complete the procedures for transferring the property in question to the heirs according to the law. Later, the ruling became final after the bank appealed the decision, and sources from “Okaz” confirmed that the bank and the heirs executed the ruling, and the decision of the Banking and Financial Violations Committee to transfer the villa's ownership to the heirs was implemented based on the inheritance certificate.

The heirs' lawyer stated that the deceased intentionally purchased the villa on installments due to his continuous need for liquidity, as he was engaged in buying and selling pure gold. He indicated that an agreement was reached among the deceased's family regarding the distribution of the inheritance according to the legal shares among family members, so that the father’s wife (Misyār) would receive the mortgaged villa in addition to a cash amount and pure gold according to her legal right in the inheritance.

30 Days to Object

Lawyer Saad Misfer Al-Maliki clarified to “Okaz” that the committees for resolving financial violations and disputes issue their decisions by majority, and it is permissible to object to their decisions within 30 days from the date of notification of the decision. The committee has all the necessary powers to investigate and resolve the cases within its jurisdiction, including the authority to summon witnesses, issue decisions, impose penalties, and order the submission of evidence and documents.

8 Days to Respond to “Financial”

Lawyer Manal Al-Harithi pointed out that lawsuits before the Banking and Financial Violations Committees are submitted through the electronic services on the website of the General Secretariat of the Banking and Financial Violations Committees, according to specific steps after entering the electronic services and following the steps, and attaching all required documents. The lawsuit is accepted after being reviewed by the specialized team, and both parties to the lawsuit are notified of the acceptance via a text message. After the lawsuit is submitted and registered, the defendant is notified and given 8 working days to respond to the lawsuit, then the plaintiff is requested to provide a rebuttal, and is given 8 working days to respond, followed by a final rebuttal from the defendant, who is also given 8 working days to respond. After that, the lawsuit is prepared and studied, and a date is set for it to be heard before the specialized committee.

Depositing the Amount by Mistake

Committee member and lawyer Nasreen Ali Al-Ghamdi confirmed that the judicial principles in banking and financial disputes included obliging banks to return amounts received from loans for clients that exceed what is due, and rulings obliging clients to return amounts mistakenly deposited in their accounts that they have no right to, based on the principle of unjust enrichment.