论文部分内容阅读
2001年9月原告周立太向建设银行重庆中山路支行申请个人住房借款,周立太就银行提供的借款合同中要求借款人必须办理所购房屋抵押期间的财产保险的条款提出异议,认为财产保险属于商业保险,应自愿购买,但银行未予接受。9月13日,周立太与银行订立个人住房借款合同,合同约定周立太以其所购房屋设定抵押作为担保并办理抵押物在借款期间的财产保险,银行向其提供69万元贷款用于购买两套商品房。 在周立太办理房屋抵押登记手续并向平安保险公司重庆市渝中区支公司投保后,银行按照约定向其发放了贷款。但周立太认为银行要求其办理保险违反了自愿原则、诚实信用原则及《保险法》等法律法规相关规定,为强制保险,侵犯了其合法权益,遂向渝中区法院起诉银行、保险公司,要求法院判定借款合同中关于办理保险的条款无效,返还其缴纳
In September 2001, the plaintiff Zhou Li Tai filed an application for personal housing loan with Chongqing Zhong Shan Road Sub-branch of Construction Bank and Zhou Lifai disagreed with the clause in the loan contract provided by the bank that the borrower must handle the property insurance during the mortgage period of the purchased house. He believes that property insurance belongs to commercial insurance , Should be purchased voluntarily, but the bank did not accept. On September 13, Zhou and his bank entered into a personal housing loan contract. The contract stipulated that Zhou Li-Tai secured the property mortgage of the purchased house and handled the property insurance of the mortgaged property during the loan period. The bank provided a loan of $ 0.69 million to purchase two Set of commercial housing. After Zhou Lizhi handled the mortgage registration procedures and insured the Ping An Insurance Company of Chongqing Yuzhong District Branch, the bank granted the loan according to the agreement. However, Zhou believes that the bank violated the principle of voluntariness, the principle of good faith and the relevant provisions of laws and regulations such as the “Insurance Law.” In order to force insurance and infringe upon its legitimate rights and interests, the bank sued banks and insurance companies in Yuzhong District Court and asked the court to determine The terms of the insurance contract in the loan contract are invalid and the payment is returned