credit-contract-review

Credit Contract Review

Matter context

Read ## Playbook → ### Banking / Credit Products in ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/banking-fintech-legal/CLAUDE.md first. This skill applies your team's positions on interest rates, CET disclosure, fee caps, and capitalization to a proposed or executed credit contract (loan, financing, credit line, etc.).

---

Purpose

Brazilian banking contracts (empréstimo, financiamento, crédito pessoal) are subject to overlapping regimes: the Código Civil (Arts. 421-480 — general contract law), the CDC (Lei 8.078/1990 — consumer protection, when the borrower is a consumer), and specific Resolutions of the BCB for particular products. The most litigated issues are: usury (vedada, but hard to define), CET disclosure, capitalization of interest, and abusive fees.

This skill reviews a contract against your playbook positions and flags deviations, ambiguities, and known STJ precedent issues. It does not render a legal opinion; a lawyer makes the call on whether a deviation is acceptable.

Jurisdiction assumption / Premissa de jurisdição (Brasil)

• Código Civil (Lei 10.406/2002) — general contract law, Arts. 421-480 (contratos em geral); arts. 591-592 on loan (empréstimo/mútuo), with services/empreitada in the following provisions rather than "financing" as a single block. [verified: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10406compilada.htm]
• CDC (Lei 8.078/1990) — consumer protection law; applies when borrower is a consumer (destinatário final, Art. 2º); makes many contract terms abusive/void (Art. 51) [verified: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8078compilado.htm]
• Lei de Usura (Decreto 22.626/1933) — antediluvian usury law; its rules do not apply to rates/charges in operations by institutions in the national financial system under STF Súmula 596. [verified: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/d22626.htm; https://portal.stf.jus.br/jurisprudencia/sumariosumulas.asp?base=30&sumula=2017]
• BCB Resolutions — specific rules for crédito consignado (CCB), financiamento imobiliário, etc. [unverified: not found in primary source]
• STJ precedent — Súmulas and jurisprudence on capitalized interest, CET disclosure, abusive fees [verified: https://www.stj.jus.br/sites/portalp/Paginas/Comunicacao/Noticias-antigas/2017/2017-02-09_18-51_Previsao-contratual-e-exigida-para-capitalizacao-de-juros-em-qualquer-periodicidade.aspx]

---

Load the playbook

Read ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/banking-fintech-legal/CLAUDE.md → ## Playbook → ### Banking / Credit Products. Your playbook should record:

• Interest cap policy: e.g., "CET capped at 150% of BCB média de mercado for the product"
• CET disclosure requirement: Yes (mandatory) / No (certain products exempt)
• Capitalization of interest: Prohibited for consumers / Permitted for corporate with disclosure
• Fee ceiling: e.g., "Admin fee ≤ 1% of principal; processing fee ≤ R$ 200"
• Termination and prepayment rights: consumer right to prepay without penalty?

If blank, proceed with analysis and flag where the playbook needs clarification.

---

Analysis

1. Borrower classification — consumer or not?

CDC definition (Art. 2º): A consumer is a person (physical or legal) who acquires or uses a product/service as a final user (destinatário final), not for resale or professional use.

• Consumer: Individual borrowing for personal use (car financing, credit card, personal loan)
• Corporate: Company borrowing for business use (working capital, expansion, equipment) — CDC may not apply if the company is clearly a professional buyer
• Ambiguous: A small business (microempreendedor) borrowing for personal/business overlap — increasingly treated as consumer-like under STJ recent precedent [unverified: not found in primary source]

Action: Confirm with the playbook: are you lending to consumers? If yes, CDC rules apply cogently (non-waivable). Many contract terms borrowers might accept are void per CDC Art. 51 (abusive clauses).

2. Interest rate and usury (a mess)

The legal mess: Brazil has no statutory usury cap (unlike many jurisdictions with fixed %). Lei de Usura caps are technically ~12% p.a. but haven't been enforced in decades. What remains are:

• STJ precedent on "abusive interest": Súmula 382/STJ — "A estipulação de juros remuneratórios superiores a 12% ao ano, por si só, não indica abusividade" [settled — 2026-07-03] (verificado contra STJ AtoM / arquivocidadao.stj.jus.br: no per se abuse over 12%; excessiveness analyzed case-by-case vs. taxa média de mercado). Instituições financeiras não se sujeitam à Lei de Usura (Súmula 596/STF) [verified: https://portal.stf.jus.br/jurisprudencia/sumariosumulas.asp?base=30&sumula=2017]
• CDC + consumer = risk: For consumer credit, excessively high interest can be challenged as "abusive" (Art. 51 CDC) even if not per se usury

Your policy: Check the playbook. What's your interest rate ceiling? Common approaches:

• e.g., "Taxa média de mercado from BCB Estatísticas + [spread]" (observable, defensible)
• e.g., "150% of prime rate" (tied to a reference)
• e.g., "CET ≤ 60% p.a. for crédito consignado" (specific product cap)

Red flags in the contract:

• Interest rate way above market (defensible only if borrower is high-risk and corporate)
• No CET disclosed (if required)
• Interest rate adjustable without limit ("ao critério do credor" is classic abusive language)
• Capitalization of unpaid interest on top of interest (compounds the rate)

3. CET (Custo Efetivo Total) disclosure

BCB requirement [unverified: not found in primary source]: For many credit products, the lender must disclose CET (the true all-in annual percentage rate, including all fees and charges). This is mandatory, in writing, before the borrower signs. Failure to disclose is a BC violation and makes the contract challengeable.

What's CET: It includes:

• Base interest rate
• Admin fees
• Processing fees
• Insurance (if bundled)
• Registration fees
• All other costs the borrower bears

What's CET not: Taxes (CPMF, if any), notary costs, appraisal fees for real estate (sometimes excluded depending on product).

Contract language to check:

• ✓ "CET: [percentage] p.a." clearly stated
• ✓ Breakout of what's included in CET
• ✓ Comparison: "Juros: [X]%; CET: [Y]%" to show the difference
• ✗ CET buried in footnotes or not disclosed
• ✗ CET omitted because "not required" (probably wrong; check BCB rules for your product)

4. Capitalization of interest

For consumers (CDC): Capitalization (compound interest) is prohibited except:

• Capitalização de juros com periodicidade inferior à anual é permitida em contratos com instituições do Sistema Financeiro Nacional celebrados a partir de 31/3/2000 (MP 1.963-17/2000, reeditada como MP 2.170-36/2001), desde que expressamente pactuada — Súmula 539/STJ [settled — 2026-07-03] (verificado contra STJ AtoM). A capitalização exige previsão contratual expressa em qualquer periodicidade (Tema 953/STJ) [verified: https://www.stj.jus.br/sites/portalp/Paginas/Comunicacao/Noticias-antigas/2017/2017-02-09_18-51_Previsao-contratual-e-exigida-para-capitalizacao-de-juros-em-qualquer-periodicidade.aspx]
• Interest on unpaid installments, calculated per period (not compound on compound) — the law is murky here and subject to STJ debate [unverified: not found in primary source]

For corporates: Capitalization is usually allowed, but must be transparent.

Red flags:

• Contract says "juros capitalizados mensalmente" without specifying scope (looks like compound compound)
• Penalty interest capitalized on top of regular interest
• Monthly rolling compound leading to exponential growth

5. Fees and charges

CDC constraint (Art. 51): "Abusive" fee clauses can be voided. What's abusive?

• Undisclosed fees
• Fees that are unreasonably high relative to the lender's cost or market
• Fees imposed outside the original terms (e.g., "we now charge a monthly admin fee, retroactively")

Common fee traps:

• Admin fee: Often 0.5–2% of principal. Defensible if disclosed and market-normal.
• Processing fee: Fixed or percentage. Per-se reasonable if ≤ cost to process.
• Mortgage registration fee / Title insurance: Often bundled; should be separate and itemized if consumer borrowing.
• Early payment penalty: Many contracts charge a "fine" if you repay early to recoup lost interest. STJ has oscillated on this — currently seems to allow it for corporate but not consumer. Flag this specifically. [unverified: not found in primary source]

Your playbook check: What's your fee ceiling? E.g., "Admin fee max 1.5% of principal", "No prepayment penalty for consumers"?

6. Crédito consignado (salary-deducted loans)

Special rules apply [unverified: not found in primary source]:

• CCB (Cédula de Crédito Bancário) is the instrument; specific BCB resolution governs terms
• Borrower consent + employer consent required
• Interest cap: Often lower than unsecured lending (because guaranteed by salary deduction)
• Pre-signing consent requirements: Written acknowledgment of terms before signing

If the contract is consignado:

• Verify consent documentation (employer + borrower)
• Check interest is within consignado parameters (usually lower than unsecured)
• Confirm T&Cs include mandatory disclosures specific to consignado products

7. No silent supplement

If a critical term in the contract conflicts with your playbook and the playbook is blank ([PLACEHOLDER]), I'll flag and ask: "Your playbook doesn't record a position on [interest caps / prepayment penalties / capitalization / other]. Options: (1) tell me your policy and I'll flag deviations; (2) defer and I'll flag this item as pending playbook guidance." Do not execute a contract without clarity on your limits.

---

Consequential-action gate

Before executing a credit contract that deviates from your playbook or uses terms you haven't vetted:

Read ## Who's using this in ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/banking-fintech-legal/CLAUDE.md. If the Role is Non-lawyer:

Executing a credit contract that carries nonstandard terms (high interest, no CET disclosure, capitalized interest, prepayment penalties) has legal risk — the borrower can challenge it, and if the borrower is a consumer, CDC rules may void the term. This should be reviewed with an attorney. Have you discussed this contract's terms with legal counsel?

If yes, proceed. If no, here's what to bring:

• Who is the borrower: consumer (individual) or corporate?
• Interest rate: what % and how does it compare to market/your policy?
• CET: is it disclosed, and how?
• Fees: list each fee and the amount/percentage.
• Capitalization: is interest compounded? On what schedule?
• Special provisions: prepayment penalties, adjustment clauses, security interest?
• Deviation: how does this contract differ from your standard terms?

(If you need a lawyer: OAB Brasil by estado; search "especialista em direito bancário" or "direito do consumidor".)

Do not execute without legal sign-off.

---

What this skill does not do

• Does not audit compliance for an ongoing loan portfolio. Portfolio review/remediation is a separate engagement.
• Does not calculate true CET. CET calculation requires product-specific formulas and a calculator; this skill reviews disclosure, not math.
• Does not advise on real estate financing-specific rules. Financiamento imobiliário (CEF, Caixa, construtoras) has specialized BCB rules outside this skill.
• Does not cover cross-border or foreign borrowers. Additional complications (exchange risk, remittance tax, foreign credit bureau) exist but are not analyzed here.
• Does not produce a compliance audit. This skill reviews one contract against your playbook; an audit reviews all active contracts and systems.

---

For STJ case law: search JusBrasil or Escavador for "Súmula STJ" + keyword (e.g., "juros" "capitalização"). For BCB rules: www.bcb.gov.br → Regulação → Crédito.