3. … that banks usually grant mortgages taking into account that value?

4. … but if the answer for the first question is yes?, what is the criteria that a particular bank should follow to choose the correct value?

6. On the other hand, banks flaunt that they’ve got independent Risk Assessment Departments (usually granting loans below 80% Loan to Value)

7. Can we make sure that commercial departments of banks not try to persuade REA to blow their assessments up in order to be able to grant loans to the public?

9. Banks win at a first stage, but they will lose if the mortgage is not paid.

10. Client who buys the house thanks to an overvalued assessment wins at the beginning, but that could mean that he is biting more than the can chew (I mean, assuming a loan that he will hardly be able to pay)

11. Private investors (investing money through mortgage securitization process) clearly lose, because they think their investment is supported by properties that don’t value as much as the REA has said.

13. … the Central Bank of Spain compelled banks to grant loans not regarding the value given by an REA, but taking into consideration the purchase price?

15. Would banks and REAs take this as a threat for their freedom to operate in the market?

17. To compel banks to use the opinion of an REA not as the main factor to make the decision of granting a loan, but the purchase value instead.

18. To compel banks to inwardly check if the purchase value is “real”, monitoring that the value in the notarial deed matches with the given price.