Real Cases and Results

A self-employed person (autónomo) asked an online tax platform to prepare quarterly taxes and request payment in instalments. According to the case documents, the deferral/instalment request (aplazamiento/fraccionamiento) was not processed as expected: the full tax amount was charged at once, causing a sudden loss of liquidity and a later chain of complaints.

The dispute is not simply about refunding taxes already paid. The question is whether a professional error in tax handling can create separate harm: loss of a real chance to pay in instalments, an unexpected full charge, stress, broken financial planning and time spent pursuing complaints against the platform, the tax adviser and the insurer.

A simplified civil claim (juicio verbal) for €1,000 is being prepared for moral damage and consequences linked to the professional error. Before filing, documentation has been requested regarding professional liability insurance: applicable insurance policy (póliza), coverage terms, exclusions, limits, basis for denial and the documents the insurer used to form its position.

• messages with the platform and tax adviser
• confirmations about whether the payment-plan request (fraccionamiento/aplazamiento) was filed
• bank charges
• tax calculation
• insurer response
• pre-claim document request about the insurance policy (póliza)
• draft simplified civil claim (juicio verbal)

After a bicycle traffic incident, the injured person contacted the vehicle insurer as a third-party claimant. According to the case documents, the insurer opened a claim file (expediente), requested documents and arranged a medical examination, but later denied compensation by disputing liability and the circumstances of the accident.

The dispute is not only about whether the accident happened. A key question is whether the insurer complied with its duty to issue a reasoned response (respuesta motivada), disclose the medical report and pay at least the undisputed part of the loss. Causation, the driver's conduct and possible shared liability are also being assessed.

The case is in juicio verbal for €1,200 under a direct claim against the insurer (acción directa). The claim, annexes and submissions responding to the insurer's procedural position have been prepared, including a request to disclose the medical report produced at the insurer's own initiative.

• initial complaint to the insurer as injured third party
• burofax requesting the opening of a claim file and communication channel
• medical documents and treatment confirmations
• police materials related to the traffic incident
• insurer denial response
• pre-court settlement offer (MASC)
• claim and later submissions in juicio verbal

A consumer bought goods online with pickup through a store/locker and exercised a partial right of withdrawal (desistimiento) for one item in the order within the legal deadline. According to the case documents, the store first refused to accept the return at the pickup point, then failed to provide workable return instructions, and later did not accept the shipped item while continuing to retain the money.

The dispute focuses on the consumer's right to withdraw from a distance purchase, the refund deadline and when risk shifts if the seller itself refuses to receive the goods. Return shipping costs, interest and moral damage are also claimed due to the prolonged loop between store, website, courier and store again.

RightNOW structured the documents, facts, consumer-law position and materials for juicio verbal. The interested person signed, filed and attended the hearing themselves; RightNOW did not represent them in court.

• online order and payment confirmation
• communications exercising the right of withdrawal (desistimiento)
• support tickets and retailer responses
• courier shipment confirmations
• pre-court settlement materials (MASC)
• juicio verbal claim and annexes
• post-hearing materials while awaiting the decision

A customer deposited cash into a bank account, but the amount appeared as "retenido" — retained or blocked. According to the case documents, the bank did not give a concrete written explanation for weeks, redirected the customer back to a branch and did not identify what documents or steps were needed to release the money. The funds were later released, but only after several written complaints and a regulator complaint.

A bank may invoke KYC/AML checks — customer identification and anti-money-laundering controls under Ley 10/2010. But in court the key issue is evidence, not the label "AML": when and why the retention was activated, whether document requests existed, why it lasted for weeks and why the money was then released without a clear explanation. Moral damage is also claimed because the customer lost control over their own funds in a vulnerable personal situation.

RightNOW structured the timeline, bank complaints, regulator materials, oferta vinculante/MASC and the position for juicio verbal. The interested person signs, files and appears in the proceedings themselves; RightNOW does not represent them in court.

• bank statements and screenshots showing the "retenido" status
• written complaint to the bank customer service department (SAC)
• bank response without a concrete release mechanism
• complaint to the financial regulator
• burofax with oferta vinculante/MASC before court
• bank offer of partial compensation and customer response
• juicio verbal claim and later procedural materials

A customer discovered a possible restriction on incoming credits to their main bank account. This is not about a disputed purchase, but about an account that may receive essential payments: professional income, tax refunds, social benefits and other lawful incoming transfers. The bank acknowledged receipt of the complaint but, according to the case documents, did not give a clear substantive answer: whether a restriction exists, when it started, which operations are affected and what steps are needed to restore normal account operation.

A bank can run checks on the customer, source of funds and transactions (KYC/AML, Ley 10/2010). But even during such checks, the customer needs a minimum operational route: which incoming payments will be accepted, which may be rejected, what documents are requested and which channel to use. A separate risk is possible indirect profiling by nationality, origin or migration status if measures are applied without an individual and verifiable justification.

RightNOW prepared an expanded bank complaint, structured the facts, separated the banking issue from medical and family details, explained the urgency around essential payments and prepared the next escalation level: Banco de España, the external financial-supervision channel and the equality/non-discrimination authority (Igualdad). At this stage, the aim is to obtain the bank's written position and try to resolve the issue before court.

• initial bank complaint and acknowledgement of receipt
• expanded complaint about incoming-payment restrictions
• evidence of possible essential incoming payments: tax refund, social benefits, professional payments
• documents linked to previous KYC/AML bank review
• description of possible indirect profiling indicators
• draft escalation to Banco de España and equality authority

A bank customer is preparing a complaint to Banco de España after a sequence of account-access and incoming-payment issues. According to the case documents, the customer asked the bank to clarify the status of the account, whether incoming credits were restricted, what documents were still required and what route existed to restore normal operation. The file also includes a chronology and orientation requests to public equality/inclusion channels about a possible discrimination concern in financial services.

The complaint is framed without stating that discrimination has been proven. It asks the supervisor to review whether the bank's conduct was sufficiently specific, individualized, documented and proportionate, especially if nationality, passport, foreigner status or international-protection status may have influenced the account treatment directly or indirectly. The practical issue is whether the customer received a clear written explanation and a workable route for essential incoming payments.

RightNOW organized the chronology, separated verifiable banking facts from sensitive personal details, prepared neutral wording for the Banco de España complaint and kept the position evidence-based: dates, written requests, acknowledgements, account-operation questions and the specific clarifications requested from the bank.

• chronology of account-opening, document requests and later account-operation issues
• bank emails and communications requesting account cancellation or clarification
• formal bank complaint and acknowledgement of receipt by customer service
• documents linked to KYC/AML checks and requested proof of activity or income
• orientation replies from equality/inclusion channels
• draft complaint to Banco de España with personal data minimized

A patient went to a private hospital emergency department after surgery with signs of postoperative bleeding. According to the patient, urgent care and transfer to another hospital were not safely organized: the patient had to reach the receiving hospital independently. Later, Generalitat de Catalunya issued an administrative resolution on the same events and identified issues with continuity-of-care and patient-transfer protocols.

In this case, Hospital Quirónsalud Barcelona and IDCQ Hospitales y Sanidad, S.L.U. are named carefully and with attribution because they are expressly named in the Generalitat resolution and court documents. We do not publish doctors' names, full medical files, addresses, case numbers or third-party personal data. The civil case is still pending: the clinic disputes civil liability in court and argues that the care was appropriate.

The Generalitat resolution states that the hospital did not correctly apply its internal continuity-of-care protocol, did not apply the transfer protocol to another centre, did not organize a safe transfer, did not prepare a transfer report, did not record the receiving centre and did not follow up afterwards. The civil juicio verbal asks whether those circumstances support compensation for the patient's moral damage.

RightNOW structured the facts, administrative resolution, patient position, evidence requests and hearing request. The interested person signs, files and appears in the court process themselves; RightNOW does not represent them in court and does not act as a medical expert.

• patient complaints and pre-court settlement materials (MASC)
• medical documents in redacted scope
• Generalitat de Catalunya resolution in an administrative sanction procedure
• reference to a €5,000 sanction and voluntary payment after recognition of responsibility in the administrative procedure
• juicio verbal claim for moral-damage compensation
• clinic response disputing civil liability
• requests for evidence, official letters, hearing and videoconference