Bonoloto Winner Loses 6.5 Million in Bank Funds; Judge Clears Santander

He lost 6.5 million of the Bonoloto and the court exonerates the bank

A resident of Castellón won nearly 6.5 million euros in the Bonoloto in 2005 and ended up suing in court. His lawsuit against the Banco de España, in which he claimed compensation for malpractice in financial advice, was dismissed. The figure that breaks the story is not the prize, but another much smaller one: according to the entity's expert, the losses from the investment fund portfolio did not reach 1% of the 3 million placed and were quantified at 29,743 euros. With this data on the table, the fate of the rest of the money was never fully explained.

Francisco Guerrero dedicated his entire working life to fishing, construction and, for a brief period, to the hospitality industry. In the trial, his son testified, who accompanied him to most banking transactions: neither he nor his father understood funds, and they signed without reading because they trusted the entity "fully." The bank, according to his version, presented those products as safe and risk-free. Guerrero himself summarized it before the cameras: "I am dead in life".

What peine to the 6.5 million from the Bonoloto

The lawsuit sought a conviction for breach of the financial advice contract, malpractice, and damages. The ruling ruled out that the entity had breached its duty to provide clear and non-misleading information in the contracting of investment funds. The judgment focuses on an operationality that goes far beyond a simple portfolio: since 2007, the client subscribed to funds, contracted a personal loan, and signed six credit policies in favor of his promoter company.

Guerrero asked the bank to pay the damage caused and assured that he has already won three trials "with the truth." He also left an uncomfortable phrase: he said that the prize was his death, because they took everything from him and insists that he does not even have enough to eat.

There lies the key that most summaries skip. The star product of the case—the funds—moved 3 million and, always according to the bank's expert, lost only 29,743 euros. The rest of the wealth did not vanish within that specific portfolio. It went through other channels that the lawsuit mixed in the same document and that the judgment does not break down with the clarity one would wish.

Aggressive profile versus conservative portfolio

The statements from Santander employees depict a client very different from the one described by his own side. The then branch manager stated that Guerrero had an aggressive investor profile and that he himself warned him that the more he wanted to earn, the more risk he would have. He added that the client wanted to "earn more than double what was paid in fixed-term deposits." Two other employees agreed to describe him as risky and assured that he had no problem understanding what was explained to him.

The fine print of those same statements introduces uncomfortable nuances. One of the employees admitted that most of the funds were guaranteed, with a maximum loss of 10%, although he also admitted that there were risky products. "The overall investment fund portfolio was conservative," they concluded.

The expert for the plaintiff reached the opposite conclusion. He accepted that the funds were safe, but pointed out that other contracted products raised the risk to 46%, so that the general portfolio could not be considered conservative. One expert placed his intellectual capabilities in a borderline area regarding normality, and another added that he suffers from an anxiety disorder and a depressive clinical picture, with a causality that he considered "evident" between the banking conflict and the illness.

What would most people do with that money

Asked to imagine the scenario, one of the most repeated calculations in the thread is to distribute the 6.5 million across deposits in several banks, collect what they give, and not complicate things. The mental account that circulates is simple: 150,000 euros per year for 40 years, with a spending cap of 60,000 annually for the first twenty and subsequent revision. Others lower the figure even further and impose themselves a salary of 3,000 to 4,000 euros per month.

A third path appears in the thread: houses, flats, and local businesses. The idea that rental income in a good area supports a family without surprises—and without the need to understand a financial brochure—appears again and again. The problem is that this path requires the same as the other: knowing what you sign. And that, with a lottery prize and a branch manager on the other side of the table, is exactly what, according to the case's own accounts, was not done.

With 6.5 million in the account and advice included, how much is bad faith, how much is bad luck, and how much is financial illiteracy that no one wanted to correct in time?