Mortgage cancellation with anticipated power of attorney: what the Supreme Court requires from banks and borrowers

Key data

If your bank has given you an anticipated power of attorney so you can cancel the mortgage yourself once paid, this resolution directly affects you. The General Directorate of Legal Security and Public Faith (DGSJFP) has ruled that a simple private zero-balance certificate—issued by the banking entity without notarial intervention—is not sufficient to register the cancellation in the Property Registry.

The specific case involves Banco Santander and the Property Registry of Fuenlabrada No. 3. The registrar denied the registration of the mortgage cancellation because the private certificate accompanying the anticipated notarial power of attorney lacked the authenticity required by articles 1280 of the Civil Code and 3 of the Mortgage Law. The DGSJFP sided with the registrar.

What does this resolution establish?

The legal conflict revolves around a mechanism that banks are increasingly implementing: the irrevocable anticipated notarial power of attorney, through which the bank authorizes the borrower themselves to cancel the mortgage once the debt is settled, without the need for the bank to go to the notary at that time.

The problem arises when that power is complemented with a private zero-balance certificate—a document issued unilaterally by the bank that certifies that the debt is paid—instead of a document with public authenticity.

In essence: the anticipated power is a valid mechanism, but the essential elements of the transaction—in this case, the certification of zero balance—must be recorded in public documentation, not in a private document issued unilaterally by the entity.

Economic and operational impact

This resolution has direct consequences for the automated mortgage cancellation models that banks are deploying to reduce operational costs and speed up the process for customers. If the zero-balance certificate must have public authenticity, the process ceases to be as agile and economical as intended.

• For banks: They must review their automated cancellation protocols. The irrevocable anticipated powers that they have already granted may be blocked if the complementary certificate does not have the proper form. This implies additional notarial costs or process redesign.
• For borrowers: A cancellation denied at the Registry means that the mortgage continues to be recorded as a charge on the property, which can block a sale, refinancing, or obtaining new financing.
• For notaries and registrars: The role of the notary as guarantor of authenticity in each step of the process is reinforced, not just in the granting of the initial power.

Who does it affect?

• Mortgage borrowers who have paid off their loan and want to cancel the mortgage using an anticipated power of attorney granted by the bank.
• Banking entities—especially Banco Santander and any other implementing automated cancellation systems with anticipated powers—that must review their processes.
• Notaries who intervene in the cancellation deed and must verify that the zero-balance certificate has sufficient authenticity.
• Property registrars who must qualify the documentation presented and may deny registrations in similar situations.
• Home buyers who acquire a property with a pending mortgage cancellation: if the cancellation fails, the charge remains registered.

Practical example

An individual finishes paying off their mortgage with Banco Santander. The bank had granted him an anticipated notarial power of attorney so that he could cancel the mortgage in the Registry himself without the bank needing to go to the notary at that time. The borrower goes to the notary with the power and with a certificate issued by the bank certifying that the balance is zero.

The notary executes the cancellation deed. When presented at the Property Registry of Fuenlabrada No. 3, the registrar denies the registration: the private zero-balance certificate does not have public authenticity and therefore does not meet the requirements of article 1280 of the Civil Code or article 3 of the Mortgage Law.

The notary appeals to the DGSJFP. The resolution of April 24, 2026 confirms the registrar's refusal. Result: the mortgage remains registered as a charge, the process is paralyzed, and the borrower must initiate a new procedure with authentic documentation. If a property sale was planned, it is blocked until the situation is resolved.

What should banks and borrowers do now?

1. Banks with anticipated powers already granted: Review whether the zero-balance certificates they issue have public authenticity or are private documents. If they are private, the cancellation process will be blocked at the Registry.
2. Redesign the automated cancellation process: Incorporate a public authenticity mechanism for the zero-balance certificate (for example, through a notarial deed or equivalent document with intervention of a public official).
3. Borrowers with paid-off mortgages: Before initiating cancellation with an anticipated power, confirm with the notary that the zero-balance certificate provided by the bank meets the requirements of article 1280 CC and article 3 LH.
4. Notaries: Warn the party executing the cancellation deed about the need for the complementary certificate to have sufficient authenticity, and not limit yourself to certifying the anticipated power.
5. Registrars: Apply the criterion confirmed by the DGSJFP and deny registrations in which the zero-balance certificate is a private document without authenticity.

Official source

Consult complete regulation in official source

Notice: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific decisions, consult a qualified professional. Source: https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2026-16225