Against the backdrop of a cautious recovery in the banking sector in many areas, B.O asked bankers how things are going in the POS lending segment

According to the forecasts of the Analytical Credit Rating Agency, growth in unsecured consumer lending (cash loans, POS loans, credit cards) will remain weak - about 5–7%. How do these forecasts match your expectations?

Sergey Vasiliev (Renaissance Credit Bank): In general, we look at the likely development of the current economic situation in a similar way, but at the same time we believe that lower growth rates in the retail unsecured lending market are possible in 2017.

Valentin Fedchin (Vostochny Bank): As for POS lending, the market is growing by about 10% per year after the difficulties of 2015. Vostochny Bank is relatively new to this market - just over three years, so we are outpacing market growth from year to year and want to maintain this trend in the long term.

Alexander Vasiliev (OTP Bank): I don’t quite agree with the forecast - market growth is expected to be more than 5–7%. According to my feelings, the growth will be closer to 10–15% year-on-year.

Stanislav Duzhinsky (Home Credit Bank): The prospects for 2017 for the retail banking market look optimistic. In the absence of unforeseen negative economic shocks, we can expect a transition from recession to moderate lending growth individuals(5–7%), continued decline in the share of overdue debt and positive dynamics financial result Russian retail banks.

How promising is the direction of online POS lending? What hinders its development?

Alexey Stepanov (Alfa-Bank): The online shopping market is growing at a significant pace every year. Some customers, including those who switched from offline to online, also need lending, but not receiving such an instrument, they return to make purchases offline. Our goal is to provide customers with a convenient service for obtaining a loan in an online store.

deterrent on this moment is the poor development of this product online. By increasing the level of awareness among online store customers about this opportunity, lending will increase significantly and will occupy a share in the stores’ turnover corresponding to that of offline stores.

Valentin Fedchin (Vostochny Bank): We believe that the direction of online POS lending is extremely attractive, since the online retail market amounts to hundreds of billions of rubles per year and continues to grow rapidly. But at the same time, credit sales in this market still occupy an insignificant share. This is partly due to the fact that not all retailers actively offer lending to their clients, since everything is fine with the current demand, which, in fact, slows down the development of the online lending market and complicates negotiations with the largest players in this market.

Alexander Vasiliev (OTP Bank): Online lending is a promising area, and it is developing quite dynamically. But there are nuances that affect the growth of this business.

Firstly, purchasing with a POS credit on the Internet today is more common in large stores, such as M-Video, Svyaznoy, Euroset. And small stores are not very interested in POS lending or paying for purchases with a credit card. The reason here is largely economic.

Secondly, statistics show that most online lending now occurs through brokerage platforms. If a brokerage system is not integrated into the online store, then the client is trading platform will most likely lose. This can be explained quite simply: in retail chains, the client often makes an impulsive purchase, which is immediately “supported” by the store consultant. In the cash register area, consultants - representatives of banks - will already be waiting for the client (note that he is usually not alone at the point, there are several of them at once - this is the key point). Or, if there is only one representative, then he is already working with a brokerage system that “breaks through” the client through several banks at once. In most cases, clients of such retail chains leave with a loan and goods. Online stores usually work with a single bank, where they score the client. In case of refusal, the client will leave such a site without purchasing. The development of online lending will be more successful if a brokerage platform is integrated into all such stores, and it will already receive approval from financial organizations and apply for a loan.

Thirdly, if purchasing a product from a POS is more of an impulsive purchase, then purchasing from an online store is a conscious decision of the client who chooses a product among many offers from different stores. The client is comfortable because he is in a comfortable environment (for example, at home), he is not confused or pushed to make an immediate decision, he has more time to weigh the pros and cons and make a reasonable decision. Such customers are looking for goods at the lowest price. But since they do this, what prevents them from choosing the most low rate among banking offers?

Nevertheless, I expect that this area will actively develop. OTP Bank identifies online lending as an important strategic area in which we will invest in order to achieve a 2-3 times increase in online lending in a year.

Sergey Vasiliev (“Renaissance Credit”): Targeted lending via the Internet is natural and, in a sense, even the main direction of development. Among the advantages of this direction are the following. First of all, lending in online stores allows you to reach a much larger audience and attract younger, more advanced customers who are accustomed to purchasing goods and services online. At the same time, the bank does not have to hire credit representatives who are involved in processing loans at stationary points of sale, which, naturally, allows them to reduce operating costs. In addition, the development of POS lending on the Internet demonstrates the bank’s innovation and its desire to keep up with the times, providing clients with the opportunity to use high-tech services.

But this direction also has disadvantages. They are primarily associated with the emergence of various risks and the need to prevent possible fraudulent activities. Data from the client is received online, and is not entered into the system by a specialist from a credit institution. Therefore, a more thorough due diligence and assessment of the borrower is required. It turns out that the growth rate here is limited by increased levels of risk and, as a consequence, the capabilities of the credit institutions work with these risks. In addition, it is quite difficult to predict the volume of targeted loans issued in an online store. It largely depends on how interested the retailer is in promoting such a service as selling goods on credit.

Thus, online POS lending is a long and gradual story. At the same time, it is clear that a significant part of this direction is effectively fulfilled by another banking credit product - credit cards. And the main component of the further development of this business is likely to be the offer by banks of new special credit card instruments, more specifically focused on online purchases.

Stanislav Duzhinsky (Home Credit Bank): We consider this direction to be very promising. Last year, our Bank launched lending for the purchase of goods in the Eldorado online store. We started with 3–4% lending online and gradually increased it to 7–8%, peaking at 10–13%.

Delay in POS lending. What are the trends?

Alexey Stepanov (Alfa-Bank): Stable, controlled level. We are currently seeing delinquency rates in online POS lending that are similar to offline ones.

Valentin Fedchin (Vostochny Bank): Currently, there is a growing trend in the market for the share of POS loans without overpayment for clients (installment plans), and installment plans traditionally attract a higher quality client, thus the quality loan portfolio is improving. At the same time, installment plans are not always profitable for banks, and due to low profitability, also for retailers, since they are forced to make discounts on goods in order to compensate the client for overpayment on the loan.

Alexander Vasiliev (OTP Bank): We have learned to calculate risks more accurately and with fewer errors. Overdue payments at OTP Bank are now close to historical minimums. We do not plan to move into any riskier segments that have a higher level of delinquency. Therefore, I hope that this POS portfolio ratio will remain at the current level.

Sergey Vasiliev (“Renaissance Credit”): Targeted lending is traditionally characterized by a lower level of risk due to relatively shorter terms and loan amounts. The presence of this advantage made it possible that, as the macroeconomic situation in the country stabilized, the POS loan segment was the first to demonstrate positive dynamics - both in terms of volume growth rates and in terms of reducing the level of delinquency.

Stanislav Duzhinsky (Home Credit Bank): As for the overdue period, since the risks for this type of lending are low due to the intended use, low amount and high turnover, it is at an acceptable level. There are also no prerequisites for its growth in the future.

Scoring for POS loans: solutions, approaches, risks

Alexey Stepanov (Alfa-Bank): At the moment, we are actively optimizing the number of fields required to make a decision. SMS signing is already available loan agreement(SMS credit), remote work with clients is actively developing. An era has come when it is not the client who comes to the bank, but the bank who comes to the client, at a convenient time and in the right place, which undoubtedly has a positive effect on the conversion from visitor to borrower (buyer).

Stanislav Duzhinsky (Home Credit Bank): Up to 75% of decisions are made based on the fields: patronymic, series and passport number, monthly income, Date of Birth. In other cases, an additional call is used.

New sales models for POS loans: how to sell when everyone already has credit cards?

Alexey Stepanov (Alfa-Bank): No matter how much we would like it, unfortunately, not everyone has credit cards. There is a huge cluster of clients who are afraid to provide data and also prefer annuity products (even if they have a credit card), which are simpler and more understandable for them.

Valentin Fedchin (Vostochny Bank): Not everyone has credit cards, since sales of goods are carried out not only in cities with a population of over a million, the population of which uses credit cards most actively. A credit card also cannot replace the “installment plan for goods” product and, as a result, does not satisfy all customer needs.

In terms of trends in the POS market, we can note the gradual transition to a new business model - work through a single IT platform without the participation of a bank employee, that is, when a partner’s employee has the opportunity to fill out a single application to all banks.

Alexander Vasiliev (OTP Bank): It is important to understand that the POS client base is different than for credit cards. Clients applying for POS loans are afraid to take credit cards. The services that are inherent to a credit card are most likely irrelevant to them. What is really important to such clients is a loan with clear terms: a clear repayment schedule, fixed payments and full transparency in the conditions specified on the on paper(agreement).

Naturally, through our POS database, we offer credit cards to similar borrowers, and they take them. But they take it very reluctantly, and upon further questioning they answer that they are afraid of credit cards and that they do not need them, and if they want to buy something on credit, they will again take POS. A more understandable product for POS clients is an analogue of a credit card, “cash on card” (cashoncard).

Sergey Vasiliev (Renaissance Credit): Credit cards are the most complex retail credit product. Their further development and the quality of their satisfaction of personal financial needs strongly depend on the increase in the level of financial literacy of the population. Targeted loans, on the contrary, are much simpler and more understandable for the client. They fit into a personal budget much more easily - a person knows in advance exactly what amounts during what period he will have to pay to pay off the debt. In this sense, in the coming years, and perhaps decades, the global risk that credit cards will radically replace targeted retail lending is unjustified. Rather, as now, they will continue to develop in parallel - each in its own direction.

Stanislav Duzhinsky (Home Credit Bank): A credit card is not a competing product, since often the conditions for installment plans in the 0-0-X format are much more favorable than the interest-free period on the card, which on average is only 50–60 days.

What will happen to the market in the long term (5-7 years)?

Alexey Stepanov (Alfa-Bank): The POS online lending market will undoubtedly grow and increase exponentially, following a similar trend in retail.

Valentin Fedchin (Vostochny Bank): We expect that the POS market will actively develop by simplifying the procedure for obtaining a loan (development of online lending, issuing loans using digital signatures, etc.) and banks entering new segments where traditionally there was no POS lending (shoes, clothing, food, etc.). It is also very likely that the market will fully switch to the format of working through unified IT platforms, and banks will not place their employees at points of sale.

Alexander Vasiliev (OTP Bank): In the future, I see that the POS market will be adapted for brokerage solutions. The service for providing POS loans in stores will remain, as it is one of the main tools for sales growth, but will be transformed into brokerage platforms. Purchasing goods on the Internet will gradually shift in favor of credit cards, and in 5–7 years more goods will be paid for with credit cards than with POS loans.

Sergey Vasiliev (Renaissance Credit): Targeted lending is historically the most developed segment of retail credit, the rules of work in which are the result of long-term intense competition. Therefore, one should not expect global changes here even in the long term.

Despite the active development of credit card products, there will still be a demand in the market for targeted loans, since they are much more understandable and often more profitable financial instrument compared to credit cards.

This area will remain a specific niche for banks with high barriers to entry, requiring an interconnected set of competencies in risk management, working with partners and technological support for sales and customer service.

Perhaps most noticeably, the formats for interaction between banks and trading companies will continue to change and evolve. The overall idea of ​​this process will be to increase the speed of customer service. For credit institutions - especially in relations with large trading companies - this will mean a noticeable increase in the share of sales through brokerage systems, when the borrower simultaneously receives offers from different banks and can choose among them the one that best suits his needs.

MOSCOW, December 26 - PRIME, Ekaterina Zhirova. The Hungarian financial group OTP Group has been represented in Russia since the end of 2006 in face OTP Jar. During this time, the bank entered the top 55 largest in Russia and took second place in the Russian POS lending market. About how private to a foreign bank works in Russia, about the attitude of the parent bank to the development of OTP Bank, about plans to expand the business, about the risks and prospects for the development of POS lending and online trading, Deputy Chairman of the Board of the Bank Alexander Vasiliev spoke in an interview with the Prime agency.

- How is the POS lending market developing in the Russian Federation? How is it different from foreign markets?

Now is a good time for POS lending. Since 2015, the situation in terms of risks has gradually improved, and now many banks are willing to lend, and go to different segments that were atypical in 2012 and 2013 - for example, lending for furs and furniture. The general trend is that the average loan amount is increasing and rates are decreasing.

As for the profitability of POS lending for banks, it has also been declining recently. This is due to the fact that retailers are finding it increasingly difficult to compete with each other, and they are forced to use POS lending as a tool to increase profitability. At the same time, it is important for them that the rate is as low as possible or the commission from the bank for attracting a client is as high as possible.

- What share of the POS lending market in the Russian Federation does OTP Bank have? How would the bank like to increase this share?

We occupy second place, in terms of issuances this is about 14% of the market. At the same time, we are a conservative bank and try to issue POS loans in those places and to those clients where this is understandable from the point of view of risk and financial model. We do not go into risky segments. Increasing our share and becoming first in the market by any means is not an end in itself and not an element of our strategy.

The POS business has its own specifics: if you compare it, say, with a mortgage, then in mortgage lending the main component of risk is social default, which can occur at any time during the life of the loan, and in POS lending it is fraud, that is, fraud .

If the client makes payments regularly in the first few months, then with a very high probability he will continue to pay in a disciplined manner and will pay the entire loan amount on time.

If you are a leading bank, then this allows you to gain experience and build good scoring models and anti-fraud systems, as well as have credibility with trade organizations and a generally good flow of clients. And only in this case does this line of business become profitable. Being the sixth or seventh bank means always being on the sidelines in every trading organization. The first choice banks collect good results, quality clients, the second and third choice banks receive refusals after them.

What changes have occurred in the POS market in the past year (how have the dynamics, issue volumes and demand, and other available statistics changed)? What are the expectations for the development of this market and growth/decline? OTP income Are you expecting a bank in 2018?

We have planned for growth and expect the market to grow too.

- How did the borrower’s portrait change in 2017? Is there a breakdown by age, gender, and income of the borrower?

If we take each product category separately, then in the majority of cases, loans, for example, for refrigerators, are taken by approximately the same people who took them before. It is clear that younger and less wealthy people buy mobile phones on credit, but the share of loans for furs and furniture, where the bulk of clients are wealthier and older borrowers, is growing. Most likely, those people who take out loans for mobile phones will not take out loans for fur coats and vice versa. Overall, our POS clients are predominantly female, with an average age of 41 years.

What do customers most often take out on credit at retail outlets? What is the average purchase amount? How has it changed in 2017?

It depends on the bank's strategy. Once upon a time, our main segments were home appliances and mobile phones, and we had virtually no presence in other product categories. Now the share of these product categories in the total volume of issuances is declining. We began to expand our presence and issue loans in very different segments, which were previously considered non-classical. The average purchase amount since the beginning of the year is about 25 thousand rubles, and it is growing. The lowest average bill in 2017 was among residents of the Mari El Republic and the Ulyanovsk region (17.97 thousand rubles and 22.42 thousand rubles, respectively). The highest average bill is 39.33 thousand rubles and 39.38 thousand rubles in Kabardino-Balkaria and the Kamchatka region.

- Have the risks in POS lending in Russia increased in recent years, or, conversely, decreased?

Risks are reduced. There was a local peak in 2014 and the first half of 2015, then they gradually decreased.

Does the bank increase the formation of reserves for these loans? Are there any gaps in legislation in this market? What suggestions do you have to improve it?

If there were no changes in regulatory rules, rules for the formation of reserves, they would have decreased. From the point of view of the formation of reserves, we feel comfortable, despite the fact that changes are taking place in the methodology for their calculation. This is largely due to the fact that we take a conservative approach to lending and do not work in high-risk segments, where reserves would have to be formed in a much larger volume. Here, perhaps, the only inconvenience is that various innovations occur quite often.

How does it generally work for a private foreign bank in Russia? What are the main advantages and disadvantages of Russian banking regulation?

Okay, comfortable. If we compare the Russian market with other markets where OTP Group is present, the market, firstly, is very large, and secondly, it is developing very quickly. Technology, innovation - this is changing an order of magnitude faster here than in other countries. When we launch new projects, we try to consult with other banks in the group, and, as a rule, their solutions are interesting, but not always applicable to our market. In fact, Russia is one of the most interesting markets, because here you can try and experiment a lot. At the same time, successful ideas can be scaled.

Does the bank have plans to expand its business in the Russian Federation? Tell us more about this, please. What are they?

We are always ready for dialogue and consider various proposals, but we do not have the task of simply buying something - our acquisition must be complementary to the current business and give a synergistic effect. We always have options that we consider and analyze.

Are you satisfied? parent bank business development in Russia? What results do you expect from the development of your business by the end of 2017 (financial indicators)?

We probably have the largest increase in profit among the group’s banks - in accordance with IFRS, the group’s profit in Russia (excluding the online project Touch Bank) for the first 9 months of 2017 amounted to 4.5 billion rubles, which is 18% more than the previous figure of the year. At the end of the year, OTP Bank's financial performance will be better than in the past. Overall, 2017 is one of the most successful years for our banking business in Russia.

What are your assessments and forecasts regarding the online trading market in Russia? How interested are banks in this segment?

Issuing loans for goods in online stores is one of the most promising directions, but it is still poorly developed. Although the potential is simply huge. If, for example, in a large chain store selling equipment, the share of sales on credit is about 30%, then in online stores this is, as a rule, no more than 2%. That is, there is room to grow and develop. The only thing is that the online lending market is more sensitive to the rate. If a person analyzes prices on the Internet, comparing them with each other, most likely, he will be thoughtful when choosing a loan offer. This is not the case in regular retail stores. In terms of rates and quality of borrowers, rates are lower, quality of borrowers is higher. But there is another problem - fraud on the Internet is easier. There is no need to run around shopping and wait for your loan to be approved.

The volume of the online trading market in Russia at the end of 2016 amounted to 920 billion rubles, an increase of 21% year on year. In the first half of 2017, growth Russian market Internet commerce accounted for 22%. By the end of the year it will grow by 25% and reach 1.2 trillion rubles. The share of online commerce in Russia’s entire digital economy is 36%. At the same time, more than 90% of buyers place orders in Russian online stores.

What are the dynamics of lending through credit cards? Are they popular among clients, or do clients prefer POS lending?

We specialize mainly in POS lending, and if our clients are asked whether they need a card and what kind, then in most cases everyone will answer that there is no such need. For customers who are accustomed to POS loans, it is important that the product is simple and understandable. A man decided to buy a refrigerator for 40 thousand rubles. He was given a loan for exactly the same amount - 40 thousand rubles. They issued a schedule indicating that on such and such a date of each month such and such an amount must be paid - everything is very clear.

The card product itself is more complex - billing period, payment period, Grace period- this mechanic is not obvious to everyone. For such clients, we have issued a special card - something between a POS loan and a credit card.

- That is, the bank’s POS lending portfolio is higher than its credit card portfolio?

They are approximately equal in size. If we talk about portfolios, then the POS loan has a short term. As the check grows, it increases slightly, but usually it is 12 months. That is, the portfolio is repaid and amortized very quickly, plus early repayment, which further increases the depreciation of the portfolio.

The situation with cards is different, there the natural depreciation itself is very small, plus we also increase the limits for good clients, thereby motivating them to use the cards. Thus, maintaining a card portfolio at existing base naturally simpler than a POS loan portfolio.

What is the average rate now in the POS lending market and at the bank? Do you expect it to decrease following the key rate?

About 25%. The key rate has very little effect on the POS lending rate. The POS loan rate is formed from the cost of funding, which is influenced by the key rate, but not directly. From the cost of risk for the borrower, which the key rate does not affect at all. And from the cost of the transaction for issuing loans. Therefore, changing the key rate up and down has a very, very indirect effect on the POS lending rate. Let's say that the risks for the borrower have a much stronger impact. According to my expectations, the average rate in the POS lending market will decrease in 2018.

According to the data, as of November 1, OTP Bank occupied 51st place in banking system Russian Federation with assets of 145.5 billion rubles, own funds amounted to 29.5 billion rubles, the funds of the population - 55 billion rubles.

Case No. 2-1341/2015

SOLUTION

In the name Russian Federation

Dimitrovgrad City Court of the Ulyanovsk Region, composed of presiding judge E.P. Chapaikina,

under secretary Rizen E.A.,

Having considered in open court a civil case based on the claim of Annenkova R.M. to the limited liability company "Beauty Salon" for the collection of funds, interest under the contract, fine, compensation moral damage, open joint stock company"OTP Bank" to invalidate the loan agreement and close the account,

INSTALLED:

Plaintiff Annenkova R.M. filed a claim, clarified during the trial, against the limited liability company "Beauty Salon" for the recovery of funds, interest under the agreement, a fine, compensation for moral damage, and the open joint-stock company "OTP Bank" for the recognition of the loan agreement as invalid and the closure accounts.

In support of her claims, she indicated that * * * over the phone she entered into a purchase and sale agreement * with Beauty Salon LLC. To invite her to a cosmetics demonstration procedure, they called her several times; in an intrusive manner they asked her to come to the presentation of “Desheli” cosmetics, emphasizing that this procedure was free.

* * * she came for a free procedure without the intention of buying any products. During the procedure, the cosmetologist assured her that after a month of caring for Desheli cosmetics at home, she would have a noticeable effect; she was also assured of the natural composition of the cosmetics and its amazing properties.

After carrying out the procedures under psychological influence, she was forced to enter into a purchase and sale agreement in installments for 3 years. She didn’t want to sign the contract, but for some reason she did. Being in a state incomprehensible to her under the influence of a complex of factors - persuasion, smells, a cosmetic procedure, she went to the office, where other employees quickly issued a loan on her behalf at OJSC OTP Bank. At the same time, there was no representative of the Bank. The loan agreement received indicates Vasiliev Alexander Vasilievich as an authorized person of the Bank, but the agreement with her was concluded by an employee of the “Beauty Salon”, a woman, and the loan agreement bears Vasiliev’s facsimile signature and the Bank’s facsimile seal. She was not explained the terms of the loan, the loan amount, or interest. When concluding a loan agreement, an employee of Beauty Salon LLC, at her own discretion, rounded up the amount of her income.

Product or cosmetic set priced * rub. was not passed on to her. The product specifications were not provided to her, and she did not sign the Goods Acceptance and Transfer Certificate. The terms of the contract for the purchase and sale of goods provide for the purchase of goods in installments, without using credit funds, but an employee of Beauty Salon LLC, misleading her, forced her to enter into a loan agreement under the influence of deception.

She did not use the funds borrowed on credit, nor did she use goods that were not purchased on credit funds. In accordance with Art. considers the transaction to conclude a loan agreement invalid.

Initial loan repayment amount * * * g., amount * rub. She was constantly called from the Bank, she was forced to pay * rub.

In * * she repeatedly contacted the defendant and asked that the contract be declared invalid * * *. The purchase and sale agreement was terminated and a Certificate of Termination of the Contract was drawn up. The Act states that the amount of * rub. transferred to an account opened in her name at the Bank until * * *

Thus, Beauty Salon LLC obliged to return the money to the Bank.

She wrote an application to terminate the loan agreement and sent it to the Bank, but the Bank refused to terminate the agreement.

She does not agree with the Bank’s refusal, since, according to the terms of the loan agreement, a consumer loan was concluded with her for the purchase of a specific product that was not provided to her.

She asked to invalidate the loan agreement No. * dated * * *, concluded between her and OJSC OTP Bank, to oblige LLC Beauty Salon to execute the Certificate of Termination dated * * * on the termination of the purchase and sale agreement * dated * * * g., to recover from Beauty Salon LLC * rub., compensation for moral damage in the amount of * rub.

According to the updated claim, he asks to recover * rubles from Beauty Salon LLC. *kopecks, losses in the amount of * rubles, fine for failure to comply with consumer requirements, interest on the loan in the amount of * rubles. for the period from * * * to * * *, compensation for moral damage in the amount of * rubles, invalidate the loan agreement No. * dated * * *, concluded between her and OJSC OTP Bank.

At the court hearing, plaintiff Annenkova R.M. she supported the specified claims, indicating that she gave the court explanations similar to those set out in the claims. She asked that the clarified claims be satisfied.

The representative of the plaintiff, Faizullina D.Kh., acting on the basis of the plaintiff’s statement, at the court hearing the plaintiff clarified the claims of Annenkova R.M. also supported.

Representatives of the defendants LLC “Beauty Salon”, OJSC “OTP Bank”, having been duly notified of the time and place of the consideration of the case, did not appear at the court hearing, did not report the reasons for their failure to appear in court, and did not submit any objections to the claim.

In accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of Article of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the court considers it possible to consider the case in the absence of defendants who have not appeared and who have been notified of the time and place of the consideration of the case.

After listening to the plaintiff and his representative, and examining the case materials, the court comes to the following conclusion.

In accordance with Part 1 of Article of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, an interested person has the right, in the manner established by the legislation on civil proceedings, to apply to the court for the protection of violated or disputed rights, freedoms or legitimate interests.

As established at the court hearing, * * * years between Annenkova R.M. and Beauty Salon LLC signed a purchase and sale agreement No. * for the purchase of a cosmetic set worth * rubles. * kop.

At the same time, loan funds were raised to purchase a range of care services - Annenkova R.M. * * * the year a loan agreement No. * was concluded with OJSC OTP Bank.

According to the terms of the loan agreement, the loan cash provided to the plaintiff for a period of * months, at *% per annum for using the loan, the amount of the monthly payment is * rubles, the amount of the last payment is * rubles.

At the same time, the loan was provided to pay for what R.M. Annenkova purchased. goods in the form of a cosmetic set, the funds must be transferred to the account of the retail outlet, which is Beauty Salon LLC.

Thus, the buyer’s obligations to pay for the goods to Annenkova R.M. were completed.

At the same time, as R.M. Annenkova explained, she did not use the range of paid cosmetic services.

The defendant LLC “Beauty Salon” did not present any evidence to the court to refute these arguments of the plaintiff, whereas, according to Art. Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections.

As follows from the case materials, * * * years between Annenkova R.M. and the defendant entered into an agreement to terminate the purchase and sale agreement No. * dated * * *, according to the terms of which, Beauty Salon LLC assumed obligations to transfer, within * * * year, the amount paid under the agreement in the amount of * rubles . * kop. by transferring money to the plaintiff’s current account opened with OJSC OTP Bank.

Thus, since the court found that the parties, in accordance with the procedure established by law, terminated the previously concluded agreement for the purchase and sale of goods in the form of a set of cosmetic services, therefore, since the goods were not transferred to the buyer, the amount of money contributed by the plaintiff to pay for the goods was subject to return.

At the same time, as established by the court, the executor LLC "Beauty Salon" has an obligation to return to the plaintiff a sum of money in the amount of * rubles. * kop. did not comply.

There is no information about the transfer by the defendant LLC “Beauty Salon” of any amounts to the plaintiff’s account at OJSC “OTP Bank” for the purpose of repaying the plaintiff’s loan obligations to the Bank, as well as about the non-return of funds to the plaintiff in another form.

The defendant Beauty Salon LLC did not present evidence to the court of the fulfillment of the obligation assumed under the act of termination of the contract.

By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. Civil Code Russian Federation, an agreement is considered concluded if an agreement is reached between the parties, in the form required in appropriate cases, on all essential conditions agreement. Essential are the conditions on the subject of the contract, the conditions that are named in the law or other legal acts as essential or necessary for contracts of this type, as well as all those conditions regarding which, at the request of one of the parties, an agreement must be reached.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a transaction is invalid on the grounds established by this Code, due to its recognition as such by the court (voidable transaction) or regardless of such recognition (void).

According to Part 1 of Art. Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an invalid transaction does not entail legal consequences, except for those related to its invalidity and is invalid from the moment of its completion.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. According to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a transaction made under the influence of deception may be declared invalid by the court at the request of the victim. Deliberate silence about circumstances that a person should have reported with the conscientiousness required of him under the terms of the transaction is also considered deception.

In the dispute under consideration, the parties entered into a contractual relationship to provide the plaintiff with credit funds.

The formalization of contractual relations for the issuance of a loan is not limited to the parties drawing up only one document (loan agreement) signed by them, but is confirmed by other documents, from which the will of the borrower will be clear to receive a certain amount from the bank sum of money on agreed terms (by the client submitting an application for the issuance of funds, by paying a fee for the provision of a loan, etc.), and, in turn, by the bank opening a loan account to the client and issuing funds to the latter.

The plaintiff did not dispute the Bank’s opening of a current account in her name and the crediting of funds to it as payment for a cosmetic product.

The borrower began to fulfill the loan agreement dated No. * dated * * * with the conditions set out therein, paying a loan fee in the amount of * rubles.

According to the provisions of Art. Art. , evidence in the case is information obtained in the manner prescribed by law about the facts, on the basis of which the court establishes the presence or absence of circumstances justifying the demands and objections of the parties, as well as other circumstances that are important for the proper consideration and resolution of the case. Each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections. Failure to prove the circumstances that the plaintiff refers to in support of his claims is an independent basis for refusal of the claim.

In this case, there is no evidence in the case materials confirming that the loan agreement of Annenkov R.M. concluded by the plaintiff under the influence of deception and delusion, as well as the fact that when concluding the contract, she did not pursue the goals that should be implied by the parties, and their actions were not aimed at achieving the legal result that should be obtained when concluding this transaction , since the agreement was concluded in accordance with the norms of current legislation, the terms of the agreement were fulfilled by the parties.

Thus, the court believes that there are no legal grounds for declaring the loan agreement invalid on the grounds that the plaintiff referred to in support of his claims.

Accordingly, the requirements of Annenkova R.M. are not subject to satisfaction. on the recovery from LLC "Beauty Salon" of the plaintiff's payments to the Bank * rub. and interest for using the loan in the amount of * rub. for the period from * * * to * * *, since in accordance with Part 3 of Art. Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the obligation does not create obligations for persons not participating in it as parties (for third parties).

Beauty Salon LLC is not a party to the loan agreement, and therefore the plaintiff’s obligations under the said agreement cannot influence the obligations of Beauty Salon LLC, and therefore imposing the obligation to pay the loan to the Bank on the defendant cannot be a way to restore the rights of the plaintiff; this part of the claim should be rejected.

In accordance with Art. Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, since the plaintiff, when filing a claim, is exempt from paying state duty, and the specified claims are satisfied, the defendant receives income local budget a state duty in the amount of RUB 2,640 is subject to collection. 72 kopecks

Guided by Art. Art. - , - Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, court

DECIDED:

The claims of Roza Mikhailovna Annenkova will be partially satisfied.

To recover from the limited liability company “Beauty Salon” in favor of Annenkova R.M. cash in the amount of * (*) rub. * kop., compensation for moral damage in the amount of * (*) rub., fine in the amount of * (*) rub. * kop., and in total to collect * (*) rub. * kop.

To the satisfaction of the rest claims Annenkova Roza Mikhailovna should be refused.

To collect from the limited liability company "Beauty Salon" a state duty in the amount of * (*) rubles for the local budget. * kop.

The decision can be appealed to the Ulyanovsk Regional Court through the Dimitrovgrad City Court within one month from the date of drawing up the decision in final form, 06/01/2015.

Judge E.P. Chapaikina

The president

Ilya Petrovich Chizhevsky was born in Leningrad (St. Petersburg) in 1978.

In 2000 he received a diploma from the St. Petersburg Institute of Precision Mechanics and Optics (Technical University). While studying at the University, he was an active member of the International Association of Students Studying Economics and Management (AIESEC). He began his career in St. Petersburg in the FMCG sector - Kraft Foods.

In 2003, he moved to work in the retail division of Citibank CJSC in Moscow, where he developed alternative sales channels and credit products. In 2006, he moved to GE Capital - working in Russia and abroad, he went from head of the Moscow region to Director of Sales and Distribution in Russia, responsible for the development of distribution and sales channels, alternative funding and attracting customers via the Internet. In October 2012, he moved to Rusfinance Bank LLC (Societe Generale) to the position of Deputy President of the bank, where he was responsible for sales, products and marketing in the bank.

In June 2013, he joined the OTP Bank team, where from August 2013 he held the position of Director of the Network Division. On June 9, 2014, he was appointed Deputy Chairman of the Board of OTP Bank. Ilya Chizhevsky’s area of ​​responsibility included the business of the classic branch network and alternative sales channels. In addition, he was responsible for working with the VIP segment, micro and small businesses, development corporate business Bank, channels for remote attraction and servicing of Bank clients.

Kapustin Sergey Nikolaevich

short biography

Sergei Nikolaevich Kapustin

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

Sergei Nikolaevich Kapustin was born in Moscow in 1979.

In 2001 he graduated from the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics of Moscow State University with a degree in Applied Mathematics. Has a candidate's degree economic sciences.

IN banking sector more than 15 years. He began his banking career in 2001 at Bank Vozrozhdenie, where he worked his way up from a leading specialist to Deputy Head of the Retail Operations Department, responsible for issues retail business Banking and risk management.

In 2008, he moved to OTP Bank, where he took the position of Director of the Risk Assessment and Methodology Directorate. Oversaw issues related to credit risks for the Bank's retail portfolio, lending methodology, operational and market risks.

From 2011 to 2013 he worked in the field of microfinance.

Since 2013, he has been Deputy Chairman of the Board, Director of the Risk Management Division at OTP Bank.

Oreshkina Yulia Sergeevna

short biography

Yulia Sergeevna Oreshkina

Director of the Legal Support Directorate, Member of the Board

Yulia Sergeevna Oreshkina was born in Moscow in 1973.

In 1997 she graduated from the Moscow State Law Academy with a degree in jurisprudence.

She began her career in the prosecutor's office, then moved to work in the Legal Department of the Moscow Main Territorial Administration Central Bank Russian Federation. Yulia Sergeevna Oreshkina also worked in various years in the legal services of a number of large Russian banks, in particular such as CB Petrocommerce, OJSC Impexbank and others.

Yulia Sergeevna Oreshkina has been working at OTP Bank (until 2008 – Investsberbank) since 2007, where she heads the legal support directorate.

Vasiliev Alexander Vasilievich

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

short biography

Alexander Vasilievich Vasiliev

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

Alexander Vasilievich Vasiliev was born in Akhtubinsk in 1978.

Graduated from Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov.

Works in the banking industry for more than 10 years.

From 2004 to 2010, he served as deputy head of the retail operations department at Bank Vozrozhdenie OJSC, where he worked on development projects credit products for individuals ( consumer loans, car loans, mortgage credit lending), as well as the implementation of automation systems for retail lending processes, such as Microsoft Dynamics CRM, Experian Strategy Manager.

In 2010, Mr. Vasiliev headed the department credit risks FG "BCS", where he participated in the launch of the line of lending to individuals and in the creation of unified processes for assessing and managing credit risks. Since June 2011, he joined the OTP Bank team as Director of the Product and Technology Development Directorate. Since December 2013, he served as Director of the Consumer Lending Division.

Dremach Kirill Andreevich

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

short biography

Kirill Andreevich Dremach

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

Kirill Andreevich Dremach was born in Moscow in 1974.

In 1996 he graduated from the Moscow Institute of Economics and Statistics with a degree in Applied Mathematics.

More than 20 years in the banking industry. He began his banking career in 1996 at ZAO CB Citibank, progressing from a specialist to the Head of the Information Technology Department, and was responsible for the development of the information technology base, automation of business processes and financial management in the IT field.

In 2009, he joined Barclays Bank LLC as a Department Director. information technologies, in 2010 he was included in the Board of Directors of the bank.

From 2012 to 2016, he worked at JSC Citibank as the Head of Operational Banking Technologies in Central and Eastern Europe, was responsible for the creation, maintenance and development of the bank’s high-tech information environment, supervised the development and application information systems and new banking products.

In November 2016, he joined the team of OTP Bank JSC as Director of the Operations Management Division. Since November 3, 2017, he has been Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, member of the Management Board of OTP Bank JSC.

Belomytsev Igor Yurievich

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

short biography

Igor Yurievich Belomytsev

Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, Member of the Management Board

Igor Yurievich Belomyttsev was born in Gorky (Nizhny Novgorod) in 1966.

In 1989, he received a diploma as an economist with a specialization in Foreign Economic Relations from the Budapest Karl Marx University of Economic Sciences. In 1993, Igor Yuryevich completed his master's degree at the Stockholm University of Economics.

More than 25 years in the banking industry. He began his banking career in 1990 at the Hungarian Mezobank, which was later merged with a large financial group in Central Europe – Erste Bank Group. Igor Yurievich was appointed Director of the Treasury Operations Division and was responsible for the development of ALM and management of the treasury activities of Erste Bank in Hungary, the development and implementation of business strategies in the field of treasury operations, and the initiation of the development of new investment products and strategies.

In 2001, he moved to Volksbank PJSC (Budapest) and headed the Treasury Division and the investment direction of the Bank.

In 2007, he joined the OTP Bank (Ukraine) team as Deputy Chairman of the Board, responsible for Treasury operations and asset and liability management, development subsidiaries. Under the leadership of Igor Yurievich, the following were created and successfully developed: OTP Factoring, OTP Pension Fund, OTP Management Company and OTP Leasing.

In 2016, Igor Yuryevich moved to OTP Bank (Russia), where he took the position of Advisor to the President and was responsible for the development of Corporate Business and Treasury Operations. In February 2017, Igor was appointed Director of the Corporate Business and Treasury Operations Division. Igor successfully manages the development of strategies and new products in the business areas of these divisions.

On November 3, 2017, he was appointed Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, member of the Management Board of OTP Bank JSC.

On January 27, 2015, Gabor Burian-Kozma joined the team of the Finance Division of OTP Bank JSC as a Project Manager. He was involved in the development of plans for the preparation and implementation of the Bank’s financial projects, took part in improving business planning and developing an effective strategic development model OTP groups in Russia.

On December 1, 2015, Gabor was appointed Director of the Finance Division and took over the supervision of the financial block of OTP Bank (Russia) and management of the divisions responsible for the formation and strategic planning of the Bank’s financial policy, financial and accounting services, and divisions responsible for audits.

On June 6, 2018, he was appointed to the position of Deputy Chairman of the Management Board, member of the Management Board of OTP Bank JSC.

At the end of October, Pochta Bank overtook OTP Bank in issuing loans for the purchase of goods in retail chains (POS loans) and in the near future may take second place in this market. The rapid growth in issuances is ensured by the rate on lending for the purchase of mobile equipment - this segment accounts for about 50% of all POS loans of the bank. Competitors do not share this approach, pointing to high risks in this segment due to the liquidity of smartphones purchased on credit, and prefer to cede market share rather than increase risks.

According to the analytical agency Frank RG, Pochta Bank, one of the top three leaders in the POS lending market, has overtaken OTP Bank, which ranks second in this segment, in terms of issuances. Over the month, Post Bank issued POS loans for 4.52 billion rubles, OTP Bank - for 4.32 billion rubles, market leader HKF Bank - for 7.11 billion rubles. As a result, the loan portfolio indicators of Pochta Bank and OTP Bank in this segment were almost equal - 32.1 billion rubles. and 32.9 billion rubles, respectively, while a month earlier the gap was 1.7 billion rubles.

215 billion rubles

Thus, before the end of the year, changes may occur in the top three, and the second place, held by OTP Bank since 2010, may be taken by Pochta Bank, which entered this market much later than other players (a joint project of VTB and Russian Post). At the moment, the market leader HKF Bank accounts for 22.2% of the total volume of loans in this segment, OTP Bank - 13.3%, and Pochta Bank - 12.9%. The portfolio of POS loans for the system as a whole amounted, according to Frank RG, as of November 1, to 215 billion rubles.

The fastest growth in the POS lending segment is provided by Pochta Bank, in particular, loans for mobile equipment. “We are strengthening our position in the mobile equipment lending segment by expanding cooperation with leading cellular communication stores,” says Andrey Pavlov, director of partnership network development at Pochta Bank. “Currently, the bank is successfully cooperating with federal companies such as Svyaznoy ( including Euroset stores), Beeline, MTS, Tele2. At the local level, relationships with major regional partners have been effectively built.” According to him, loans for mobile equipment make up about 50% of the bank’s total POS loans.

Such a high share of loans for mobile equipment is atypical for market leaders, since such loans are associated with increased risk. “Our share of mobile equipment accounts for no more than 30% of the POS portfolio,” says Alexander Antonenko, deputy chairman of the board of HCF Bank. “This share depends on the bank’s policy, since loans for the purchase of phones are associated with increased risks due to the liquidity of the goods.” Unlike refrigerators, fur coats and other segments, a new smartphone can be sold virtually in one day through online bulletin boards, which attracts scammers, bankers note. According to the deputy chairman of the board of OTP Bank, Alexander Vasiliev, the bank does not have a goal to maintain a certain market share, since it focuses on the profitability of issues. “We adhere to conservative policies. In the POS business, you can issue a lot and earn little or even lose,” notes Mr. Vasiliev. According to him, at OTP Bank mobile equipment accounts for about 15% of issues. “The main volume of loans for mobile equipment is concentrated in communication shops and large electronics stores,” he explains. “They have fairly high requirements for credit rate and the commission that the bank must pay to a trading organization for attracting clients; accordingly, some of the loans may simply be unprofitable.” Cell phones- a segment associated with high risks, and when this is accompanied by a low rate and high commission, then there are quite a few profitable loans left, he concludes.

However, Pochta Bank does not intend to abandon its approach. Our goal is to take second place in the ranking for the portfolio of trade loans: in 2019, Pochta Bank plans to increase its market share to 15%, said Mr. Pavlov.

Ksenia Dementieva, Svetlana Samuseva