WON CASE AGAINST "PROBUSINESSBANK". PETROZAVODSK LAWYER SUGGESTED RUB 1,300,000 FROM THE BANK. May 28th, 2017

WON CASE AGAINST "PROBUSINESSBANK". PETROZAVODSK LAWYER SUGGESTED RUB 1,300,000 FROM THE BANK.

I would like to talk about an interesting case involving a dispute between a bank and a borrower, in which I achieved great success. This story will be very useful borrowers of Probusinessbank » of which, as practice shows, there are quite a few and to whom exorbitant demands are made after a long silence from the bank, as well as to other citizens who have loans from banks.

So, a citizen contacted me, who became a defendant in a lawsuit
"Probusinessbank"» . They wanted to get almost two million rubles from the citizen, despite the fact that this bank had become bankrupt and the person was physically unable to pay the loan, because... The account details changed, but the bank did not inform about it. The bank wanted to receive from the borrower: the loan body, approximately 700,000 rubles, overdue interest + penalties - approximately 1,300,000 rubles.

I accepted the case for proceedings, objections were written, it was stated that the penalties were disproportionate, under Art. 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, about the creditor’s delay, under Art. 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a witness was heard, and in the end I won the case. Of the 2,000,000 rubles, only the body of the loan was collected, approximately 700,000 rubles, which the defendant did not argue with, and overdue interest and penalties for three million were removed. One million three hundred thousand - I beat it off, which I consider a success.

The court found that there was a delay by the creditor. Our position in the case was fully recognized by the court and this allowed us to win the case.

In fact, my client actually had a loan agreement with the bank. The client paid the loan regularly, on time. But then the unexpected happened.

By order Central Bank Russian Federation dated August 12, 2015 No. OD-2071 from OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank» the license to operate has been revoked banking operations.

By the decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court dated October 28, 2015 in case No. A40-154909/2015, JSCB Probusinessbank was declared insolvent (bankrupt), and bankruptcy proceedings were opened against it.

Since August 2015 borrower could not make loan payments because... bank branch, where previously, since 2012, the defendant regularly made payments, closed.
Moreover: my client was also unable to make the payment according to the details established by the parties’ agreement, because when contacting other banks, he was told that payments using these details were not possible. The defendant contacted Sberbank and Rosselkhozbank. The defendant even found and talked to former employeesJSCB "Probusinessbank", trying to understand how he could pay the loan, but they could not help him, telling him that they themselves had credit cards and could not pay, and that they needed to wait for information. In fact, the old account details are no longer relevant, because... Due to the bank bankruptcy procedure, a new account was opened, but my client was not informed about it.
Thus, as we stated in court, there was - creditor's delay.
Starting from August 2015, the defendant wanted, but could not make payments under the agreement, because I didn’t know where or how to pay him cash. In fact, the creditor bank, by closing the bank branch and not properly informing the defendant of the account details for loan payments, allowed the creditor to delay.

As the court states in its decision:
“At the same time, the court believes that the defendant’s arguments about the creditor’s delay deserve attention.
So, in accordance with Art. 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the creditor is considered delinquent if he refused to accept the proper performance proposed by the debtor or did not perform actions provided for by law, other legal acts or agreement, or arising from customs or from the essence of the obligation, before which the debtor could not fulfill his obligation.
By monetary obligation The debtor is not obliged to pay interest during the creditor's delay.
By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 189.88 of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”, the bankruptcy trustee is obliged to use during bankruptcy proceedings only one correspondent account of a credit organization declared bankrupt for funds in the currency of the Russian Federation - the main account of the credit organization opened with the Bank of Russia, and also depending on the number of types of foreign currency available to the credit institution - the required number of accounts of the credit institution for funds in foreign currency opened in others credit institutions V established by the Bank Russia is fine.
The fact that the plaintiff’s account details changed after the bank’s license was revoked is not disputed by the plaintiff.
Thus, the plaintiff himself, JSCB Probusinessbank, did not perform the actions provided for by law, before which the debtor could not fulfill his obligation...."

As a result of the judicial consideration of the case, the court recognized the existence of a delay by the creditor, due to which only approximately 700,000 rubles were recovered from my client out of two million, and the court refused to collect the overdue interest and penalties. My client is happy.

We believe that this decision shows that borrowers can and should defend their rights, especially when the bank itself is to blame for the occurrence of overdue loans.

It seems to us that this story will be useful for both lawyers and ordinary bank clients.

COURT DOCUMENTS

Civil case No. 2-298/2017 on the claim of OJSC JSCB "Probusinessbank" represented by the bankruptcy trustee - State Corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency" against Kuzmin M., E. for debt collection and the counterclaim of Kuzmin M. E. against OJSC JSCB "Probusinessba"

Case No. 2-No./2017

In the name of the Russian Federation

U S T A N O V I L:

OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee, the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, filed the above claim in court. In support of the claim they indicated that DD.MM.YYYY. Loan Agreement No. No. f was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the Loan Agreement).

In accordance with the terms of the Loan Agreement, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a loan in the amount of 180,000 rubles 00 kopecks with a repayment period of DD.MM.YYYY., and the Defendant assumed the obligation to promptly repay the loan amount and pay interest for the use of loan funds.

The funds were transferred to the Defendant, which is confirmed by statements of personal accounts.

According to the terms of the Loan Agreement, the interest rate for using the loan is 0.1% for each day.

In accordance with the terms of the Loan Agreement, in the event of failure and/or improper fulfillment by the Defendant of its obligations under the Loan Agreement, including repayment of the loan amount and/or payment of accrued interest, a penalty of 0.5% is charged on the amount of overdue debt for each day of delay. .

The defendant does not fulfill its obligations under the Loan Agreement, and therefore, as of DD.MM.YYYY. he acquired a debt in the amount of 881,616 (eight hundred eighty-one thousand six hundred and sixteen) rubles and 11 kopecks, of which: the amount of the principal debt is 106,978.00 rubles, the amount of interest is 131,983.18 rubles, penalties are 642,654.93 rubles, total - 881,616.11 rubles.

The defendant was sent a demand to repay the existing debt under the Loan Agreement, but it was ignored.

By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the city of Moscow dated October 28, 2015 in case No. A40-154909/2015, JSCB Probusinessbank was declared insolvent (bankrupt), bankruptcy proceedings were opened against it, and the functions of the bankruptcy trustee were assigned to the State Corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency".

OJSC AKB "Probusinessbank" represented by the bankruptcy trustee - the State Corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency", taking into account the increase in claims, asks the court to recover from Kuzmin Mikhail Evgenievich the amount of debt under CD No. No. dated DD.MM.YYYY in the amount of 881,616, 11 rubles, including: 106,978.00 rubles - principal debt; 131,983.18 rubles - interest; 642,654.93 rubles - a penalty, as well as the cost of paying the state duty incurred by the plaintiff when filing a statement of claim.

Kuzmin M.E. filed the above counterclaim. In support of the claim, he indicated that on November 9, 2011, between OJSC AKB Probusinessbank and Kuzmin M.E. in the premises of the office of KCO "Tilsitsky" branch of the bank OJSC JSCB "Probusinessbank", located at the address: Kaliningrad region, Sovetsk, st. Gorky, 6, Loan Agreement No. No. was concluded, by signing it, as well as by signing a payment schedule, for the provision of a loan for lending individuals, according to which he, as a borrower, was granted a loan in the amount of 180,000 rubles for a period of 60 months with interest paid for using the loan at 0.10% per day, which accrues from the day following the day the loan was granted.

In October 2013, JSCB Probusinessbank restructured its credit debt and a new payment schedule was approved and signed, in which the amount of the monthly payment was already indicated in the amount of 4,000 rubles, the collection of another payment (tariff commission) was excluded, the issue of insurance payments was resolved, and interest for using the loan was established in the amount of 33, 23% per annum, with an increase in the loan term to 90 months.

In accordance with the agreed payment schedule, after the restructuring of the loan debt carried out by OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank, it continued to faithfully fulfill loan obligations. The last payment was made DD.MM.YYYY year, in strict accordance with the agreed schedule.

By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the city of Moscow dated October 28, 2015 in case No. A40-154909/2015, JSCB Probusinessbank was declared insolvent (bankrupt), bankruptcy proceedings were opened against it, and the functions of the bankruptcy trustee were assigned to the State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency”.

By the ruling of the Moscow Arbitration Court dated April 27, 2017, bankruptcy proceedings were extended for six months.

By virtue of paragraph 2 of Art. 20.3 of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”, the bankruptcy trustee is obliged to act in good faith and reasonably, taking into account the rights and legitimate interests of creditors, credit institutions, society and the state.

In this regard, he believes that JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the Bankruptcy Manager of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, violated its legal rights and interests.

OJSC AKB Probusinessbank, represented by the Competition Manager of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, attaches to its initial statement of claim to the court calculations about which it was never notified, indicating that it is he who ignores the fulfillment of the terms of the Loan Agreement No. No. dated DD.MM. YYYY year, and does not indicate the circumstance of an agreed change with OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank in DD.MM.YYYY year of the terms of the loan agreement, in connection with the restructuring of loan obligations and the signing of a new payment schedule. That is, JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, attaches debt calculations to its claim, calculating fines without taking into account the following circumstances that have occurred and are taking place.

OJSC JSCB "Probusinessbank", starting from the date DD.MM.YYYY., actually refuses to provide it with proper information about the method of free execution of the monetary obligation under the specified agreement on consumer credit and thereby refuses and prevents the fulfillment of its terms. It was in connection with the order of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation dated August 12, 2015 No. OD-2071 on the revocation of the license to carry out banking operations from OJSC AKB Probusinessbank, the office of the KCO "Tilsitsky" branch of the bank OJSC AKB Probusinessbank was closed and in this regard he was deprived of any opportunity to fulfill the terms of Loan Agreement No. No. dated DD.MM.YYYY due to the actual refusal of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank to provide him with adequate information about the method of free execution of the monetary obligation under the specified consumer loan agreement.

The office of the KCO "Tilsitsky" branch of the bank OJSC JSCB "Probusinessbank", located at the above address, was closed until the middle of DD.MM.YYYY and was subsequently liquidated due to the lease of the premises leased by the company PJSC IC "Rosgosstrakh" " At the same time, information periodically appeared on the doors of the premises at the specified address about payment details for consumer loans for borrowers of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank, which was not possible to use to fulfill the terms of the loan agreement.

In September DD.MM.YYYY, details for payment through OJSC JSCB Russian Capital were posted on the doors of the office of KCO "Tilsitsky", and it was indicated that payment was accepted only at the offices of the specified bank. Then the details for accepting payments appeared in the offices of PJSC TRRANSCAPITALBANK, in the offices of OJSC AIKB Tatfondbank and in the points of accepting payments of PJSC Sovcombank through self-service devices. Payment in these organizations should also be made only at its location. However specified organizations were absent in the region and it was physically impossible to make payment.

Further, already at the beginning of DD.MM.YYYY, information appeared on the doors of the above office about payment details for individual borrowers at the State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency”. However, for individuals, when making a payment, it was necessary to indicate an ID that was never known to him and he was also refused to make a payment in the banks of Sovetsk, which were mentioned above, also with reference to the impossibility of making a payment.

Thus, a situation arose when he was able to fulfill the obligation, had the necessary funds on hand, but due to the fact that the bank did not provide him with adequate information about the current details for fulfilling loan obligations in a timely manner, fulfillment of loan obligations was impossible. In fact, due to the bank’s refusal to accept the fulfillment of loan obligations and failure to provide it with the appropriate payment details, interest, additional penalties and fines were accrued.

Believes that in this case there is a legal situation in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, when the creditor is considered delinquent if he refused to accept the proper performance proposed by the debtor or did not take actions provided for by law, other legal acts or agreement, or arising from customs or from the essence of the obligation, before which the debtor could not fulfill his obligation.

In this case, there is a legal consequence - the possibility of terminating the concluded loan agreement in court from the moment the conditions for its execution begin to be absent, that is, from the date DD.MM.YYYY.

According to clause 3 of Article 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, on a monetary obligation, the debtor is not obliged to pay interest during the creditor’s delay.

Kuzmin M.E. believes that the fines and interest stated in the bank’s claims are not subject to collection, and it is only obligated to repay the principal amount, a total of 106,978 rubles.

In addition, he believes that the actions (inaction) of the bank OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank in refusing to accept funds from it as payment for a loan (goods, services) received from it to a loan (credit) account in its bank in relation to clause 1 of Art. . 16 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” infringe upon the consumer’s rights established by law and even form an administrative offense provided for in parts 3 and 4 of Art. 14.8 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

According to Art. 16 Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”, contract terms that infringe on consumer rights in comparison with the rules established by laws or other legal acts of the Russian Federation in the field of consumer rights protection are declared invalid.

Despite the fact that the bank violates clause 1 of Article 16 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights,” the bank declares the collection of debt from it under loan agreement which was actually formed through his fault and thus to this day does not recognize the violations of the current legislation committed by him in the provision of banking services.

Due to the bank’s refusal to accept fulfillment of the terms of the loan agreement, that is, due to the bank’s actual refusal to provide banking services, I was constantly and continues to be in a state of stress associated with a feeling of anxiety, fear for my financial future position, for its business reputation, credit history. This situation was further aggravated by the bank filing claims in court for debt collection.

Kuzmin M.E. asks the court to terminate the Loan agreement No. from DD.MM.YYYY of the year with DD.MM.YYYY, that is, from the moment of his application to the office of the KCO "Tilsitsky" branch of the bank OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank and the refusal by the party JSC JSCB Probusinessbank to accept from him to fulfill loan obligations under this agreement; to recover compensation from OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank represented by the Competition Manager of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency moral damage in the amount of 100,000 rubles, a fine in the amount of 50% of the amount of money awarded by the court in his favor and resolve the issue of offset awarded by the court in his favor sums of money to repay the debt to OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank represented by the bankruptcy trustee of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency that remained unfulfilled by his party under the loan agreement dated DD.MM.YYYY. principal debt in the amount of 106,978 rubles.

The representative of the plaintiff-defendant on the counterclaim did not appear at the court hearing, the time and place of the court hearing were duly notified, and a petition was submitted to consider the case in the absence of the representative of the plaintiff-defendant on the counterclaim.

The defendant-plaintiff in the counterclaim Kuzmin M.E. did not appear at the court hearing, and was duly notified of the time and place of the court hearing. His representative Perchikov Yu.B., acting on the basis of a power of attorney from DD.MM.YYYY., at the court hearing supported the counterclaims and asked to satisfy them. The claims of JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, were partially recognized, explaining that they do not object to the collection of only the amount of the principal debt under the loan agreement in the amount of 106,978 rubles. Regarding the collection of interest and penalties, without disputing their amount taking into account the presented updated calculation, they object because their accrual was due to the fault of the bank. With a request to terminate the loan agreement from DD.MM.YYYY. Kuzmin M.E. didn't apply. He believes that the loan agreement should have provided information and created special accounts in case the bank’s license was revoked, which was not done in this situation, which did not allow making payments on the loan, which violated the rights of the consumer. DD.MM.YYYY., Kuzmin M.E. Having contacted the bank office, I was ready to make the next loan payment. He did not have the funds available to repay the entire amount of his credit debt, but he could pay monthly payments, but the payments did not go through. I did not apply anywhere in writing on this issue in order to obtain details for paying the loan. Assumes that it is possible on DD.MM.YYYY. there were already details for making payments on the loan, but he found out about this only in the year DD.MM.YYYY, because he didn't have internet. When I found out the details, difficulties arose again in repaying the loan, because... it was necessary to indicate the id in the payment documents, but when applying for a loan he did not receive it. Kuzmin M.E. called the Agency regarding obtaining an id, they told him that they would inform him, but he never received a letter. He was very worried about this, he constantly had a headache, confirming medical documents not available, but believes that compensation for moral damage should be paid due to the provisions of the consumer protection law. Kuzmin M.E. did not present any requirements to the bank and (or) the Deposit Insurance Agency, for non-compliance with voluntary satisfaction of which a fine in the amount of 50% of the awarded amount is provided.

The court received written objections from JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee - the State Corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency" to the counter statement of claim, in which they indicate that the statement of Kuzmin M.E. about delay in performance due to the fault of the creditor is untenable. Payment details are freely available on network resources: on the official website of JSCB Probusinessbank, on the official website of the Deposit Insurance Agency, on the official website of Komersant. After the bank's license was revoked and it was declared insolvent (bankrupt), the bank sent out relevant notifications twice (postal registers, the text of the notification is attached). The Borrower, acting in good faith and prudently, must take all necessary measures to fulfill its obligation. possible ways from the notification sent or the official website of the Bank, which provides detailed information, but has not taken any measures to repay his debt to date. The defendant's arguments that he tried to make payments, but they did not go through are untenable, because the defendant did not provide payment documents indicating that funds were sent to the Bank and returned to the defendant. Evidence that Kuzmin M.E. made attempts to repay the loan obligations, they were not presented, therefore the claims of delay due to the fault of the creditor are not valid. When concluding a loan agreement, the defendant expected to receive loan funds and use them according to the interest rate established by the loan agreement. The terms of the loan agreement have not changed, the defendant received the funds. Payment details, according to the Federal Law “On Consumer Credit (Loan),” are not an essential condition of the loan agreement. Therefore, their change cannot be considered a violation of the agreement on the part of the Bank, provided that the Bank notified borrowers both via the Internet and by sending notifications. It is believed that there were no significant violations of the terms of the loan agreement on the part of the Bank, the bank fulfilled its obligation to transfer funds in good faith, and there are no grounds for terminating the loan agreement. The bank provided sufficient information about ongoing changes, conditions and possibilities for repaying debt under loan obligations. The defendant could obtain information from the Internet, according to the Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated December 21, 2013. No. 353 “On consumer credit (loan)”, as well as by Russian post, since notifications were sent to his address. In addition to all the necessary information, he could obtain information from the signs of the State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency”, appointed as the bankruptcy administrator of the Bank, in particular at the correspondence address: 127055, Moscow, Lesnaya St., 59 building 2. It is believed that the fact of violation of the rights of Kuzmin M.E. there is no information about obtaining information, therefore, the request for compensation for moral damage is asked to be refused in full.

In addition to the objections to the counterclaim, they also indicated that Kuzmin M.E., by attaching payment details available in official information sources, does not confirm that he took actions to repay the debt according to the available details. In accordance with Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the integrity of participants in civil legal relations and the reasonableness of their actions are provided for. The Borrower, acting in good faith and prudently, must take all necessary measures to fulfill its obligation by possible means from the notification sent or the official website of the Bank, which contains detailed information, but has not taken any measures to repay its debt to date. By virtue of Article 310 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation is not allowed. It is believed that the borrower is abusing existing rights, and therefore the bank’s claims must be satisfied.

Having examined the evidence in the case and heard the representative of the defendant-plaintiff on the counterclaim, the court comes to the following conclusion.

In accordance with Art. 154 Civil Code In the Russian Federation, transactions can be bilateral or multilateral (agreements) and unilateral. To conclude a contract, it is necessary to express the agreed will of the two parties (bilateral transaction).

According to Art. 432 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a contract is considered concluded if an agreement is reached between the parties, in the form required in appropriate cases, on all essential conditions agreement.

In accordance with Articles 309 and 314 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, obligations must be fulfilled properly and in due time. In accordance with Article 310 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation is not allowed.

According to Art. 819 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a bank or other credit organization (lender) undertakes to provide funds (loan) to the borrower in the amount and on the terms stipulated by the agreement, and the borrower undertakes to return the amount of money received and pay interest on it.

The rules provided for in paragraph 1 of Chapter 42 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation apply to relations under a loan agreement, unless otherwise provided by the rules of paragraph 2 of Chapter 42 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and does not follow from the essence of the loan agreement.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 807 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a loan agreement, one party (the lender) transfers into the ownership of the other party (borrower) money or other things determined by generic characteristics, and the borrower undertakes to return to the lender the same amount of money (loan amount) or an equal number of other things received by him of the same kind and quality. The loan agreement is considered concluded from the moment the money or other things are transferred.

In accordance with Art. 809 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, unless otherwise provided by law or the loan agreement, the lender has the right to receive interest from the borrower on the loan amount in the amount and in the manner specified in the agreement. Unless otherwise agreed, interest is paid monthly until the date of repayment of the loan amount.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 810 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the borrower is obliged to return the loan amount received to the lender within the time frame and in the manner prescribed by the loan agreement.

By virtue of paragraph 2 of Art. 811 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if the loan agreement provides for the return of the loan in installments (in installments), then if the borrower violates the deadline established for the return of the next part of the loan, the lender has the right to demand early repayment of the entire remaining loan amount along with the interest due.

At the court hearing it was established, confirmed by the case materials and not disputed by the parties, that between OJSC AKB Probusinessbank (bank) and Kuzmin M.E. (borrower) DD.MM.YYYY year, a loan agreement No. No. was concluded, under the terms of which the borrower urgent needs a loan of 180,000 rubles was provided. for a period of 60 months. with payment of interest for using the loan in the amount of 0.10% per day.

The borrower, by virtue of clause 3.1.1 of the agreement, undertook, until the 10th day (inclusive) of each month, starting from December 2011, to ensure the availability of funds in the account or deposited in the bank’s cash desk in the amount of the monthly payment amount specified in the payment schedule, which is an integral part of the part of the contract. The monthly payment amount includes interest on the loan and part of the principal debt.

Clause 4.2 of the agreement provides that in case of untimely payment of the monthly payment in accordance with the payment schedule or untimely fulfillment of the bank’s request for early repayment debt (clause 5.3), the borrower undertakes to pay the bank a penalty in the amount of 0.5% of the amount of overdue debt for each day of delay.

According to clause 5.2 of the agreement, in case of delay, including a one-time delay in payment of the monthly payment (clause 3.1.1 of the agreement) for a period of more than 10 days, the bank has the right to terminate the agreement unilaterally out of court or demand early repayment of the loan and payment of interest for using the loan and penalties provided for in the contract.

JSCB Probusinessbank fulfilled its obligations to provide a loan in full, funds in the amount of 180,000 rubles. were provided to Kuzmin M.E., which is confirmed by the case materials and was not disputed by the parties.

In accordance with the order of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation No. OD-2071 dated August 12, 2015, the license to carry out banking operations was revoked from Probusinessbank JSCB, which can be seen from the decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court dated October 28, 2015. The specified court decision of JSCB Probusinessbank "Probusinessbank" was declared insolvent (bankrupt), a bankruptcy procedure was opened against it, and the State Corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency" was appointed as the bankruptcy manager.

According to the calculation attached to the claim, the amount of debt under loan agreement No. No. dated DD.MM.YYYY is 881,616.11 rubles, including: 106,978.00 rubles - the principal debt; 131,983.18 rubles - interest; 642,654.93 rubles – penalty.

However, when calculating the debt of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank represented by the bankruptcy trustee, it was not taken into account that there was a change in the terms of the loan agreement. The court was presented with a payment schedule under the loan agreement (original), from which it follows that from DD.MM.YYYY. the monthly payment amount became 4,000 rubles, the loan term and the total cost of the loan changed. (case sheet 204-206)

Despite the absence of an additional agreement between the borrower and the bank to the loan agreement dated DD.MM.YYYY. about changing its terms, a new payment schedule submitted by the borrower, signed by the parties and being an integral part of the loan agreement, cannot but be accepted by the court. In addition, from the debt calculation attached to the claim, it follows that indeed Kuzmin M.E. with DD.MM.YYYY. began making monthly payments to repay the loan in the amount of 4,000 rubles, i.e. taking into account the modified payment schedule, and in the period from DD.MM.YYYY. by DD.MM.YYYY. did not repay the loan, allowed late repayment of the loan, which indicates that the issue of restructuring the loan debt could be considered and was resolved.

At the request of the court, JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee, calculated the debt under the loan agreement dated DD.MM.YYYY. taking into account the new payment schedule presented by M.E. Kuzmin. According to this calculation, the debt of Kuzmin M.E. on the loan is 449,922 rubles. 50 kopecks, including: principal debt - 106,978 rubles, interest - 94,344.41 rubles, penalty - 248,600.09 rubles. The correctness of the calculation by the representative Kuzmin M.E. not disputed.

A penalty (fine, penalty) is recognized as determined by law or contract sum of money, which the debtor is obliged to pay to the creditor in the event of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of the obligation, in particular in case of delay in performance. (Article 330 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation)

By virtue of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if the penalty payable is clearly disproportionate to the consequences of violation of the obligation, the court has the right to reduce the penalty.

In accordance with the explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the resolution dated March 24, 2016. No. 7 “On the application by courts of certain provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on liability for violation of obligations”, paragraph 70 within the meaning of Articles 332,333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, establishing in the contract the maximum or minimum size(upper or lower limit) penalties are not an obstacle to its reduction by the court.

If the debtor is a commercial organization, individual entrepreneur, as well as a non-profit organization when it carries out income-generating activities, a reduction of the penalty by the court is allowed only upon a substantiated application of such a debtor, which can be made in any form. When collecting a penalty from other persons, the rules of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation can be applied not only at the request of the debtor, but also at the initiative of the court, if there is an obvious disproportion of the penalty to the consequences of violation of the obligation (clause 1 of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) clause 71.

Due to the disposition of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an important legally significant basis for its application is the obvious disproportion of the penalty to the consequences of violation of obligations. At the same time, a reduction in the amount of the penalty should not lead to an unjustified release of the debtor from liability for delay in fulfilling the requirements under the loan agreement. Applying this rule of law, the court establishes a balance between the measure of liability applied to the violator and the amount of actual damage caused as a result of the violation of the obligation, by reducing the amount of the penalty.

The existence of grounds for reducing the penalty and the definition of proportionality criteria are determined by the court in each case independently, based on the circumstances established in the case.

Criteria for establishing disproportionality may be: excessive high percent penalties, a significant excess of the amount of the penalty in the amount of possible losses caused by the violation of the obligation, the duration of the non-fulfillment of the obligation and other circumstances.

The degree of proportionality of the penalty claimed by the plaintiff to the consequences of breach of obligation is an evaluation category; only the court has the right to assess this criterion based on its internal conviction and the circumstances of a particular case.

The court, taking into account that the penalty by its nature is of a compensatory nature, is a way of ensuring the fulfillment of an obligation and should not serve as a means of enriching the creditor, and therefore must correspond to the consequences of violation of obligations, taking into account the obvious disproportion of the penalty due to the excess of the amount of the penalty to the amount of debt on the principal debt and interest , based on the circumstances established in the case, comes to the conclusion that the amount of the penalty collected from the defendant is reduced to 10,000 rubles.

Taking into account the above, the claims of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank represented by the bankruptcy trustee, the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, are subject to partial satisfaction.

At the same time, the court does not see any grounds for satisfying the counterclaims of Kuzmin M.E. under the circumstances stated below.

According to Part 2 of Article 452 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a demand for termination of a contract can be submitted by a party to the court only after receiving the refusal of the other party to the proposal to terminate the contract or failure to receive a response within the period specified in the proposal or established by law or the contract, and in its absence - in thirty days period.

As established at the court hearing by Kuzmin M.E. the requirement to terminate the loan agreement before filing a corresponding claim in court was not filed.

In accordance with Article 432 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an agreement is considered concluded if an agreement is reached between the parties, in the form required in appropriate cases, on all the essential terms of the 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.

According to Article 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, at the request of one of the parties, the contract can be changed or terminated by a court decision only: 1) in case of a significant violation of the contract by the other party; 2) in other cases provided for by this Code, other laws or the contract. A violation of the contract by one of the parties is considered significant, which entails such damage for the other party that it is significantly deprived of what it had the right to count on when concluding the contract.

According to paragraph 3 of Art. 154 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in order to conclude an agreement, it is necessary to express the agreed will of the two parties.

By virtue of Art. 421 Civil Code of the Russian Federation citizens and legal entities are free to enter into a contract.

From the totality of evidence presented in the case file, it follows that Kuzmin M.E. entered into a loan agreement with the bank with the payment of interest in the amount, terms and conditions set out in the agreement, the agreement was signed by him personally. Thus, the parties reached an agreement on all essential terms of the loan agreement and made necessary actions aimed at their implementation.

The court does not find a violation of paragraph 1 of Article 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” in relation to the arguments of the claim.

The arguments that, due to the revocation of the license of JSCB Probusinessbank and the closure of its office, there was no information about the details for repaying loan obligations and in this regard the borrower had no real opportunity to fulfill the obligation, are untenable.

So, by virtue of clause 1, part 12, art. 20 Federal Law dated 02.12.1990 N 395-1 “On Banks and Banking Activities”, in the period after the day of revocation of the license to carry out banking operations and before the day the decision of the arbitration court on declaring a credit organization insolvent (bankrupt) or on its liquidation enters into force, the credit organization has the right collect and receive debt, including for previously issued loans, return advance payments previously made by a credit institution, receive funds from the redemption of securities and income from securities owned by a credit institution.

According to the requirements of Articles 189.77, 189.78 of the Federal Law of October 26, 2002 N 127-FZ “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”, the bankruptcy trustee in the case of bankruptcy of credit institutions that had a license from the Bank of Russia to attract funds from individuals on deposits is, by force of law, the Agency. The Agency exercises the powers of the bankruptcy trustee through a representative appointed by him from among his employees, acting on the basis of a power of attorney. The bankruptcy trustee exercises the powers of the head of the credit organization and other management bodies of the credit organization within the limits, in the manner and on the conditions established by this paragraph.

The bankruptcy trustee by virtue of Part 4 of Art. 189.78 of this law is obliged to present to third parties who have a debt to the credit institution, demands for its collection in the manner established by this paragraph.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 189.74 of the Bankruptcy Law, the bankruptcy trustee within five working days from the date of his submission to the Bank of Russia of documents confirming his right to carry out transactions on the correspondent account of a credit organization declared bankrupt (or in the case of exercising the powers of a bankruptcy trustee by the Agency - from the date of opening the main account of the credit organization during bankruptcy proceedings), includes in the Unified Federal Register of Information on Bankruptcy and sends for publication in the official publication determined by the Government of the Russian Federation, "Bulletin of the Bank of Russia", an announcement about the decision of the arbitration court to declare the credit organization bankrupt and to open bankruptcy proceedings.

From the analysis of the above norms, it follows that information about the details of the bankruptcy trustee of JSCB Probusinessbank - GC "Deposit Insurance Agency" is publicly available, since it was published both in the official source and on the Agency's website on the Internet.

Under such circumstances, there are no difficulties in obtaining details for repaying the debt under the loan agreement from Kuzmin M.E. there was none, and therefore his statements about the absence of guilt in the delay in fulfilling obligations cannot be accepted and the court does not see any grounds provided by law for releasing the borrower from paying interest and penalties (in full).

According to paragraph 1 of Article 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a creditor is considered delinquent if he refused to accept the proper performance proposed by the debtor or did not perform actions provided for by law, other legal acts or agreement, or arising from business customs or from the essence of the obligation, before the commission of which the debtor could not fulfill your obligation.

By virtue of paragraph 3 of Article 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, on a monetary obligation, the debtor is not obliged to pay interest during the creditor’s delay.

During the consideration of the case, the defendant-plaintiff in the counterclaim did not provide evidence confirming the proper fulfillment of the obligation and the creditor’s delay. In itself, the introduction of bankruptcy proceedings, the revocation of the plaintiff’s license to carry out banking operations, are not grounds that relieve the borrower from fulfilling his obligations to the lender to repay the loan and interest for using the loan. In addition, the opportunity to fulfill the obligation by depositing the debt with a notary, as provided for in Art. 327 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the borrower did not use it.

According to Art. 56 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections, unless otherwise provided by federal law.

Evidence of proper fulfillment of its obligations under the loan Kuzmin M.E. did not submit, the fact of the existence of the debt was not refuted, the calculation of the debt presented at the request of the court is not disputed.

No evidence was presented that the plaintiff, due to the revocation of his license, refused to accept regular payments.

Witness FULL NAME1. at the court hearing she explained that DD.MM.YYYY., she remembers the date exactly because it was the last Friday of the summer and she was getting the child ready for school, she and Kuzmin M.E., with whom she is on friendly terms, went to the city .Sovetsk. Kuzmin M.E. went to the Probusinessbank office, but the doors were closed, she was sitting in the car and saw it. Kuzmin M.E. said that he took the details for paying the loan and they went together to Sberbank to pay the loan, but the payment using these details did not go through. Then they went to Energotranbank, but there they were told that Probusinessbank was closed and they would not even try to make a payment. After that, they also turned to Rosselkhozbank and Euroset, but Kuzmin M.E. was unable to do so. pay the loan. At the end of December 2015, they went together to Kaliningrad, Kuzmin M.E. I stopped by the offices of Probusinessbank on Leninsky and Sovetsky Prospects, but they were closed. She didn’t ask, but Kuzmin M.E. he himself did not say whether there is information on the bank doors about the details for paying for loans. In mid-2016, Kuzmin M.E. he received a letter stating that he had a loan debt; he did not say whether this letter contained information about where payments should be made. There were no further conversations with him regarding the Probusinessbank loan.

The court is critical of the testimony of this witness, who has been on friendly terms with M.E. Kuzmin for a long time. In addition, the fact that the doors of the offices of Probusinessbank JSCB were closed does not indicate that Kuzmin M.E. was deprived of the opportunity to pay the next loan payment at another credit institution. No evidence was presented to the court to support these arguments.

In the case materials there is a requirement to repay the amount owed on the loan. The specified demand was sent to the address of Kuzmin M.E., indicated by him when receiving the loan, which is confirmed by a list of internal mailings and a receipt, however, even after receiving this demand, the defendant did not take any actions aimed at repaying the debt under the loan agreement .

After the license was revoked and the bank was declared insolvent (bankrupt), the Bank twice sent mailings to M.E. Kuzmin. notifications indicating payment details, including ID, which is confirmed by postal registers, the text of notifications (case sheet 164-171)

Taking into account the above, the court does not see any grounds for terminating the loan agreement from the date of August 28, 2015.

The court, taking into account the provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Protection of Consumer Rights", as well as the provisions of civil legislation on the conclusion and termination of contracts, the fulfillment of obligations, on a loan agreement, the requirements of Article 56 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, comes to the conclusion that there is no admissible, reliable and sufficient evidence violation by the bank of the rights of Kuzmin M.E. as a consumer.

Since the violation of the rights of Kuzmin M.E. as a consumer was not established during the trial, and there are no grounds for compensation for moral damage.

At the court hearing it was established that Kuzmin M.E. did not send letters, claims, demands to the bank (Agency), in this regard, it cannot be said that the bank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee, did not voluntarily satisfy the consumer’s demands, and therefore, the provisions provided for in paragraph 6 of Art. 13 of the Law “On Protection of Consumer Rights” fine.

According to Article 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the party in whose favor the court decision was made, the court awards compensation from the other party for all expenses incurred in the case court expenses. If the claim is partially satisfied, legal costs are awarded to the plaintiff in proportion to the amount of the claims satisfied by the court.

According to the explanations contained in paragraph 21 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 21, 2016 No. 1 “On some issues of application of legislation on compensation of costs associated with the consideration of a case,” the provisions of procedural legislation on proportional compensation (distribution) of legal costs (Article 98, 102, 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) are not subject to application when resolving a claim for the collection of a penalty, which is reduced by the court due to the disproportion to the consequences of breach of obligation, the receipt by the creditor of unjustified benefits (Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Taking into account the above, the court’s reduction of the amount of the penalty on the basis of the provisions of Art. 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not entail a reduction in the amount of state duty payable.

Guided by Article 194-198 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court

The claims of JSCB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee, the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, against Mikhail Evgenievich Kuzmin for debt collection are partially satisfied.

To collect from Mikhail Evgenievich Kuzmin in favor of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank represented by the bankruptcy trustee, the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, the debt under the loan agreement No. No. dated DD.MM.YYYY. in the amount of 211,322 rubles. 41 kopecks, including: principal debt - 106,978 rubles, interest - 94,344.41 rubles, penalty - 10,000 rubles, as well as a refund of paid state duty 8,210 rubles, total 219,532.41 rubles .

The counterclaim of Mikhail Evgenievich Kuzmin against OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank represented by the bankruptcy trustee, the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, for termination of the loan agreement from the date of contacting the bank’s office, recovery of compensation for moral damages, a fine and offset of awarded amounts is rejected.

The decision can be appealed to the Kaliningrad Regional Court through the Slavsky District Court within a month from the date the court made the decision in final form.

Many borrowers naively believe that if the license of the creditor bank is revoked, they no longer owe anyone. This assumption is erroneous, since the money will still have to be returned, albeit to other financial organizations. This is exactly what happened with Probusinessbank, whose license was revoked. We will tell you further about where to pay the Probusinessbank loan, as well as why you should not hesitate to pay it off.

Brief history of Probusinessbank

Probusinessbank is one of the largest Russian banks in the Russian Federation, part of Financial Group"Life". The time of its creation falls on the not so distant 1993. Since its opening, this financial organization has specialized exclusively in servicing and lending to private and corporate clients.

Probusinessbank: license revoked, where to pay the loan?

Unexpectedly for all its clients, Probusinessbank announced protracted financial problems and possible bankruptcy. In August 2015, this information was confirmed by representatives of the Central Bank of Russia. At the same time, persons authorized by the regulator arrived at the bank building, where they conducted a global inspection, as a result of which the organization lost its license.

The official statement of the regulator stated that the reason for revoking the license of the credit institution was the implementation of a high-risk financial policy. According to preliminary data, it was associated with investing cash savings in low-quality assets. As a result, the organization's reserve cash reserves could not withstand the financial risks that arose, and the bank found itself on the verge of bankruptcy. We will tell you further about where to pay the Probusinessbank loan to those citizens who previously took out a loan from it.

Problems with borrowed funds: what to do?

The bankruptcy of Probusinessbank was a real shock for individuals and other clients financial organization who previously took out a loan here. Many of them were simply confused, not knowing where to turn, to whom and what to do now with the loan payment. What to do in such situations?

Firstly, if a bank’s license is revoked, there is no need to panic. All financial questions sooner or later they will decide. Secondly, it is better not to choose a position of waiting. To clarify the situation regarding loans, you must contact the competent authorities. Thus, information about banks to which the rights to accept cash payments, including loans, are transferred is indicated on the official page of the Central Bank, the Arbitration Court and the Deposit Insurance Agency. In total, such data appears approximately 10-14 days from the date of license revocation. Here's what you need to do if you have questions due to the fact that Probusinessbank is closed. Where to pay the loan?

Which banks should I contact to repay my loan?

According to the message that appeared on the official page of the Agency on September 14, 2015, you can pay for loans from the former Probusinessbank in all branches of the Russian Capital bank.

So, if you don’t know where to pay a Probusinessbank loan, pay attention to the addresses of Russian Capital Bank branches presented below.

On September 23, 2015, a message regarding Transcapitalbank PJSC also appeared on the website. According to this information, to this bank it was also allowed to accept credit and other payments from citizens who had previously obtained loans from the bankrupt Probusinessbank.

For example, the loan payment can be made at the subsidiary Armavirsky (Krasnodar branch of TKB Bank PJSC), located in the city of Armavir on Komsomolskaya Street, 107. Still don’t know where to pay the loan taken from Probusinessbank? Please pay attention to the following branches of PJSC Transcapitalbank (TBK):

• Novosibirsk branch of the NGO "Altai".
• Voronezh branch of the NGO "Belgorodsky".
• Bryansk and Perm branches.
• Yekaterinburg branch of the subsidiary company "Severny" and others.

What other banks can you pay for a loan at?

If you have not yet decided where to pay your Probusinessbank loan, pay attention to the branches of the following banks:

• OJSC AIKB Tatfondbank.
• PJSC Sovcombank.

The branch addresses of the above bank branches can be found below. In addition, anyone wishing to pay their loan can contact the cashier. It is located in Moscow on Lesnaya Street, 59, building 2. If you have any questions about the operation of the cash desk, you can ask by phone hotline 8-800-200-08-05. Sovcombank branches are listed below.

Why shouldn’t you delay paying off your loan?

So, Probusinessbank is closed. Where to pay the loan now? This question interests many borrowers. They often ask this question to the temporary administration of a bankrupt bank. But people who are busy solving completely different issues can answer you something like: “No one knows anything yet. As soon as something becomes clear, we will contact you."

Having heard this, most borrowers will go home with peace of mind and wait for a call from the bank. However, such an expectation can lead to completely the opposite effect. A typical situation looks like this. Let’s say that the day before the license was revoked, the client arranged an overdraft at the bank, then they promised to inform him of the details of the subsequent payment of the loan. But the borrower received the message only a year and a half later, and in the form of a claim indicating the amount of debt, penalties and fines accrued during the period of delay.

That is why you should not wait for weather by the sea. It is better to stay in the center of events, monitor all the news related to his future fate, and also receive information from official sources.

A court case from a Petrozavodsk lawyer about protecting the interests of a citizen against Probusinessbank on a loan. Interest and penalties were recovered, Art. 406, 333 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

I was approached by a citizen who became a defendant in a lawsuit by Probusinessbank. They want to get almost two million rubles from a citizen, despite the fact that this bank became bankrupt and the person could not pay the loan, because... The account details changed, but the bank did not inform about it.
I accepted the case for proceedings, objections were written, it was stated that the penalties were disproportionate, under Art. 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, about the creditor’s delay, under Art. 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a witness was heard, and in the end I won the case completely. Of the 2,000,000 rubles, only the body of the loan was collected, which the defendant did not argue with, and interest and penalties for one million three hundred were removed. The court found that there was a delay by the creditor. Our position in the case was fully recognized by the court and this allowed us to win the case. Later, the magazine “These Are Stories” wrote about this case.

Case No. 2-2017 DECISION
IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION On March 31, 2017, Petrozavodsk, the Petrozavodsk City Court of the Republic of Karelia, consisting of: presiding judge N., with secretary N., having considered in open court a civil case on the claim of OJSC JSCB "Probusinessbank" represented by the bankruptcy trustee of the State Corporation "Insurance Agency" deposits" to Anatoly Yuryevich Ivanov regarding the collection of debt under a loan agreement, established:

OJSC AKB Probusinessbank, represented by the bankruptcy trustee of the State Corporation Deposit Insurance Agency, filed a lawsuit against A.Yu. Ivanov. on the grounds that on 08/07/2012, a loan agreement No. 774-34894074-810/12f was concluded between JSCB Probusinessbank and the defendant to provide a loan in the amount of 850,000 rubles. for 120 months with an interest rate for using the loan of 0.08% per day. Due to improper fulfillment of obligations under the loan agreement, as of 01/09/2017, a debt was formed in the amount of 2,083,703.16 rubles, including the amount of urgent principal debt - 726,411.89 rubles, the amount of overdue principal debt - 58,583, 12 rub., amount urgent interest- 8135.81 rubles, amount of overdue interest - 314447.88 rubles, amount of interest on overdue principal debt - 11510.17 rubles, penalties on overdue principal debt - 143877.14 rubles, penalties on overdue interest - 820737 ,15 rub. Based on the above, the plaintiff asks to recover from the defendant the amount of debt under the loan agreement in the amount of 2,083,703.16 rubles, and to reimburse the costs of paying the state duty at the defendant’s expense.
The plaintiff’s representative did not appear at the court hearing; they were duly notified of the time and place of the consideration of the case; they asked to consider the case without the participation of a representative; they provided additional written explanations. Defendant Ivanov A.Yu. did not appear at the court hearing, was duly notified of the time and place of the hearing of the case, and sent a representative to the court.
The representative of the defendant Samsonov M.S., acting by proxy, admitted the claims in part on the grounds set out in the written explanations, indicating that the defendant, from the moment of execution of the loan agreement, properly fulfilled his obligations, made payments on the loan at his place of residence in the city. Medvezhyegorsk Having arrived to make the next payment in September 2015, I found that the bank branch had closed and there was no information about the payment procedure. Subsequently, by mail or in any other way, there was no notification of new details by which payments could be made; attempts to deposit money using the details available in the agreement through other banks were unsuccessful. The representative asks to take into account that from the moment the plaintiff’s bankruptcy procedure was introduced, the account details The plaintiff has changed, but no one notified the defendant about this. It is believed that there is a delay by the creditor.
Having heard the persons who arrived, questioned the witness, and examined the evidence presented, the court comes to the following conclusions.
By virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 810, paragraph 2 of Article 811 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the borrower is obliged to return to the lender the received loan amount on time and in the manner prescribed by the loan agreement. If the loan agreement provides for the return of the loan in installments (in installments), then if the borrower violates the deadline established for the return of the next part of the loan, the lender has the right to demand early repayment of the entire remaining loan amount along with the interest due. According to Article 309 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, obligations must be fulfilled properly in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the law and other legal acts.
The court found that on August 7, 2012, between OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank and Ivanov A.Yu. a loan agreement No. 774-34894074-810/12f was concluded to provide a loan in the amount of 850,000 rubles. with an interest rate for using the loan of 0.08% per day, for a period of 120 months. The plaintiff fulfilled his obligations to provide a loan in full - in the amount of 850,000 rubles. is confirmed by the account statement and is not disputed by the defendant.
According to the plaintiff, due to failure to make payments on the loan, the defendant incurred a debt in the amount of 2,083,703.16 rubles, including the amount of urgent principal debt - 726,411.89 rubles, the amount of overdue principal debt - 58,583.12 rubles, the amount of urgent interest - 8135.81 rubles, amount of overdue interest - 314447.88 rubles, amount of interest on overdue principal debt - 11510.17 rubles, penalties on overdue principal debt - 143877.14 rubles, penalties on overdue interest - 820737 ,15 rub.
The plaintiff provided information on the structure of the debt and calculation of the amount of the claim as of January 9, 2017. Taking into account the circumstances established in the case, the position of the defendant, the court considers it justified to collect the amount of the overdue and urgent principal amount, as well as the amount of urgent interest, in the total amount of 793,130.82 rubles. From the grandfather’s materials it follows that the defendant received a loan but did not repay it in full, the loan was issued on a reimbursable basis, at an agreed interest rate for use.
The defendant’s arguments about the need to reduce the amount of debt by the amount of withheld commissions, which, in his opinion, were not agreed upon with Ivanov A.Yu., the court finds unfounded, since the court considers the plaintiff’s claim within the limits of the stated requirements, taking into account Part 3 of Art. 196 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, no fees are provided for in the claimed debt, the defendant raises a question regarding amounts that were previously withheld from the defendant’s funds, some amounts were withheld more than three years ago, with a counterclaim to challenge any terms of the agreement between the parties, the defendant didn't apply. In the written response, the plaintiff also refers to the fact that a bank account agreement was concluded between the parties; the detailed terms of such an agreement were not presented to the court by any of the parties. In this connection, Ivanov A.Yu. is not deprived of the right to file an independent claim in court for these amounts. The court takes into account the same reasons when refusing to reduce the amount of debt by the amount of the insurance premium.
The defendant's arguments with reference to the Review judicial practice in civil cases related to the resolution of disputes about the fulfillment of loan obligations, are not taken into account, since in the framework of this dispute there is no reason to believe that the commission for opening and maintaining a loan account is withheld at the expense of the defendant. At the same time, the court believes that the defendant’s arguments about the creditor’s delay deserve attention. ^ "So, in accordance with Article 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the creditor is considered to be in default if he refused to accept the proper performance proposed by the debtor or did not perform actions provided for by law, other legal acts or agreement, or arising from customs or from the essence of the obligation, before the fulfillment of which the debtor could not fulfill his obligation.
The creditor is not considered to be in default if the debtor was unable to fulfill the obligation, regardless of the fact that the creditor did not take the actions provided for in paragraph one of this paragraph. Under a monetary obligation, the debtor is not required to pay interest during the creditor's delay. In paragraph 1 of Art. 401 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes that a person who fails to fulfill an obligation or performs it improperly is liable in the presence of guilt (intention or negligence), except in cases where the law or contract provides for other grounds for liability. A person is considered innocent if, with the degree of care and prudence required of him by the nature of the obligation and the conditions of turnover, he took all measures for the proper fulfillment of the obligation. Clause 3.1.1 of the loan agreement states that the borrower undertakes, by the 25th day inclusive of each month, starting from September 2012, to ensure that funds in the amount of the monthly payment are available in the account or deposited in the Bank's cash desk.
The agreement contains information about the plaintiff’s details, which can be used to repay the loan. From the account statement it follows that until August 2015 the defendant faithfully fulfilled his obligations to pay the loan.
The court found that by order of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation dated August 12, 2015 No. OD-2071, the license of JSCB Probusinessbank was revoked. By the decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court dated October 28, 2015 in case No. A40-154909/2015, the plaintiff was declared insolvent (bankrupt), and bankruptcy proceedings were opened against him. The functions of the bankruptcy trustee are assigned to the State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency”. At the same time, the Federal Law “On the Insolvency (Bankruptcy) of Credit Institutions,” to which the defendant refers, lost force on December 22, 2014. However, according to Art. 20 of the Federal Law of December 2, 1990 No. 395-1 “On Banks and banking» after the revocation of a credit organization’s license to carry out banking operations, the credit organization must be liquidated in accordance with the requirements of Article 23.1 of this Federal Law, and if it is declared bankrupt - in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”. After the revocation of a credit institution’s license to carry out banking operations, the Bank of Russia, no later than the business day following the day of revocation of the said license, appoints a temporary administration to the credit institution in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 4.1 of Chapter IX of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”; performs the actions provided for in Article 23.1 of this Federal Law.
By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 189.88 of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”, the bankruptcy trustee is obliged to use during bankruptcy proceedings only one correspondent account of a credit organization declared bankrupt for funds in the currency of the Russian Federation - the main account of the credit organization opened with the Bank of Russia, and also depending on the number of types of foreign currency available to a credit institution - the required number of accounts of a credit institution for funds in foreign currency opened with other credit institutions in the manner established by the Bank of Russia.
The fact that the plaintiff’s account details changed after the bank’s license was revoked is not disputed by the plaintiff. According to the defendant, in August 2Q15, a branch of the plaintiff bank at his place of residence was closed, no information about the procedure for repaying the loan was provided, they attempted to make loan payments through other banks, but the money did not go to the account specified in the agreement. The delay was due to the fault of the plaintiff. The relevant circumstances were also confirmed by witness E.G. Ivanova, who is the plaintiff’s wife, who indicated that they (and the defendant) made attempts to clarify how to fulfill their obligations further, but even the bank employees in Medvezhyegorsk, who could not answer this question previously worked at OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank, the latter reported that it was necessary to expect written notification. Other banks did not accept payments on the plaintiff's loans because the payments were returned.
The court has no reason not to trust the testimony of the witness; the witness gave testimony that is consistent with the position of the defendant; before giving testimony, the witness was warned about criminal liability under Art. 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Thus, the plaintiff himself, JSCB Probusinessbank, did not perform the actions provided for by law, before which the debtor could not fulfill his obligation. There is no reason to believe that the defendant was unable to fulfill the obligation, since earlier, as the court already indicated, Ivanov A.Yu. made loan payments in good faith.
The plaintiff’s arguments that written notifications with new details were sent to the defendant on November 26, 2015 and February 25, 2016 cannot be taken into account, since no evidence of delivery of such notifications to the defendant was presented, and the defendant himself does not confirm receipt of the relevant correspondence. A written demand to the defendant, which indicated the details, was sent according to the postal receipt on 01/17/2017, while the cost of the claim was calculated as of 01/09/2017. In addition, no evidence was presented to the court that the defendant received this demand.
The court notes that the defendant has not changed his phone number since the execution of the loan agreement by other means ( phone call, SMS notification, etc.) the defendant was not notified of the procedure for fulfilling obligations under the contract, and in the absence of new details Ivanov A.Yu. I couldn’t make the next loan payment. At the same time, the defendant had no obligation to independently study information on the Internet, since this was not provided for in the contract. The plaintiff’s references to the public availability of information about the recognition of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank as bankrupt do not relieve the latter of the obligation to provide its debtor with reliable information about the procedure for fulfilling obligations under the contract.
Provisions of paragraph 4 of Art. 12 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” require the bank to proceed from the assumption that the consumer does not have special knowledge about the properties and characteristics of the product (work, service). The provisions of Article 327 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation speak of the debtor’s right to deposit funds with the notary, and not of his obligation.
These circumstances, taking into account the provisions of paragraph 3 of Art. 406 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation indicate that Ivanov A.Yu. is not obliged to pay interest during the delay of the creditor, namely overdue interest in the amount of 314,447.88 rubles, which, however, does not deprive the plaintiff of receiving, at the expense of the defendant, a fee for using the loan from the moment of notification of new details until full repayment loan amount. The plaintiff also seeks punitive damages in the total amount of 964,614.29 rubles. According to Art. 330 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a penalty (fine, penalty) is a sum of money determined by law or contract, which the debtor is obliged to pay to the creditor in the event of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of an obligation, in particular in the case of delay in fulfillment. Upon a claim for payment of a penalty, the creditor is not required to prove that he suffered losses.
The creditor has no right to demand payment of a penalty if the debtor is not responsible for non-fulfillment or improper execution obligations. The court found that the borrower was not at fault for failing to fulfill his obligations; payment of the penalty presupposes the debtor's culpable failure to fulfill his obligations. In view of the above, the plaintiff’s demands to recover the amount of penalties from the defendant are not justified and cannot be satisfied. Thus, with Ivanov A.Yu. the debt under the loan agreement is subject to collection in the total amount of RUB 793,130.82.
By virtue of Article 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, a state duty is subject to recovery from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff in the amount based on the satisfied part of the claim (the claim is satisfied by 38.06%).

Guided by Art. Art. 98, 194-198 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court decided:
The claims are partially satisfied.
To collect from Anatoly Yuryevich Ivanov in favor of OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank for the debt under the loan agreement of 793,130.82 rubles, and for the cost of paying the state duty of 7,086.20 rubles. The rest of the claim is denied.
The decision may be appealed against in Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia within a month from the date of the court’s decision in final form through the Petrozavodsk City Court of the Republic of Karelia.

1. Probusinessbank, represented by DIA, filed a claim in court for the return of credit card debt after the statute of limitations had expired and lost the claim, but then filed an appeal, citing clause 3, art. 202 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, that he did not violate the deadlines, since he sent me the Demand out of court and thereby increased the deadline limitation period for 6 months. But the Request that I received indicated a Loan Agreement that does not exist. Can such a Demand be considered an out-of-court resolution of the dispute and how best to protect yourself in this situation.

Lawyer Shaposhnikov A. M., 365 answers, 215 reviews, on the site from 02/08/2019
1.1. Statute of limitations general rule 3 years. The bank cannot extend the limitation period by its demand. For more detailed advice, please contact any lawyer on the site.

Lawyer Lebedev A.V., 60 answers, 38 reviews, on the site since November 30, 2018
1.2. What kind of agreement is specified in the request?

Lawyer Soldat S.V., 3997 answers, 2687 reviews, on the site from 01/22/2018
1.3. Hello Svetlana Alexandrovna! Limitation period for credit card begins to flow from the moment the final claim (final invoice) is presented to you. If, after the cancellation of the court order, less than 6 months remain before the expiration of the limitation period, then the limitation period is extended for the specified period.

"How to win a lawsuit against a bank over a loan"

"How to win a lawsuit against a bank over a loan - a case for 5.6 million rubles."

"How to cancel a court decision in a case of debt collection under a loan agreement"

2. In the court decision, instead of the plaintiff “Competition manager of OJSC Probusinessbank”, as in the statement of claim, it is written simply OJSC Probusinessbank. It is not clear who is the plaintiff now?

Lawyer Lipatova L. R., 252 answers, 127 reviews, on the site from 06/21/2019
2.1. Hello. The plaintiff has the right to apply for correction of an error in the writ of execution.

3. I took out a loan from Probusinessbank in 2014 for 25 thousand, it closed, I received a letter from the Federal Social Security Service to recover 137 thousand, what should I do?

3.1. Good afternoon.
Your problem is not unique; now many clients of this bank are receiving Court Orders. I will write to you in more detail about this in a personal message, please take a look. Most likely, a court order was issued; it is issued without summoning the parties and without trial. You have the right to cancel this Court Order. To do this, you need to write your objection and send it to the court that issued the Court Order.
In accordance with Art. 129 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation

Lawyer Shinyaev N. M., 1348 answers, 958 reviews, on the site from 03/01/2019
3.2. Go to the bailiffs and find out what you have judgment or court order, then restore the terms, appeal or cancel.

4. I took out a loan in 2013 of 100,000 from a probusiness bank, I paid for some time, then I didn’t pay, then somehow I decided to pay and it went bankrupt, I received a letter to the bailiffs with a debt of 347,000. What to do now, it’s useless, there’s no way to reduce the debt? I understand that it’s my own fault that I didn’t pay, that’s what happened.

Lawyer Kozyrev P. A., 2309 answers, 1529 reviews, on the site from 01/22/2019
4.1. If you have a court order, it can be canceled in accordance with Art. 128-129 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, you need to know the final judicial act in order to advise you in more detail.
Sincerely!

7. In June 2015, my wife and I applied for a loan. She’s at Sberbank, I’m at Probusinessbank. I was approved somehow quickly, but my wife was delayed in answering. I had to get it from Probusinessbank. After some time, the loan was approved for my wife. Comparing interest rate It was decided to repay the loan in full from Probusinessbank. Having asked this question, they said that it would be advisable to pay at least the first payment. Which is what was done. A little more than a week after payment I made a full payment. I received a receipt and a certificate of no debt. After more than two and a half years, an ABC representative called and presented the debt to the bank. Accordingly, I no longer have any documents confirming payment. Then the trial. then the bailiffs did not receive any summons to the court. I have not received a court decision. The trial took place in July 2018. I learned about the enforcement proceedings on March 4, 2019. The court filed an appeal soon. TELL ME WHAT TO DO.

Lawyer Makarov V.A., 3314 answers, 2085 reviews, on the site since 06/09/2004
7.1. Defend your rights in court, demand calculation of the debt and check the legality of its accrual.

8. 12/19/14 I took out a loan from Probusinessbank. Since 08.15 payments have not been deposited into the account, new details were sent, payments did not go through. She called and said wait for a letter. A letter arrived, a court decision from the bailiffs about a debt three times higher. The court order states that the correspondence was sent to the address Moscow, st. Lesnaya, 59 building, 2.. I was passing there on 02.16.
Court order dated September 18, 2018
Resolution on initiation enforcement proceedings 02/19/19
I received the letter on April 15, 2019. Is there any hope of reducing the amount?

Lawyer Shulga S.V., 284 answers, 199 reviews, on the site from 02/01/2017
8.1. Hello! You need to cancel the court order. And in the event of a lawsuit, you can petition the court to reduce the penalty. In general, you need to get acquainted with the terms of the contract and the circumstances for a more detailed answer.

10. Yesterday bailiffs sent a letter Debt of 301,000 thousand, probusinessbank has been bankrupt for a long time, we did not know where to pay, before this we paid on time. Please tell me what to do?

10.1. Hello!
In your case, you can cancel the court act and write off the debt!
Specify the name of the court.

Lawyer Radchenko A.I., 18 answers, 14 reviews, on the site from 04/17/2019
10.2. You need to go and get acquainted with the materials of the enforcement proceedings from the bailiff on the reception day. Find out on what basis it was initiated, on the basis of a court decision or court order.
If you were not notified about the trial (no letters arrived), then there is a chance that court order cancel. This can help subsequently reduce the amount of debt or at least delay its forced collection.
Maybe in your case you should think about declaring yourself insolvent (bankrupt) in order to write off the amount of debt. However, everything is not so simple here and you need to weigh the pros and cons (after consulting with a lawyer).
The fact that the bank went bankrupt does not mean that its rights of claim against you have disappeared. The bank could assign it under an assignment agreement before bankruptcy, or the debt could be collected by the Deposit Insurance Agency as a bankruptcy trustee in a bankruptcy case.
The bank's website contains the following:

At a meeting of the Moscow Arbitration Court in case No. A 40-154909/15 on October 27, 2015, the operative part of the decision on the recognition of JOINT-STOCK COMMERCIAL BANK "PROBUSINESSBANK" (OPEN JOINT-STOCK COMPANY) (OJSC JSCB "Probusinessbank"), registered at the address: 119285, was announced , Moscow, st. Pudovkina, 3, OGRN 1027700508978, TIN 7729086087, address used for information disclosure - www.asv.org.ru, insolvent (bankrupt). The State Corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency" has been appointed as the bankruptcy manager.
For additional information, you can call: 8-800-200-08-05.
DIA information regarding JSCB Probusinessbank:

Information about details for loan repayment:

In any case, you need to get more information, and then contact a specialist about what can be done.

Lawyer Gumerov K.R., 761 answers, 315 reviews, on the site from 03/25/2019
10.3. Is 301,000 thousand equal to 301 million? Talk to credit lawyer or a lawyer.

11. On August 12, 2012, he received a loan from OJSC AKB ProbusinessBank in the amount of 200,000 rubles, under agreement No. 774-34918108810/12 f. By decision of the arbitration court on October 27, 2015, case No. A 40-154909/2015, Moscow Bank Probusinessbank was declared bankrupt. The next day, October 28, 2015, the Arbitration Court of Moscow in case No. A 40-154909/15 appointed the Deposit Insurance Agency as bankruptcy trustee. 07/15/2015 last payment there were no reports that with Probusiness Bank, the Criminal Code was filing in absentia on December 16, 2015 with the Court. for the recovery of 60,000 and after that 3 more different courts and the amount of recovery increased to 173,161.93, penalties 142,231.93 rubles. He filed an appeal, to terminate the loan agreement, and to cancel the last decision of the court of first instance. The contract states; penalty 1% per day, clause 4.3.. fifthly, repayment of loan debt.

Lawyer Sokolova A.V., 1687 answers, 1017 reviews, on the site since 02/26/2019
11.1. And what about your appeal?
In general, of course, asking to “terminate the loan agreement” in an appeal is strong))) This is what happens when citizens themselves go to court, bypassing lawyers.

12. 04/19/2019 (Friday, envelope dated 04/16/2019) received a letter by mail (a ruling on preparing the case for trial), proceedings regarding non-repayment of a loan from Probusinessbank (bankrupt bank), it says that I, as a defendant, need to On April 22 (Monday) submit a written response to the claim. The trial was set for April 26. Naturally, no lawyer works on weekends. On Monday you can make an appointment with a lawyer, but only during the week. How much time is required by law to be given to prepare for the trial?

Lawyer Maryutina E.N., 402 replies, 267 reviews, on the site from 02/05/2019
12.1. Preparing the case for a court hearing is a conversation during which the judge explains the rights and obligations of the parties, then a court hearing will be scheduled, at which you must submit written objections to the claim, so that you have two weeks.

20. How to reduce interest on a loan? My father took out a credit card from Probusinessbank in 2015 and didn’t tell anyone about it. (amount of 21,000 rubles until 2020 according to the contract, he had a couple of repayments, the debt remained 17,760 rubles). In 2015, the bank had difficulties, as a result of which a bankruptcy trustee was appointed, the bank notified my father in writing about the current situation, but he received the letter, did not tell us and threw it away. We found out about the loan by accident when they started calling from the Premium Insurance Agency last fall. I myself had to find out through the equifax service about the availability of loans. Then, in December last year, an order came from the district court to recover an amount in the region of 46 thousand. We wrote objections to the court and the judge canceled the court order. Last week we received a statement of claim from the court, it already states the payment of an amount of 63,700 rubles, but they are ready to reduce us
accrued fines, a total of 51,200 rubles payable. Question: can we somehow fight and reduce the %? Thanks in advance!

Lawyer Averkova T.N., 9951 answers, 7576 reviews, on the site from 04/11/2017
20.1. Hello Julia!
In accordance with Art. 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the amount of fines and penalties should not exceed the amount of the principal debt, plus the statute of limitations for going to court is 3 years. Since your father's last payment.

Lawyer Kopylov A. S., 104 answers, 66 reviews, on the site from 02.26.2019
20.2. To answer your question in detail, you need to look at the agreement with the bank. We can say for sure that you can reduce the amount of debt by agreement with the bank. Again, if your father has property, then repaying the loan is relevant; if there is no property, then whether you repay this loan or not, from the point of view of the consequences, does not matter.

20.3. Don't even think about paying, because... reset the limitation period missed by the bank 3 years from the last payment. Hire a lawyer in person to draft objections to the claim and represent your interests in court. You will do a lot of things without a lawyer.

Lawyer Lyapin A. O., 305 answers, 95 reviews, on the site since 10/06/2008
20.4. Yes, interest can be reduced to the amount of the principal debt at the time the bank’s license was revoked, since there was a delay by the creditor. But it will be difficult for you to prepare your own objections to the claim. You can call me at the number indicated in my profile and sign up for a free consultation.

21. I have a problem with the bank "Probusinessbank" their license was taken away and due to the fact that I was not notified about the further actions of the bank, details, etc. I didn’t mind paying, only they stopped accepting payments and said what’s wrong with you They will contact you and tell you everything, now 3 years later they are charging you a crazy amount of money, fines and penalties! What to do in this situation, do you have a recommendation for lawyers in Belgorod, where could you go?

Law firm Protasov M.A., 676 answers, 298 reviews, on the site since 11/19/2015
21.2. A court order can be canceled by filing an objection to its execution. To answer your question, it is IMPORTANT to understand when you properly were notified of the issuance of the joint venture. You don't talk about this in your question, but it's important. You can calculate the period if you know the details.

P.S. The Deposit Insurance Agency (DIA) is the bankruptcy trustee in the bankruptcy case of a pro-business bank, which has not yet been completed.

22. A court order came to foreclose on a loan from a pro-business bank, my wife and I took out a loan for 60,000, so she received the same thing, they paid for a year until it closed, no one accepted our payments, but last week they woke up and charged a cosmic amount. What do you advise? Thank you.

Lawyer Boldyrev R.I., 4003 answers, 2253 reviews, on the site from 07/26/2017
22.1. Hello Sergey!
Send objections to the court to cancel the court order.

Lawyer Prokhorko T.N., 1323 answers, 878 reviews, on the site from 02/08/2018
22.2. Good afternoon
Write objections to the court order, then they will be forced to go to court and prove the amount, just don’t be late, this must be done within 10 days from the date the order was issued.

22.3. The order must be canceled before 10 days have passed, nothing must be paid under any circumstances, you need to consider the statute of limitations on the loan, perhaps they have already partially or completely expired, then declare this in court, also ask to reduce the penalty to the maximum, you will need everything study documents and write objections. Now the main thing is to cancel the order in a timely manner.

23. Probusinessbank’s license was revoked and I stopped paying the loan.

Because I did not receive any official notification about where I should transfer the contributions.
Now a decision has been received to initiate enforcement proceedings. The resolution says that the trial took place on October 16, 2018, I was not in court, I didn’t even know anything. How to cancel a court decision. The amount is much too high.

Lawyer Kudrin O. E., 15129 answers, 8098 reviews, on the site since 03/20/2015
23.1. Good afternoon.
Most likely, a court order was issued; it is issued without summoning the parties and without trial.
Almost always, an MFO or bank provides an inflated estimate of the debt to the court.
You have the right to cancel this Court Order. To do this, you need to write your objection and send it to the court that issued the Court Order.
In accordance with Art. 129 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the judge cancels the court order if the debtor within the prescribed period receives objections regarding its execution.
If everything is done correctly, it will definitely be cancelled. It is imperative to cancel the Court Order, otherwise you will get a debt that is not clear by whom and how it was calculated. Just don’t try to cancel the Court Order yourself. If you make a mistake, there will be nothing you can do to correct it!

24. Probusinessbank’s license was revoked and I stopped paying the loan.

Because I did not receive any official notification about where I should transfer the contributions. Now the magistrate has decided to collect the debt, penalties and fines. The question is how to avoid paying penalties and fines and how to calculate the statute of limitations; the loan was taken out in 2015.

Lawyer Kiseleva O.G., 4592 replies, 2087 reviews, on the site since 10/29/2013
24.1. Hello, Elena!
The judicial act can be canceled and the debt can be written off completely!
Please specify the name of the court.

25. In 2015, I took out a loan from OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank for 40,000 rubles for a period until November 21, 2016, I paid everything regularly according to schedule, but in August 2015 the bank’s license was revoked. I paid using the old details according to the schedule night/w other banks, terminals I don’t remember how, but I repaid the loan. The receipts were not kept as unnecessary. But on October 17, 2018, I received a court order to collect a debt from me in the amount of 111,002.14, as well as a resolution for my work to execute enforcement proceedings to deduct this amount from my salary, where the receiver of the bank is the bankruptcy trustee. I filed a lawsuit in the district court to recognize the contract dated February 27, 2015 as fulfilled, what should I do next? Now I have been disabled since 2017 (oncological disease). I have two minor sons whose insurance includes the following insurance risks: temporary incapacity/disability.

Lawyer Voronchikhin D. A., 7230 answers, 4632 reviews, on the site from 11/14/2018
25.1. It was necessary to immediately cancel the court order as soon as we received it. If you do not have proof of payment, going to court will not help; the court will not take your word for it that you paid when there are no receipts. Now you can’t do much, why did you wait so long, you should have acted immediately as you received the order.

26. A court order came regarding the outstanding loan from Probusinessbank, and it paid without delay. When the bank was closed there was no way to pay, but now large amounts of money have been charged. What to do?

Lawyer Pitnichenko A. Yu., 2732 replies, 1891 reviews, on the site since 12/20/2013
26.1. Good afternoon, if a court order has arrived, you can cancel it within 10 days by sending objections to the court, and regarding the fact that the bank was closed, all loan obligations should have been transferred to another credit or other organization, then you need to look at who, what , when and how.

Lawyer Selyankin V.V., 12983 answers, 4128 reviews, on the site from 03/01/2013
26.2. Submit an application to cancel the default judgment to the court that made the decision within 10 days from the date of receipt.

Lawyer Voronchikhin D. A., 7230 answers, 4632 reviews, on the site from 11/14/2018
26.3. For now, the order can be canceled within 10 days, then wait for the trial in the general manner, consider the statute of limitations, ask to apply them, and also reduce the penalty.

27. Probusinessbank’s license was revoked and I stopped paying the loan. Because I did not receive any official notification about where I should transfer the contributions. Now the magistrate has decided to collect the debt, penalties and fines. Question: can a bank without a license sue? And even after 3 years? After all, the license was revoked in 15, and now it’s already 19. We canceled the order. Now we are being summoned to court to consider the case.

Lawyer Kudrin O. E., 15129 answers, 8098 reviews, on the site since 03/20/2015
27.1. Good afternoon.
You need to write your objection to the statement of claim. Almost always, an MFO or bank provides an inflated estimate of the debt to the court. The judge will not check it, the judge does not need it! You must provide the court with your counter-calculation of the debt. As a rule, you can significantly reduce the amount. And you must definitely declare that the statute of limitations has passed!

Lawyer Kabanov M.E., 23 replies, 9 reviews, on the site since 12/01/2012
27.2. You need to provide objections and declare that the statute of limitations has passed (if this is the case). Missing the limitation period is an independent basis for refusing to satisfy claims. Otherwise, objections must be argued (there are certain arguments that Ryazan courts accept). According to the court (this is the case), the debtor had to deposit funds with a notary or a bank account in a case where he did not know who to pay.

28. A loan was taken out from a probusiness bank in 2014. In the amount of 40,000 rubles. In 2015, the probusinessbank went bankrupt. No payments were made. Since there was no information about the details. Until March 2019, there were no more calls or letters from them. Now the bailiffs have sent a letter stating that they are obliged to pay 62 thousand rubles within 5 days. What to do and whether it is possible to cancel the loan. Go to law?

Lawyer Shishkin V.M., 62632 answers, 25520 reviews, on the site from 02/11/2013
28.1. It will not be possible to cancel. But you can familiarize yourself with the enforcement proceedings, Article 50 of the Law on Enforcement Proceedings and appeal the judicial act on the basis of which payments are required.

Lawyer Shamolyuk I.A., 61033 answers, 25769 reviews, on the site from 07.11.2009
28.2. The loan cannot be cancelled. You need to obtain a court decision from the court and appeal it, or a court order and cancel it (if it was an order)

29. The court made a decision to pay the debt in the amount of 316,000 rubles. But Probusinessbank continues to charge interest on the loan? Is this correct and what should I do? Is it possible to sue them? If so, is it possible after paying off the debt? Or is it necessary before?! And another question is that the enforcement fee from the court can somehow be returned after the debt is paid. (paid not on time, it was 5 days). Thank you!

Lawyer Drannikova Yu. V., 651 answers, 360 reviews, on the site from 02/19/2019
29.1. Probusinessbank was deprived of its license back in August 2015.

Sergey Yuny Barmaleikin, 15876 answers, 854 reviews, on the site since 10/25/2011
29.2. Interest will continue to accrue until the contract is terminated.

30. I received a letter-Decree on initiating enforcement proceedings at the place of work to withhold from my salary the amount of debt on loan payments to OJSC JSCB Probusinessbank in the amount of 111,002.14 rubles. I don’t even remember when I took out a loan, but I paid everything off regularly. Then I heard that this bank was closed. What should I do? It's a shame at work.

Lawyer Abrzhova V. A., 2305 answers, 1409 reviews, on the site from 09/22/2018
30.1. Hello, most likely a court order was issued against you, it can be canceled.

Lawyer Timofeeva P. A., 169 answers, 144 reviews, on the site from 02/20/2019
30.2. Hello.
Go to the bailiff, get a copy of the document (most likely a court order) and go to court to cancel the judicial act.