Circumstances: The plaintiff refers to the fact that an agreement was concluded, the defendant does not fulfill his obligations under the agreement.
We draw your attention to the fact that this decision could be appealed to a higher court and overturned

BELGOROD REGIONAL COURT

The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Belgorod Regional Court, consisting of:
presiding Motlokhova V.I.
judges Lyashchovskaya L.I., Efimova D.A.
with secretary B.
considered in open court a civil case on the claim of the public joint-stock company National Bank "TRUST" against K. for the collection of debt under a loan agreement
on appeal by K.
on the decision of the Stary Oskol City Court of the Belgorod Region dated April 3, 2017.
Having heard the report of Judge Efimova D.A., the judicial panel

installed:

PJSC National Bank "TRUST" filed a lawsuit against K. for the collection of debt under the loan agreement, indicating in support of the claims that, based on the defendant's application, on December 12, 2011, agreement No. 2035229517 was concluded between them and the bank, in accordance with which the defendant was opened bank account, payment card N was issued with a validity period of 36 months with an allowed overdraft limit of 23,299 rubles. subject to payment of 51.10% per annum for the use of credit funds. Referring to cases of untimely and insufficient payments made by the borrower to repay the debt and pay interest, the plaintiff asked to recover from K. a debt in the amount of 91,157.18 rubles, of which: 31,123.93 rubles. - the amount of the principal debt; 60033.25 rub. - interest for using the loan.
The plaintiff's representative did not appear at the court hearing and submitted a motion to consider the case in his absence.
Defendant K. did not admit the claim at the court hearing, referring to the fact that the plaintiff missed the deadline limitation period, pointing out that the limitation period must be calculated from May 2013, since last payment The bank received it on 04/10/2013 and was asked to apply the consequences of missing such a deadline.
By the decision of the Stary Oskol City Court of the Belgorod Region dated 04/03/2017, the debt under loan agreement No. 2035229517 in the amount of 91,157.18 rubles was recovered from K. in favor of PJSC National Bank "TRUST", as well as the cost of paying state duty in the amount of 2935 rubles.
In K.’s appeal, citing a violation by the court when making a decision of substantive law, the discrepancy between the court’s conclusions and the circumstances of the case, indicating that the court incorrectly calculated the statute of limitations, since he made the last payment on April 10, 2013, the plaintiff should have learned about the violation of his right in the period after May 2013, due to which at the time of going to court the statute of limitations on the demand for collection of the last payment had expired, he unreasonably rejected the petition to apply the consequences of its omission, asks the court’s decision to be canceled and a new decision to be made in the case to refuse to satisfy the requirements.
The parties, who were notified of the time and place of the court hearing in a timely and proper manner, did not appear at the appellate court, and were not informed of the reasons for their failure to appear.
Having checked the legality of the judicial act according to the rules of Parts 1 and 2 of Art. 327.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, within the limits of the arguments set out in the appeal, in the absence of grounds for going beyond the given arguments, the judicial panel considers that the appealed judicial act on the basis of Art. 330 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation is subject to cancellation on the following grounds.
By virtue of the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 195, part 4 art. 198 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and clarifications of the Plenum Supreme Court Russian Federation, set out in paragraphs 1 - 4 of the Decree of December 19, 2003 N 23 "On court decision", the decision must be legal and justified, made in strict compliance with the norms of procedural law and in full compliance with the norms of substantive law that are subject to application to a given legal relationship, when the facts relevant to the case are confirmed by relevant and admissible evidence examined by the court, or circumstances not in need of proof, and when the decision contains exhaustive conclusions of the court arising from the established facts.
The appealed judicial act does not fully comply with the above provisions of the law.
The court of first instance established and is not disputed by the parties that on October 25, 2011, between PJSC National Bank TRUST and K., based on the latter’s application, a loan agreement No. 01-276150 was concluded for a loan in the amount of 47,230.58 rubles. for a period of 38 months with the condition of repaying the loan in equal annuity payments. There is no dispute regarding the fulfillment of obligations under this loan agreement.
The same statement of the defendant (case file 15) contained a proposal to conclude a second agreement on the provision of an international settlement Bank card with an authorized overdraft limit on the terms specified in the application, as well as in the “Conditions for the provision and servicing of international settlement Bank cards with an authorized overdraft limit overdraft" (hereinafter referred to as the Card Conditions) and in the "Tariffs for the international settlement bank card of NB TRAS (OJSC) with a limit of the permitted overdraft" (hereinafter referred to as the Card Tariffs). Such Conditions and Tariffs are presented by the bank in the case materials (case sheets 14 - 27).
According to clause 2.1 of the Card Terms, such an agreement is considered concluded after the client receives a notification from the bank about the establishment of an overdraft limit from the moment the bank card is activated by the client. The parties took the corresponding actions on December 12, 2011.
K., from December 12, 2011, used credit funds provided by the Bank to pay for purchases and receive cash, as follows from the statement of the flow of funds on the card account (case sheets 9-11).
The circumstances of the conclusion by the parties of the second agreement, to which PJSC National Bank "TRUST" assigned N 2035229517, containing the conditions for the plaintiff to provide a loan in the form of an overdraft to K., are not disputed by the parties, confirmed by the evidence presented in the case materials
From the calculation presented by the plaintiff, at the time of going to court, K.’s debt on the principal debt amounted to 31,123.93 rubles, and on payment of interest for using the loan - 60,033.25 rubles.
According to the documents presented by the bank, the overdraft limit established by K. under agreement No. 2035229517 was 23,299 rubles. The plaintiff, despite presenting a demand for collection of the principal debt in the amount of 31,123.93 rubles, which exceeds the overdraft limit, does not refer to an increase in such a limit in the manner prescribed by the agreement and does not provide evidence of such an increase.
The interest rate for using credit funds according to the agreement is 0.14% per day, and when repaying the loan within grace period 55 days - 0%, which is reflected in the Tariffs for the card.
According to clause 5.10 of the Card Terms, loan repayment must be made by monthly payment minimum amount repayments during the payment period that follows the billing period (case sheet 24).
The concepts of “minimum repayment amount”, “billing period” and “payment period” are given in section 1 of the Card Terms and Conditions (case sheet 22 - 23).
According to the terms billing period is a monthly period, the beginning of which is determined by the date the card is activated by the client, and the end is determined by the previous date of the card activation day of the next month. Each subsequent billing period begins on the date following the end date of the previous billing period and ends on the day before the activation day of the next month.
The payment period is also the monthly period following the end date of the billing period.
The minimum repayment amount, as follows from this section, is equal to the lesser of two amounts, the first of which is the amount of debt, and the second is the greater of the following values: the amount of the minimum payment calculated in accordance with the Tariffs or the amount over-limit debt, unpaid interest on the date of overdue payment, overdue principal and fees or the minimum amount of the minimum payment established by the tariffs.
In accordance with Art. 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the general limitation period is established at three years.
For obligations with a certain period of performance, the limitation period begins at the end of the performance period (Clause 2 of Article 200 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
When assessing the arguments of the complaint about the court’s incorrect application of the consequences of missing the statute of limitations, the judicial panel proceeds from the obligation of the borrower provided for in the contract by the parties to repay the debt by paying the minimum repayment amount during the payment period.
From the calculation of the debt compiled by the plaintiff based on the data reflected in the statement of the movement of funds on the card account, it follows that since 04/11/2013 K. has not fulfilled his credit obligations.
Since the overdraft is in the amount of RUB 29,094.93. arose on the defendant’s card no later than 04/11/2013, repayment of the debt and overdraft fees according to the Bank’s Terms should have been made no later than 05/13/2013; the limitation period for the obligation to return the overdraft and interest for using it begins from 05/14/2013. Therefore, the last day of the limitation period was 05/13/2016.
This statement of claim was filed with the court on 02/01/2017. Previously, the bank applied to the magistrate's court with an application for the issuance of court order, namely November 25, 2016, that is, also outside the limits established by Art. 196 and paragraph 2 of Art. 200 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
As explained in para. 2 clause 26 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 29, 2015 N 43 “On some issues related to the application of norms Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the limitation period", according to paragraph 1 of Article 207 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, with the expiration of the limitation period for the main claim, the limitation period for additional claims is considered to have expired.
Thus, the statute of limitations on the claim for the collection of interest for using the overdraft on the day the statement of claim was filed also expired.
According to Art. 199 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the expiration of the limitation period, the application of which is declared by a party to the dispute, is the basis for the court to make a decision to reject the claim. If it is established that a party to the case has missed the limitation period and there are no valid reasons for restoring this period for the plaintiff - an individual, then if there is an application from the appropriate person about the expiration of the limitation period, the court has the right to refuse to satisfy the claim only on these grounds, without investigation of other circumstances of the case (clause 15 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 29, 2015 N 43).
Since the plaintiff went to court over the limitation period, the application of which was declared by the defendant, and did not provide evidence of valid reasons for missing it, the stated claims should be denied.
Payments erroneously credited to K.’s account by the bank on November 20, 2014, January 27, 2015, February 25, 2015, March 25, 2015, and subsequently written off from this account, do not prove that the defendant committed actions indicating recognition of the debt, since these transactions were made in addition to his will, and do not affect the calculation of the limitation period.
For the same reasons, the calculation of the limitation period and the circumstances reflected in the statement do not affect personal account for the period from December 12, 2011 to January 20, 2017, payment on December 25, 2013 of fines in the amounts of 390 rubles, 690 rubles, 890 rubles, since the bank independently wrote off these funds to pay off fees in violation of the terms tariff plan, including without the receipt of funds to a special card account (clause 10), providing the specified amounts on account of an overdraft in excess of the limit, while the bank does not refer to an increase in such a limit in the manner prescribed by the agreement and does not provide evidence of such an increase.
In civil law there is a presumption according to which participants in civil legal relations must exercise their rights in good faith and wisely, showing the necessary degree of care and prudence (Article 401 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), and not allow abuse of rights (Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). In practical terms, this means that the burden of the negative consequences of the fact that the copyright holder did not use the right properly is borne by him.
Under such circumstances, the court decision is subject to cancellation with the adoption of a new decision to refuse to satisfy the claim of PJSC National Bank "TRUST" against K. for the collection of debt under the loan agreement.
Guided by Art. Art. 328 - 330 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, judicial panel

Dear Olga! Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Failure to fulfill duties harms health
1. Intentional infliction of serious harm to health, dangerous to human life, or resulting in loss of vision, speech, hearing or any organ or loss of an organization or termination of activity by an individual entrepreneur.
In case of expiration of urgent employment contract During a woman’s pregnancy, the employer is obliged, upon her written application and upon provision of a medical certificate confirming the state of pregnancy, to extend the term of the employment contract until the end of the pregnancy. A woman whose employment contract has been extended until the end of her pregnancy is obliged, at the request of the employer, but not more than once every three months, to provide a medical certificate confirming the state of pregnancy. If the woman actually continues to work after the end of her pregnancy, then the employer has the right to terminate the employment contract with her due to its expiration within a week from the day the employer learned or should have learned about the end of the pregnancy.
It is permissible to dismiss a woman due to the expiration of an employment contract during her pregnancy, if the employment contract was concluded for the duration of the duties of an absent employee and it is impossible, with the written consent of the woman, to transfer her to another job available to the employer before the end of her pregnancy (as a vacant position or a job corresponding to the woman’s qualifications, and a vacant lower-level position or lower-paid job), which a woman can perform taking into account her state of health. In this case, the employer is obliged to offer her all the vacancies that he has in the given area that meet the specified requirements. The employer is obliged to offer vacancies in other localities if this is provided for by the collective agreement, agreements, or employment contract.
Termination of an employment contract with women who have children under three years of age, single mothers raising a child under fourteen years of age (a disabled child under eighteen years of age), other persons raising these children without a mother, at the initiative of the employer. NOT ADMISSION BY REFERENCE ( PRIVATE LEGAL COMPLAINTS EXCEPT IN THE CASES
REVIEW OF ACTIVITIES UNDER ART. 128 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.
AND ARTICLES OF REFUSAL IN THE CREDIT PROCEDURE FOR ATTRACTING JOBS, SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, AS WELL AS PAYMENTS FOR AN APARTMENT ABOUT AN INHERITANCE IT IS NECESSARY TO RECEIVE IT FROM THE EXECUTION OF SEPARATE BENEFITS UNDER THE SOCIAL INSURANCE AGREEMENT.
TO APPLY YOUR CONSENT TO THE COURT.
Art. 12.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation Violation of the rules for registering a citizen of the Russian Federation at the place of stay or place of residence in residential premises in the Russian Federation -
shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to two hundred thousand rubles or in the amount wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to one year, or compulsory labor for a term of one hundred eighty to two hundred and forty hours, or correctional labor for a term of up to two years, or imprisonment for a term of up to two years.
2. The same acts committed with the aim of concealing another crime or facilitating its commission, -
shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of eight to fifteen years with a fine in the amount of up to five hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to six months, or without it.
4. Theft committed:
a) an organized group,
b) by a person using his official position, -
shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles, or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of one to three years, or by forced labor for a term of up to three years, with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years or imprisonment for a term of up to five years.

On October 10, Trust Bank filed a lawsuit in Moscow arbitration against the Kommersant publishing house, writes the Vedomosti newspaper. The credit institution demands compensation for damage to business reputation allegedly caused by the article dated October 5, dedicated to financial crisis. The claims amount to 100 million rubles.

The Kommersant article entitled “Early Market” stated that Trust Bank had suspended issuing loans to companies and was negotiating with borrowers about early repayment of debts.

Bank Trust

Visitors to the legal consultation asked 130 questions on the topic “Bank Trust”. On average, the answer to a question appears within 15 minutes, and to a question we guarantee at least two answers that will begin to arrive within 5 minutes!

Bank Trust filed a lawsuit. The trial took place without me in another city. The bank demands the return of 24,377 rubles! My salary is 18-19 thousand rubles. I have a 7-year-old child and my wife doesn’t work.

How to sue bank trust

TRUST Bank began to actively file claims against Debtors exclusively in the Sovetsky district court Ufa. regardless of the place of residence of the borrower (defendant).

11/15/2011 National Bank "TRUST" (OJSC) (hereinafter referred to as the Bank, Plaintiff) and D.D.D. (hereinafter referred to as the Borrower, Defendant) entered into a loan agreement No. 03-247764 (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement).

In accordance with the terms of the Agreement contained in the Application for a loan (hereinafter referred to as the Application), Conditions for the provision and servicing of loans by National Bank TRUST (OJSC), Tariffs of National Bank TRUST (OJSC), as well as in other documents containing lending conditions , the loan was provided on the following terms:

In the Application/Application Questionnaire, the Borrower agreed that the acceptance of his offer to conclude an Agreement is the Lender’s actions in opening an account for him, and the Tariffs, Conditions, (Payment Schedule) are an integral part of the Application/Application Questionnaire and the Agreement.

Is it possible to sue a trust bank?

1 answer. Moscow Viewed 93 times. Asked 2012-04-24 13:51:12 +0400 in the topic “Other questions” Good day, I live in a communal VK. the neighbor rented out one of the rooms to the blockheads! - Good day, I live in a communal VK. a neighbor rented out one of the rooms to the blockheads. Further

1 answer. Moscow Viewed 19 times. Asked 2013-05-30 10:12:20 +0400 in the topic “Law enforcement” Does the bank have the right to install an ATM (extreme noise from the server in the bank itself) for residential privatization.

Why don't banks sue debtors?

Some are tormented by the question, why don’t banks sue debtors? After all, it often happens that debtors have a great desire to financial institution the company that issued the loan to them sued them. But banks delay filing an application and use the services of such annoying collectors in order to avoid suing the debtor. Let's try to figure out what could be the reason for this strange behavior.

TOPIC: TRUST went to court

For the bank to go to court, at least 6 consecutive months of non-payment of the loan must pass. And I owed money to TRUST for 5 months in a row, they threatened me with going to court, they even sent me a fake lawsuit, and then when that didn’t work, they began to persuade me to restructure.

They practice going to the debtor's home. They came to me a dozen times, but I never opened the door, they left letters under the door and that’s it. They don't break much.

Trust bank complaint

Personally, I have repeatedly, in the office of TRUST Bank in Lipetsk, explained the current situation to employees, at the same time making every effort to pay the debt (involving borrowed funds for repayment), respectively, not hiding from anything or anyone.

But, it is unclear for what reasons, bank employees began threatening me. Moreover, on the night of February 26, 2013, a bank employee who came to see me said in a boorish manner that, upon his call, people would come from the Moscow branch of the bank and treat me like a deputy of the Lipetsk City Council Pakhomov (they would roll me into a barrel of cement).

What to do if the bank sues for non-repayment of a loan?

The Deposit Insurance Agency began an inspection of the credit organization Svyaznoy Bank for the possibility of carrying out the procedure for its financial rehabilitation. Another option for the development of the situation could be the revocation of the license from Svyaznoy Bank. As Kommersant learned, Svyaznoy Bank...

Banking news this week turned out to be quite positive for citizens wishing to take out a loan - Sberbank and UBRD reduced interest rates consumer loans, and Globex and Rosselkhozbank banks announced a reduction in mortgage rates.

Legal services in Khabarovsk for individuals and legal entities

I save your money. This means that if your business is 100% unpromising, I will inform you about it immediately, without instilling false hopes. Immediately, and not when you pay an advance payment, pay for several court hearings, you will be mentally in a state of trial for six months and the court will resolve the case not in your favor.

I take care of your nerves. Contacting a competent specialist who helps you solve your problems allows you to stop panic, feel safe and, as a result, make the right decisions, take adequate and appropriate actions, and not focus your life on the problem to the detriment of work and family.

SOLUTION

In the name of the Russian Federation

Pavlovo-Posad City Court of the Moscow Region, composed of: presiding judge S.E. Ryakin, with secretary N.I. Parshenkova, with the participation of plaintiff O.A. Kartseva, representative of the plaintiff A.A. Kartsev, representative of OJSC " National Bank“Trust” Ivanik E.P., having considered in open court civil case No. 2-645/2013 on the claim of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva against OJSC “National Bank “Trust” for the protection of consumer rights,

Installed:

Kartseva O.A. indicates that 07/05/2012 Agreement No. was concluded between it and OJSC National Bank TRUST for the amount of rubles. A prerequisite for issuing a loan under the Agreement was lump sum payment enrollment fees credit funds to the client’s account, which amounted to RUB 5,990. Within of this loan she was given two cards: card 1 - No. (clause 3 of the agreement) and card 2-No. (clause 4 of the agreement).

03.12.2012 Kartseva O.A. contacted the call center to clarify the amounts for early repayment of the loan for two bank cards 1 and 2. The operator told her the amounts for early repayment and the date until which these amounts are valid, namely: on card 1 - the amount was RUB. kopecks, for card 2 - the amount of early repayment was rubles. cop., repayment period until December 24, 2013.

04.12.2012 to the cash desk of the Paveletsky Operations Office in Moscow, located at the address: Moscow, st. Valovaya, 11/19, Kartseva O.A. paid the specified amount in full. After payment, she turned to bank employee Evgeniy, who gave Kartseva O.A. application form for closing the account on card 2. She handed over both to him bank cards.

12/27/2012 Kartseva O.A. came to the same bank branch where I made the full repayment funds via bank cards, where she learned that she had a debt of 235 rubles. When asked when she might have incurred this debt, bank employees did not answer. On the same day Kartseva O.A. wrote a statement about her disagreement with this deduction.

By email, she received a response from the bank, according to which Kartseva O.A. should have paid not rubles. 11 kopecks, and rub. 28 kopecks As stated in the answer this amount consisted of the following payments: rub. 87 kopecks - main debt; rub. 41 kopecks - interest for using the loan; 390 rub. - penalty for missing the minimum monthly payment.

Kartseva O.A. did not agree with this amount of the fine, because the period for its accrual was not indicated, for what payment it was accrued and why the bank did not notify her of the existence of a fine.

12/27/2012 Kartseva O.A. a certificate of closure of the loan agreement No. dated July 23, 2012 was issued, which indicated that as of December 27, 2012. She has no debt, the loan agreement is closed. However, until now mobile phone Kartseva O.A. come SMS messages about her debt to the bank, which is growing and today amounts to 1,315 rubles. 14 kopecks Kartseva O.A. contacted the bank’s call center with a question about what kind of debt we were talking about, the bank replied that she was not paying the monthly minimum payment, so the bank was charging fines, which at that time amounted to 1,315 rubles. 14 kopecks

Loan application form for urgent needs provided in the form developed by OJSC NB TRUST, which excludes any influence of the consumer by O.A. Kartseva. to determine the terms of the contract.

The loan agreement was concluded on established by the bank conditions, make any changes to the contract, Kartseva O.A. didn't have the opportunity.

The specified provisions of the loan agreement, providing for the conditions for paying a commission for crediting funds to the client’s account, contained onerous conditions for the individual borrower, which, based on reasonably understood interests, would not have been accepted by Kartseva O.A., if she had the opportunity to participate in determining the terms of the contract.

The provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do not make the provision of a loan to an individual dependent on the opening of a current or other account for the borrower and does not automatically entail the conclusion of a bank account agreement.

The fee for depositing funds is actually an additional interest rate- which the borrower must pay.

According to Kartseva O.A. When concluding loan agreements, the bank is obliged to bring to the attention of the borrower in an understandable language all the necessary and reliable information about the cost of services and their properties.

The terms of the loan agreement on the Borrower’s payment of a commission for settlement services, as well as a commission for crediting funds to the account, violate her rights.

By its actions, the bank caused Kartseva O.A. moral suffering, because is still demanding money from her that she has already paid him and returning her overpaid funds. She is worried about the current situation and is experiencing moral suffering.

Kartseva O.A. asks the court: Recognize clause 1.16. loan agreement No. dated July 23, 2012 on the collection of a commission for crediting funds received from the Client (at a time) is invalid. Recognize as revoked her consent received by OJSC National Bank TRUST on the application form for the conclusion of an Agreement on the issue of servicing a bank card dated July 23, 2012. Close the accounts of Kartseva O.A., which were opened in branches of the bank National Bank TRUST. ; to recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of the Client the amount of commission for crediting credit funds to the Client’s account in the amount of 5990 rubles; unlawfully withheld funds in the amount of 154 rubles. 83 kopecks, interest for the use of others in cash in the amount of 327 rubles. 20 kopecks, compensation moral damage in the amount of 10,000 rubles; payment of legal expenses in the amount of RUB 30,000; payment for drawing up a statement of claim in the amount of 4,800 rubles, payment of notary services in the amount of 1,300 rubles, collect a fine in her favor in the amount of fifty percent of the amount, awarded by the court in favor of the consumer.

At the court hearing, plaintiff Kartseva O.A. supported the stated demands.

Representative of the defendant OJSC National Bank TRUST Ivanik E.P. submitted a review, did not recognize the claim, explained that the bank did not violate the rights of the consumer Kartseva O.A. The representative of the defendant could not explain why the bank on December 27, 2012. Kartseva O.A. a certificate of closure of the loan agreement No. dated July 23, 2012 was issued, which indicated that as of December 27, 2012. debt from Kartseva O.A. missing, the loan agreement is closed.

After hearing the plaintiff, the defendant’s representative, and checking the case materials, the court finds that the claims are justified and must be satisfied in part on the following grounds:

In accordance with 4.1 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.

The court found that on 07/05/2012. between OJSC National Bank TRUST and Kartseva O.A. a loan agreement No. was concluded for the amount of rubles. A prerequisite for issuing a loan under the Agreement was a one-time payment of a commission for crediting loan funds to the client’s account, which amounted to RUB 5,990. As part of this loan, Kartseva O.A. two cards were issued: card 1 - No. (clause 3 of the agreement) and card 2 - No. (clause 4 of the agreement).

All bank documents are signed only by O.A. Kartseva. There are no bank seals or signatures of its representatives.

12/27/2012 Kartseva O.A. a certificate of closure of the loan agreement No. dated July 23, 2012 was issued, which indicated that as of December 27, 2012. She has no debt to the bank, the loan agreement is closed.

According to the calculation of credit card debt as of May 14, 2013. the accumulated debt of interest for using the loan is 235 rubles. 14 kopecks The representative of OJSC National Bank TRUST could not explain to the court why the bank did not transfer funds for their repayment from the funds paid to O.A. Kartseva. to repay the loan.

By virtue of Art. 421 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation citizens and legal entities are free to enter into a contract. The terms of the agreement are determined at the discretion of the parties, except in cases where the content of the relevant term is prescribed by law or other legal acts.

In accordance with Art. 422 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the contract must comply with the rules mandatory for the parties established by law and other legal acts (imperative law) in force at the time of its conclusion.

According to Art. 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation dated 02/07/1992 No. 2300-1 “On the protection of consumer rights”, the terms of the contract that infringe on the consumer’s morals 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. It is prohibited to condition the acquisition of certain goods (works, services) on the mandatory acquisition of other goods (works, services), which was the case in relation to the Borrower (plaintiff). Losses caused to the consumer as a result of violation of his right to free choice of goods (work, services) are reimbursed by the seller (performer) in full.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in Resolution No. 4-P dated February 23, 1999, indicated that a citizen in legal relations with a bank is an economically weaker party and needs special protection of his rights, which entails the need to limit the freedom of contract of a credit organization (bank).

According to Part 1 of Art. 428 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an adhesion agreement is an agreement, the terms of which are determined by one of the parties in forms or other standard forms and could be accepted by the other party only by joining the proposed agreement as a whole.

The application form for a loan for urgent needs is provided in the form developed by OJSC National Bank "TRUST", which excludes any influence of O.A. Kartseva. to determine the terms of the contract. The loan agreement was concluded on the terms established by the defendant; she could not make any changes to the agreement.

The specified provisions of the loan agreement, which provide for the conditions for paying a commission for crediting funds to the client’s account, contain onerous conditions for the individual borrower, which, based on reasonably understood interests, would not be accepted by Kartseva O.A., if she had the opportunity to participate in determining the terms of the contract.

The provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do not make the provision of a loan to an individual dependent on the opening of a current or other account for the borrower and does not automatically entail the conclusion of a bank account agreement.

According to Art. 30 of the Federal Law of December 2, 1990. No. 395-1 “On banks and banking", opening a bank account is a right, not an obligation, of citizens.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 819 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the payment under a loan agreement is the payment of interest on the loan amount. This interest is a payment to the bank for a set of actions performed when issuing a loan and repaying it by the borrower; it must cover both its expenses and include the bank’s income from this operation.

Also the norms of Art. 807, 809 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation do not contain the concept of “crediting, settlement service", in accordance with Art. 819 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, actions to provide and service a loan are the responsibility of the bank under the loan agreement.

Regulations Central Bank Russian Federation dated August 31, 1998 No. 54-P “On the procedure for providing credit organizations funds and their return (repayment), there is also no provision for payment for any additional services when issuing a loan and its repayment by the borrower, nor is there any provision for opening and servicing a special account for the borrower.

Thus, the application fee is actually an additional interest rate that the borrower must pay.

In accordance with Art. 9 of the Federal Law of January 26, 1996 No. 15-FZ “On the implementation of part two of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation” in cases where one of the parties to the obligation is a citizen using, purchasing, ordering, or intending to purchase or order goods (work, services for personal household needs, such a citizen enjoys the rights of a party to an obligation in accordance with the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the rights granted to the consumer by the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” and issued in accordance with other legal acts.

According to paragraph 1 paragraph. “e”, paragraph 3 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 28, 2012 No. 17 “On the consideration by courts of cases on disputes regarding the protection of consumer rights” when considering civil cases: courts should take into account that relations in which a citizen is one of the parties using, purchasing, ordering, or intending to purchase or order goods (work, services) exclusively for family, household, household and other needs not related to business activities, and the other is an organization (manufacturer, performer, seller, importer), providing services that are relations regulated by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Law of the Russian Federation dated 02/07/1992 No. 2300-1 “On the protection of consumer rights”, others federal laws and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation adopted in accordance with them.

In accordance with Art. 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” it is prohibited to condition the purchase of some goods (works, services) on the mandatory purchase of other goods (works, services).

At the same time, according to Art. 10 of the same law, the contractor is obliged to promptly provide the consumer with the necessary and reliable information about the services provided. This information is brought to the attention of the consumer in a clear and accessible form when concluding contracts for the provision of services in ways accepted in certain areas of service. In Part 4 of Art. 12 of the Law states that the consumer’s lack of special knowledge is assumed. Consequently, the borrower, due to his lack of special knowledge in the field of banking legislation, cannot know about the legality or illegality of certain terms of loan agreements. In accordance with Part 3 of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation assumes reasonableness of actions and voluntariness of participants in civil legal relations.

It follows from this that the Bank was obliged, when concluding loan agreements, to bring to the attention of the borrower in an understandable form all the necessary and reliable information about the cost of services and their properties - but did not do this. The court found that the bank documents available in the case, information about tariffs and conditions are printed in small print, which makes them difficult to read and perceive.

By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 16 of the 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.

The norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Federal Law “On Banks and Banking Activities”, and other regulatory legal acts allow the possibility of charging a fee in the form of a commission for crediting funds when granting a loan individuals, is not provided for, and therefore the terms of the loan agreement on payment of commission for settlement services contradict the provisions of Art. 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”.

According to the provisions of Art. 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a transaction that does not comply with the requirements of the law or other legal acts is void unless the law establishes that such a transaction is contestable or does not provide for other consequences of the violation.

The terms of the loan agreement on the Borrower’s payment of a commission for settlement services, as well as a commission for crediting funds to the client’s account, violate the consumer rights established by law and by virtue of Articles 168. 180 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, paragraph 1 of Article 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” and are invalid (insignificant).

In accordance with the provisions of Art. 395 Civil Code of the Russian Federation, paragraph 2 of Art. 1107 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, interest is subject to accrual for the use of someone else’s funds from the time when the acquirer learned or should have learned about the unjustification of receiving or saving funds.

Interest for the Defendant’s illegal use of the Borrower’s funds under the loan agreement No. dated July 23, 2012. are 327 rubles. 20 kopecks. According to the calculation of interest presented by the plaintiff (calculation of the amount of debt is carried out taking into account the legal position set out in the Resolution of the Presidium of the BAS of the Russian Federation No. 5451/09 dated September 22, 2009): The amount of debt is 5,999 rubles. 0 kop., including VAT 0% 0 rub. 0 kop. Overdue period from 07/23/2012 to 03/20/2013: 238 (days). Refinancing rate: 8.25%. Total interest for the period = (5999) * 238 * 8.25/36000 = 327 rubles. 20 kopecks

By virtue of Art. 15 of the Law “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”, moral damage caused to the consumer as a result of violation by the manufacturer (executor, authorized organization) of consumer rights provided for by the laws and legal acts of the Russian Federation regulating relations in the field of consumer rights protection is subject to compensation by the causer of harm if he is at fault. The amount of compensation for moral damage is determined by the court and does not depend on the amount of compensation for property damage. Compensation for moral damage is carried out regardless of compensation for property damage and losses incurred by the consumer.

By its actions, the bank caused Kartseva O.A. moral suffering, expressed in worries due to the current situation, to this day the bank demands the funds that she paid to him and does not return the overpaid funds, sends SMS messages to her mobile phone.

In accordance with Art. 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen has suffered moral harm (physical or moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights, or encroach on other intangible benefits belonging to the citizen, as well as in other cases provided for by law, the court may impose on the violator the obligation of monetary compensation for the specified harm.

In accordance with Art. 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, when determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court takes into account: the nature of the physical and moral suffering caused to the victim, the degree of guilt of the harm-doer, the actual circumstances in which the harm was caused, the individual characteristics of the victim, as well as reasonableness and fairness. Therefore, taking into account reasonableness and sufficiency, the court reduces the amount of moral damages sought to RUB 5,000. 00 kop.

In accordance with paragraph 6 of Art. 13 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”, when the court satisfies the consumer’s requirements established by law, the court collects from the manufacturer (executor, seller, authorized organization) for failure to voluntarily satisfy the consumer’s requirements a fine in the amount of fifty percent of the amount awarded by the court in favor of consumer, which is 5,736 rubles. 01 kop.

In accordance with Article 98 of the Civil Procedure Code 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.

The plaintiff's expenses for legal services amounted to: drawing up a statement of claim - 4,800 rubles.

In accordance with Art. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, to the party in whose favor the court decision was made, the court awards, on the other hand, the costs of paying for the services of a representative within reasonable limits.

According to the assignment agreement No. 85/19-03-13 dated March 19, 2013. costs of representation in court - 30,000 rubles. subject to partial recovery in the amount of RUB 15,000. taking into account the complexity of the case and the number of court hearings.

Notarial services for drawing up a power of attorney to represent interests
court - 1300 rub. are subject to recovery in full.

In accordance with Art. 98 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation from the defendant to income local budget subject to
recovery of state duty costs in the amount of 688 rubles. 32 kopecks

Based on the above, guided by Articles 194-198 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court

Decided:

The claim of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva against the Open Joint-Stock Company National Bank Trust for the protection of consumer rights was partially satisfied.

Accept clause 1.16. loan agreement No. dated July 23, 2012 on the collection of a commission for crediting funds to the Client’s account (at a time) is invalid.

Recognize as revoked the consent of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva, received by National Bank TRUST OJSC on the application form for the conclusion of an Agreement for the issue and servicing of a bank card dated July 23, 2012.

Close the accounts of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva, which were opened in the branches of the bank OJSC National Bank TRUST.

To recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva the amount of commission for crediting credit funds to the Client’s account in the amount of 5,990 (five thousand nine hundred ninety) rubles.

To recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva, unlawfully withheld funds in the amount of 154 (one hundred fifty-four) rubles 83 kopecks.

To collect from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva interest for the use of other people's funds in the amount of 327 (three hundred twenty-seven) rubles and 20 kopecks.

To recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva compensation for moral damages in the amount of 5,000 (five thousand) rubles 00 kopecks.

To collect from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva a fine in the amount of fifty percent of the amount awarded by the court in favor of the consumer in the amount of 5,736 rubles 01 kopecks.

To recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva payment for notary services in the amount of 1300 (one thousand three hundred rubles.

To recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva payment for legal services in the amount of 15,000 (fifteen thousand) rubles.

To recover from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva payment for drawing up a statement of claim in the amount of 4800 (four thousand eight hundred) rubles.

The rest of Oksana Anatolyevna Kartseva’s claims will be denied.

To collect from OJSC National Bank TRUST in favor of the local budget a state duty in the amount of 688 rubles 32 kopecks.

The decision can be appealed by the parties to the Moscow Regional Court, through the court that adopted it, within a month.

Chairman: S.E. Ryakin

Case No. 2-3758/2016

SOLUTION

In the name of the Russian Federation

Central District Court of the city of Tver composed of:

presiding judge Stepanova E.A.,

under secretary Kudryavtseva A.A.,

with the participation of the representative of the plaintiff Mesropyan N.A., acting on the basis of a power of attorney,

defendant Zvonkov N.I.,

having considered in open court in the city of Tver a civil case based on the claim of PJSC Bank Trust against Zvonkov N.I. on debt collection under a loan agreement,

installed:

PJSC Bank "TRUST" filed a claim with N.I. Zvonkov in the Central District Court of the city of Tver. on collection of debt under a loan agreement, legal costs.

In support of the stated requirements, he indicated that DD.MM.YYYY OJSC NB TRUST and Zvonkov N.I. concluded agreement No. (agreement 2, payment card agreement) on the basis and terms of the application - the client’s offer, on the basis of which a loan agreement No. dated DD.MM.YYYY (agreement 1) was also concluded.

Agreements 1 and 2 were concluded in offer-acceptance form, in accordance with the provisions of Art. , And .

The loan under agreement 1 was provided on the terms and conditions contained in the loan application, the conditions for the provision and servicing of loans, and tariffs. At the same time, the application for a loan also contained the client’s offer to conclude a mixed agreement with him, containing elements of an agreement on opening a bank account, an agreement on the provision of a bank card for use in accordance with the Terms of provision and servicing of international bank cards of BANK "TRUST", tariffs according to the international bank card of BANK "TRUST", as well as other documents containing credit conditions.

In the application, the borrower agreed that the acceptance of his offer to conclude agreement 1 is the action of opening an account and a special card account for him, and the conditions, tariffs and payment schedule are an integral part of the application and agreement 1.

In the application, the borrower also expressed his agreement with the terms of the payment card, the tariffs for the payment card, undertook to comply with them and asked the bank to enter into a payment card agreement with him, within the framework of which, in accordance with the terms of the payment card, open a bank account/accounts for him and provide for use of an international payment bank card/cards of BANK "TRUST" (PJSC) with a limit on the permitted overdraft (payment card).

In connection with the conclusion of Agreement 1 by the bank and the borrower, the borrower receives a payment card, with the terms of use of which he agreed in advance. Subsequently, at his own request, the borrower can activate this payment card, thereby concluding another contract-contract 2.

The bank fulfilled its obligations. At the conclusion of the agreement, the 1st defendant received payment card No. with a limit on the permitted overdraft on the following conditions: the size of the limit on the permitted overdraft - , interest on the loan - , validity period payment card– DD.MM.YYYY. Thus, the bank and the borrower, by mutual consent, entered into a mixed agreement, which was assigned No.

In accordance with clause 5.5 of the Terms and Conditions for a payment card, a loan is provided by the bank to the client to carry out operations on the SCS, the conduct of which is not limited by the conditions on the payment card, in the event of insufficient or absence of own funds on the SCS to carry out transactions. Operations include non-cash payments (including payment for goods and services), receiving cash at cash dispensers and ATMs, depositing cash and crediting funds to SCS. According to clause 5.10 of the conditions for the payment card, the client is obliged to repay the debt by paying at least the minimum repayment amount during the payment period following the billing period. In case of failure to pay the minimum repayment amount on time or payment of an incomplete repayment amount, the defendant is charged a fine for missing payment of the minimum repayment amount in accordance with the tariffs.

In violation of the terms of the payment card and the provisions of the law, the defendant does not take measures and continues to evade execution accepted obligations according to planned repayment current debt under agreement 2, in connection with which, for the period from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY, the defendant incurred a debt to the bank in the amount of, including the amount of the principal debt in the amount of, interest for using the loan in the amount of

The defendant's violation of the terms of the loan agreement is significant and entails such damage for the Bank that the bank is largely deprived of what it has the right to count on when concluding the agreement.

In connection with the above, the plaintiff filed the said claim against the defendant, and asks the court to recover from the defendant in its favor the debt under loan agreement No. in the amount of, the cost of paying the state duty in the amount of

At the court hearing, the plaintiff’s representative Mesropyan N.A., acting on the basis of a power of attorney, supported the plaintiff’s claims in full on the arguments and grounds set out in statement of claim. He objected to the defendant’s motion to terminate the proceedings on the grounds and grounds set out in the written objections to the motion. He also explained that in the application, the borrower expressed his agreement with the Conditions for the payment card, the tariffs for the payment card, undertook to comply with them and asked the bank to enter into an agreement with him on the payment card, within the framework of which, in accordance with the Conditions for the payment card, open a bank account for him and provide for use an international bank card with an allowed overdraft limit. According to clause 2.1 of the Payment Card Terms, the bank enters into an agreement with the client by accepting the client’s offer contained in the application, by opening a SCS. At the same time, the bank accepts the client’s offer to provide a card by issuing a card. The date of conclusion of the agreement is the date of activation of the card by the client. The card is handed over to the client unactivated or can be activated by the bank automatically at the request of the client immediately upon issuance. The bank and the borrower, by mutual agreement, entered into an agreement, which was assigned No. At the same time, the defendant did not provide evidence indicating that the defendant handed over the payment card to the bank, and the bank this information does not confirm.

At the court hearing, the defendant Zvonkov N.I., objected to the satisfaction of the claims made by the plaintiff, asked the court to terminate the proceedings in the case, since there was a court decision that had entered into legal force and was adopted on a dispute between the same parties, on the same subject and on the same grounds , asked the court to apply the consequences of missing the statute of limitations on late payments. At the same time, he explained that when concluding credit agreements, he received 2 bank cards, but after repaying the debt on loan No. 1, he returned the cards to the bank, and does not remember whether he used a payment card or not.

Having heard the representative of the plaintiff Mesropyan N.A., acting on the basis of a power of attorney, the defendant Zvonkov N.I., and having examined the case materials, the court comes to the following.

According to the latter, the performance by the person who received the offer, within the period established for its acceptance, of actions to fulfill the terms of the contract specified in it (shipment of goods, provision of services, performance of work, payment of the appropriate amount, etc.) is considered acceptance, unless otherwise provided for by law, other legal acts or not specified in the offer.

The fact of the conclusion of loan agreement No. between the plaintiff and the defendant is evidenced by the statement of N.I. Zvonkov. on the provision of a loan for urgent needs from DD.MM.YYYY, questionnaire of Zvonkov N.I. to the application for a loan for urgent needs, as well as the bank’s actions to open account No.

As follows from the account statement No., agreement number No., contract start date DD.MM.YYYY, card number No., card activation date DD.MM.YYYY, credit limit on the card

According to the defendant’s application for a loan from DD.MM.YYYY, Zvonkov N.I. understands and agrees that the lender has the right to repeatedly make offers to establish and subsequently change the credit limit on a payment card by sending the borrower a corresponding notice, the acceptance of which will be the actions of the borrower to activate and use the payment card / the borrower expresses consent to the lender with the amount credit limit on a payment card / expressing consent to the lender to activate the payment card, if the payment card was received by the borrower simultaneously with the conclusion of the agreement.

As follows from the statement, Zvonkov N.I. agreed that before activating the payment card, the borrower undertakes to familiarize himself with the information about the full cost of the loan on the payment card provided by the lender in accordance with clause 2.2 of the application, and only if he agrees with the full cost of the loan on the payment card, take actions to activate the payment card/ express to the creditor your consent to activate the payment card, take steps to activate the payment card/ express to the creditor your consent to activate the payment card

By his signature on the application, the defendant confirms the fact of receipt of one copy of the application, payment schedule, tariffs, card tariffs, payment card tariffs, payment card conditions, memo of the insured person, which contains the conditions of the collective insurance program for loans for emergency needs and/or collective insurance programs for cardholders, as well as the fact of receipt of payment card No. and consent to its activation.

The court has no reason to doubt the validity of the parties' will when concluding this agreement.

From the defendant's account statement it follows that the defendant used funds within the credit limit established by the plaintiff, and improperly fulfilled his obligations under the agreement concluded with the plaintiff, which led to the formation of debt. No evidence of the return of payment card No. to the creditor was presented to the court.

At the same time, the court does not see any grounds for terminating the proceedings under paragraph. 3 tbsp. , since, as follows from the operative part of the decision of the magistrate of court district No. 4 of the Proletarsky district of Tver dated DD.MM.YYYY, the National Bank TRUST (OJSC) addressed Zvonkov N.Yu. with demands for collection of debt under loan agreement No. dated DD.MM.YYYY, while in the framework of the civil case under consideration, the subject of the claim is the debt under loan agreement No. In connection with the above, the grounds and subject matter of the claim previously filed by PJSC NB TRUST are different from those being considered within the framework of this civil case.

Based on the foregoing, the court comes to the conclusion that the limitation period for the plaintiff’s demands for the collection of interest for using the loan, a fine for missing minimum payments that arose before DD.MM.YYYY in amount has expired. The amount of debt under the loan agreement as of DD.MM.YYYY will be

By virtue of Part 1 of Art. court costs consist of state fees and costs associated with the consideration of the case.

According to Part. 1.2 tbsp. the party in whose favor the court decision was made, the court awards to the other party all legal costs incurred in the case. If the claim is partially satisfied, the legal costs specified in this article are awarded to the plaintiff in proportion to the amount of the claims satisfied by the court, and to the defendant in proportion to the part of the claims that were denied to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff paid the state duty in the amount, which is confirmed by payment orders from DD.MM.YYYY No., from DD.MM.YYYY No. In connection with the above, the costs of payment of state duty in the amount of

Based on the above, guided by articles, - the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court

decided:

Claims of PJSC Bank "Trust" against Zvonkov N.I. to partially satisfy the debt collection under the loan agreement.

Collect from Zvonkov N.I. in favor of PJSC Bank "Trust" debt under loan agreement No. in the amount, as well as a state fee in the amount

The decision can be appealed by the parties to the Tver Regional Court through the Central District Court of the city of Tver within a month from the date of its production in final form.

Judge signature E.A. Stepanova

Court:

Central District Court of Tver (Tver Region)

Plaintiffs:

Public Joint-Stock Company National Bank "Trust"

Defendants:

Zvonkov N.I.

Judges of the case:

Stepanova Ekaterina Aleksandrovna (judge)

Judicial practice on:

Recognition of the contract as not concluded

Arbitrage practice on the application of the norm of Art. 432 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

For loans, for loan agreements, banks, banking agreement

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 819, 820, 821, 822, 823 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Limitation period, by statute of limitations

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 200, 202, 204, 205 Civil Code of the Russian Federation