Examples of complaints against the actions of JSC Tinkoff Bank regarding the reduction of deposit rates. How to act in case of a lawsuit with Tinkoff Bank Court and Tinkoff

Tinkoff Bank is a unique organization in its own right, positioning itself as a completely electronic bank that does not have offices. In general, his work is quite good and does not cause a negative response among thousands of clients, but his wide coverage and lack of “centralized” authority sometimes leads to various conflicts.

So what to do if Tinkoff Bank violated your rights? Of course, complain. And it is the court that will help you achieve what you want most effectively. Our article will tell you how to file a claim, achieve the desired result and receive fair compensation.

Features of the proceedings

Before starting a conversation about the trial with Tinkoff Bank, several features related to its very structure should be noted. Let's look at them briefly:

• Most transactions are performed remotely, and documentation is sent to clients electronically. So it is better to save all the files you receive from Tinkoff Bank, just like letters;
• Although this bank does not have the usual branches, it still has offices. So you shouldn’t immediately sue any complaint - find out where you can file a preliminary appeal in your city and try to resolve the issue before the trial;
• Since disputes on various issues are resolved at the first stages with the help of the customer relations department, be sure to request the inclusion of recordings of these conversations as case materials.

Remember that these features of Tinkoff Bank do not in any way affect the laws and principles by which it must operate. So the trial itself will remain virtually unchanged. So don’t be afraid to face some significant difficulties.

Grounds for complaint

You can complain about Tinkoff Bank in all the same cases as about a regular bank. You can submit your claim in the following cases:

• A bank employee violated your rights, insulted you, disseminated your personal data;
• The bank lost your personal documents or money, but refused to pay the due compensation. For Tinkoff Bank, such situations are rare, since the entire system is mostly electronic;
• The bank used your cash without your prior consent;
• Without your consent, either the bank refused to fulfill its obligations;
• You or another professional crime.

How to file a claim?

Let's get down to it. To begin proceedings, you will first need to inform the court of the violation. And this can only be done with the help of a statement of claim. Writing it is quite difficult, since you will need to adhere to a clear form. The standard statement of claim against Tinkoff Bank consists of three parts:

1. Title. Any appeal to government services begins with it. It is written in the upper right part of the A4 sheet, since the left is reserved for affixing seals and marks in the court itself. The text of the title itself contains the details of the courthouse, information from the plaintiff and details of the defendant. After this, write the title of the document “Statement of Claim against Tinkoff Bank” in the center of the sheet and fill out the next part;
2. Information part. It states the data on the case, your claim to the bank, actions to peacefully resolve the conflict, requirements to the court and their justification from the point of view of law;
3. Final part. Its purpose is simple - it contains additional information on the case materials, a list of documents attached to the claim, the signature of the applicant and the date of filing the lawsuit.

All three parts of the application must be written according to strict guidelines. They are very simple and if you approach the preparation issue responsibly, you will not have any problems. Their list is not long:

• Use business style letters. Remember that you are drawing up an official document - an appeal;
• Don't use insults. Please remember that insulting statements may result in you being sued;
• Write only confirmed facts. Avoid inaccuracy and contradictions;
• Write briefly and clearly. If you have any of your own conjectures, small details and opinions, then keep them until the start of the trial - you will have time to speak out;
• Do not use obscene language. Such appeals are not even read in court.

Sample

How to start the proceedings?

In order to initiate a lawsuit with Tinkoff Bank, you will need to submit your statement of claim along with a package of documents. This is not so difficult to do, but difficulties may arise here too.

Let's start with the question “Where to file a claim against Tinkoff Bank?” The answer depends on the value of the claim (the amount of money you need in compensation). If this amount is less than 50,000 rubles, then the claim is filed in the magistrate’s court. Otherwise, the claim is filed in arbitration court. In addition, you can file a claim in court at your place of residence, at the location of the Tinkoff office that committed the violation, or at the place where the contract that was violated was signed.

The next difficulty is submitting the application itself. This can be done in only three ways: in person, with the help of a representative with a power of attorney, or by mail. The latter method is not recommended, as the letter may get lost or not arrive on time. To be on the safe side, use registered letters with notifications.

Well, the last question is “How to win a case?” It’s difficult to answer, since there are no universal tactics. However, two pieces of advice will help you in any situation and in any claim against the bank. First, don’t be afraid to protect your interests. The bank is required to follow hundreds of regulations when dealing with clients, so the law is likely to work against it. Second, hire a lawyer. The bank will do the same and organize protection in advance. You should also think about the support of a specialist even before litigation begins.

What can warm you up on a Saturday evening besides strong drinks?

A good story of the triumph of good over evil.

Below is the story of the lost court case by Tinkoff Bank, the decision of which came into force on December 15, 2015, i.e. there will be no more appeals.

This is not about the sensational story with depositors, but about the disabling of remote banking services...

A few words about my experience

A year ago then Tinkoff Credit Systems They put a pig under my Christmas tree exactly on December 31st: they blocked the debit card of my wife and two brothers.

Remote banking services (Internet banking) have been blocked. It stuck, as I read in the then, 400k.

The bank offered (did you eat fish soup?) to fly to Moscow (from Krasnoyarsk!) and receive cash in the only office throughout Russia.

I still withdrew the money after complaints using a free interbank service upon written application, but the bank, firstly, strictly forbade me to contact the hotline with any questions, they say, all issues are resolved only through a personal visit to the bank’s office, and, secondly , the hands of SB reached to Kukuruza with a credit limit from TKS, to the Yandex-Money card (issuer - TKS), even to the electronic wallet “Tinkoff Mobile Wallet”.

According to the court decision, Tinkoff Bank is obliged to make changes to the Terms of Comprehensive Services. To date, the bank has not complied with the court decision, has not connected the Internet bank, limiting my remote servicing.

He did not make changes to the Criminal Code; illegal clauses of the Criminal Code continue to operate. In such circumstances, the court decision will be sent to the bailiffs for enforcement.

From significant comments from banki.ru:

To submit an application for appeal – one month from the date of production of the final decision (+ 5 days). A month has passed a long time ago. So the bank’s wishes for his appeal are just wishes.

Since the default judgment was not canceled, it means that the court found the bank’s arguments about its cancellation ridiculous. […]

The bank missed the deadline for the appeal - it was August 18 + 7 days + 1 month - i.e. The bank could file an appeal against the decision no later than September 25, 2015.
And the bank will not be able to restore the missed deadline accurately, i.e. he received the decision and saw it, which is also confirmed by filing an application for its cancellation. […]

In this case, the bank agreement is considered void, because it was proven in court that it does not comply with either the Law of the Russian Federation or the legislation of the Russian Federation =) And with its behavior (regarding failure to comply with a court decision), the bank disgraces itself =)

Below is the text of the court decision (minus one page). three photos.

Judgment

Absentee decision
In the name Russian Federation
August 11, 2015

Dzerzhinsky District Court of Perm, consisting of: presiding judge M.A. Meledina, with secretary E.S. Burdina,

having considered in open court a civil case on the claim of Sergei Viktorovich Gornostaev against Tinkoff Bank JSC for the protection of consumer rights,

installed:

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit to recognize the actions of Tinkoff Bank JSC to limit remote services, disable the Internet bank as illegal and violating the rights of the consumer of financial services, to oblige the defendant to connect the Internet banking service, to recognize as illegal and violating the rights of the consumer of financial services clauses 4.5, 4.6 , 4.7 Terms of comprehensive banking services of Tinkoff Bank JSC.

The stated requirements are motivated by the fact that on April 13, 2015, a universal agreement was concluded between the plaintiff and AOTinkoff Bank, the components of which are: an application form, terms of banking services, tariffs.

As part of the universal agreement, agreement No. 5009368753 for a settlement debit card was concluded, card account No. 40817810100000645913 was opened, as of April 14, 2015, the amount of funds on the card account is 43,379.95 rubles. On April 14, 2015, JSC Tinkoff Bank unilaterally suspended remote servicing under the public universal agreement, disabled the Internet bank, limited electronic payment services in the Internet bank, limited the receipt of information, submission of orders, and opening of deposits under the universal agreement in the Internet bank.

The defendant invited the plaintiff to submit orders for a card account, a deposit agreement, a universal agreement with a visit to the bank’s office in Moscow. The bank motivated these actions by the fact that the plaintiff assessed the quality of the services provided by the bank extremely low, leaving reviews on the bank’s website, ordering certificates confirming the conclusion of agreements by the bank for each agreement.

These actions of Tinkoff Bank JSC are illegal and violate the rights of the consumer of financial services under a public contract. The bank has a single bank office in Moscow; all banking activities are carried out remotely, via the Internet; the bank does not have offices in Perm. In addition, the plaintiff believes that the provisions of clauses 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 of the Terms of Comprehensive Banking Services of Tinkoff Bank JSC violate consumer rights and contradict current legislation.

The plaintiff did not appear at the court hearing, submitted a statement with a request to consider the case without his participation, and insists on the claims.

The defendant's representative did not appear at the court hearing, was duly notified of the date of the court hearing, which is confirmed by information about the delivery of the postal item, did not present any objections to the stated demands, and did not ask to postpone the hearing.

Thus, the court recognizes the reason for the defendant’s failure to appear as disrespectful, and considers it possible to consider the case at this appearance, in the absence of the defendant, in absentia proceedings.

According to Part 1 of Art. 452 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an agreement to amend or terminate a contract is made in the same form as the contract, unless otherwise follows from the law, other legal acts, contract or customs.

From the analysis of legal norms it follows that the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” and other federal laws do not provide for the right of a bank to unilaterally change the terms of an agreement concluded with citizen consumers.

The provisions of clause 4.5 of the conditions for comprehensive banking services at Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) actually give the bank the right to unilaterally change the terms of the agreement, thereby the bank deprives the consumer of the opportunity to receive information about the service in the manner provided for in Art. 10 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”. Thus, the bank’s inclusion in the contract of a condition on the possibility of unilateral changes to the contract contradicts the norms of civil law and infringes on the consumer’s rights established by law.

According to clause 4.6 of the conditions, the client agrees that the bank is not responsible for failures and refusals in remote servicing associated with disruptions in the operation of communication equipment and/or communication networks, and losses incurred in this regard.

This paragraph contradicts Art. 309, 310 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which obligations must be fulfilled properly in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the law and other legal acts, unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation and unilateral change of its conditions are not allowed.

By including this clause in the terms of comprehensive banking services at Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC), the bank refuses to properly fulfill its obligations under the agreement, which also infringes on the consumer’s rights established by law.

Clause 4.7 of the conditions stipulates that the bank has the right to refuse to accept orders from a client through remote servicing to carry out transactions on a card account or deposit account. In such cases, the bank accepts only properly executed payment documents on paper.

In accordance with Article 845 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a bank account agreement, the bank undertakes to accept and credit funds received to the account opened for the client (account owner), carry out the client’s orders to transfer and withdraw the corresponding amounts from the account and carry out other operations on the account. The bank can use the funds available in the account, guaranteeing the client’s right to freely dispose of these funds.

According to the rules of Article 849 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the bank is obliged, by order of the client, to issue or transfer the client’s funds from the account no later than the day following the day the bank receives the corresponding payment document, unless other deadlines are provided for by law, banking rules issued in accordance with it or bank account agreement.

Article 858 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation stipulates that restrictions on the client’s rights to dispose of funds in the account are not allowed, with the exception of seizing funds in the account or suspending operations on the account in cases provided for by law.

Based on the above, the provisions of clause 4.7 of the conditions for comprehensive banking services at Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) contradict the norms of current legislation, since refusal to a client to accept orders through remote servicing to conduct transactions on a card account or deposit account is a restriction of the client’s rights to disposal of funds in the account, which is not allowed by virtue of Art. 858 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the plaintiff, by virtue of Art. 56 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation provided sufficient evidence to support the stated requirements, in connection with which, the requirements of Gornostaev S.V. recognition as illegal and violating the rights of consumers of financial services, clauses 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 of the Terms of Comprehensive Banking Services of JSC Tinkoff Bank are justified and subject to satisfaction.

Due to the fact that clauses 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 of the Terms of Comprehensive Banking Services of JSC Tinkoff Bank contradict the current legislation and were declared invalid by the court, the plaintiff’s demands to recognize the actions of JSC Tinkoff Bank to limit remote services, disable the Internet bank as illegal and in violation of consumer rights financial services, as well as the obligation of Tinkoff Bank JSC to connect the Internet banking service are subject to satisfaction.

In accordance with Part 1 of Article 103 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, a state fee is subject to recovery from the defendant, from which the plaintiff was exempted when filing this claim, in the amount of 300 rubles.

Guided by Art. 194-198, 233 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

Claims of Sergei Viktorovich Gornostaev to satisfy.

Declare illegal and violative of consumer rights financial services clauses 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 of the conditions for comprehensive banking services at Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC).

Recognize the actions of Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) to limit remote servicing and disable Internet banking in relation to Sergei Viktorovich Gornostaev illegal and promoting the rights of consumers of financial services.

Oblige Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) to connect the Internet banking service in relation to Sergei Viktorovich Gornostaev.

Collect from Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) to the income of the corresponding budget a state duty of 300 rubles.

The defendant has the right to file with the court that made the default decision an application to cancel this court decision within seven days from the date of delivery of a copy of this decision.

A court decision in absentia may also be appealed by the parties on appeal within a month after the expiration of the deadline for the defendant to file an application to cancel this court decision, and if such an application is filed, within a month from the date of the court’s decision to refuse this application. .

Judge – M.A. Meledina

Appeal ruling of the Investigative Committee for civil cases of the Altai Regional Court dated June 24, 2015 in case No. 33-5901/2015

Judicial panel for civil cases of the Altai Regional Court consisting of:

presiding Kuznetsova S.V.,

judges Varnavsky V.M. Dmitrieva O.S.,

under the secretary O.V. Gorskaya,

considered in open court a civil case on the appeal of the defendant G.S.A. on the decision of the Rubtsovsky City Court of the Altai Territory dated April 1, 2015

according to the claim of Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint stock company) against G.S.A. on debt collection loan agreement, counterclaim G.S.A. to Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint stock company) to invalidate the terms of the agreement.

Having heard the report of judge Dmitrieva O.S., the judicial panel

INSTALLED:

Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint stock company) filed a claim against G.S.A. on collection of debt under loan agreement N *** from DD.MM.YY in the amount of *** rubles, as well as the amount of paid state duty in the amount of *** rubles.

In support of the requirements, it is stated that DD.MM.YY between Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) and G.S.A. Agreement No. *** was concluded on the issue and servicing of TKS Bank (CJSC) credit cards with an initial credit limit of *** rub. (credit line agreement with a debt limit). In accordance with the agreement G.S.A. accepted the obligation to repay the debt by paying monthly minimum payments in the amount and terms specified in the invoice statement. If the minimum payment is not paid, an appropriate penalty is established. The bank fulfilled its obligations under the agreement properly and provided loans to the defendant in its own name and at its own expense. The defendant repeatedly delayed payment of the minimum payment, thereby violating the terms of the contract. Due to the defendant’s systematic failure to fulfill its obligations under the agreement, DD.MM.GG Bank terminated the agreement with G.S.A. The defendant's debt to the plaintiff amounted to *** rubles, of which: *** rubles. - overdue principal debt; *** rub. - overdue interest; *** rub. - penalty interest for amounts not paid on time in accordance with the agreement to repay credit card debt; *** rub. - credit card service fee. The bank's demand for debt repayment was left unsatisfied.

During the consideration of the case, G.S.A. filed a counterclaim for the protection of consumer rights. to Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC), asked to invalidate the terms of the loan agreement N *** dated DD.MM.YY, concluded between it and the bank, according to which the latter includes borrowers in the borrower insurance protection program, and to exclude it from this program .

The counterclaims are motivated by the fact that DD.MM.YY between her and Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) concluded agreement No. *** on the issuance and servicing of a credit card with an initial limit of *** rubles. Simultaneously with the conclusion of the main agreement, the bank forced her to enter into a borrower insurance program. A loan agreement and a bank insurance agreement against life, accidents and illnesses are independent civil obligations. The borrower's obligations under the loan agreement cannot give rise to his obligations to join the borrower insurance protection program, since civil law does not provide for such an obligation for the borrower. The collection of other payments from the borrower, in addition to interest on the loan amount, is not provided for by law. Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) actually made the conclusion of a loan agreement conditional on the mandatory conclusion of an insurance agreement, without specifying the insurance company, thereby depriving it of the right to choose an insurer. The borrower's obligations under the loan agreement cannot lead to his obligations to join the insurance program and reimburse the bank's expenses for paying insurance premiums to the insurer, since civil law does not provide for such an obligation for the borrower. Believes that charging a borrower a fee for inclusion in the borrower insurance protection program is an imposition of life and health insurance services on the consumer, which infringes on the consumer’s rights established by law. Notes that the bank did not provide an alternative to the insurance company when concluding the contract.

By the decision of the Rubtsovsky City Court of the Altai Territory dated April 1, 2015, the claims of Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint stock company) for debt collection under the loan agreement were partially satisfied.

With G.S.A. in favor of Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint-stock company) the debt under the loan agreement was collected, namely: arrears in payment of the principal debt in the amount of *** rubles, overdue interest on the loan in the amount of *** rubles, penalty interest in the amount of *** rubles, towards reimbursement of legal expenses for payment of the state duty *** rubles, total - *** rubles.

The rest of the claim by Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint stock company) was rejected.

In satisfying the counterclaims of G.S.A. to Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (closed joint stock company) was refused.

In the appeal, defendant G.S.A. asks the court's decision to be quashed, citing the arguments set out in the counterclaim.

In written objections to the appeal, the plaintiff asks the court's decision to be left unchanged and the appeal to be dismissed.

The parties did not appear at the appellate court, were duly notified of the time and place of the court hearing, no motions were filed to postpone the consideration of the case, and therefore the judicial panel, guided by Art. 167 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, considered the case in the absence of the non-appearing participants in the process.

Having studied the case materials, discussed the arguments of the complaint, checked the legality and validity of the court's decision within the limits of the arguments of the complaint according to the rules of Part 1 of Art. 327.1 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the judicial panel does not find any grounds to satisfy it.

In accordance with Art. Art. 309, 310 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, other legal acts, and in the absence of such conditions and requirements - in accordance with customs or other usually imposed requirements. Unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation and unilateral change of its terms are not allowed, except in cases provided for by law.

According to Art. 819 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a loan agreement, 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 received and pay interest on it. The rules provided for a loan agreement apply to relations under a loan agreement.

According to the rules of Art. Art. 809, 810, part 2 of Art. 811 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the borrower is obliged to return the received loan amount to the lender on time and in the manner prescribed by the loan agreement, and the lender has the right to receive interest from the borrower on the loan amount in the amount and in the manner provided for by the 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 return the entire remaining loan amount plus any interest due.

It was established that DD.MM.YY G.S.A. submitted an application (offer) to Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC) to receive a Tinkoff Platinum credit card, with tariff plan TP 1.0, with a debt limit of *** rubles, while indicating your desire to participate in the borrower insurance protection program.

In the application form G.S.A. confirms that she is fully familiar with the general conditions and tariffs of the bank and undertakes to comply with them.

DD.MM.YY G.S.A. activated the bank card by calling the bank, from that moment between G.S.A. and the bank entered into an agreement N *** for the issue and servicing of credit cards.

Thus, the bank fully fulfilled its obligations under the agreement, which is confirmed by the borrower’s account statement and is not disputed by the defendant, however, the borrower systematically failed to fulfill its obligations, violating the loan repayment schedule, which led to the formation of a debt in the amount of *** rubles.

The defendant did not provide evidence of full fulfillment of the obligation to repay the loan amount or interest for using the loan.

Resolving the dispute on the merits, the court of first instance came to the conclusion about the long-term improper fulfillment by the defendant of the obligations assumed under the loan agreement, and therefore, after checking the calculation of the debt, determining the balance of unfulfilled obligations, it satisfied the stated requirements in part - it collected the amount of the principal debt from the defendant , interest, penalty, while reducing its amount at the request of the defendant.

Since the arguments of the appeal express actual disagreement with the court's decision regarding the refusal to satisfy counterclaims, the judicial panel, in accordance with Art. 327.1 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation there are no grounds for verifying the rest of the court decision.

Refusing to satisfy the counterclaims of G.S.A. to Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC), the court of first instance proceeded from the fact that the borrower voluntarily agreed to join the insurance program, while the bank’s service is an additional paid service, this method ensuring the borrower's fulfillment of loan obligations was not imposed by the defendant, the borrower had the right to refuse insurance.

The panel of judges believes that when resolving a dispute in the disputed part, the court correctly identified the circumstances relevant to the case, gave them a proper legal assessment and made a decision based on a correct assessment of the totality of the evidence presented in the case and the requirements of the substantive law governing the disputed issues that arose legal relations.

According to Art. 934 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a personal insurance contract, one party (the insurer) undertakes, for a fee stipulated by the contract (insurance premium) paid by the other party (the policyholder), to pay a lump sum or pay periodically the amount stipulated by the contract (insurance amount) in the event of harm to life or health the policyholder himself or another citizen (insured person) named in the contract, when he reaches a certain age or when another event (insured event) stipulated by the contract occurs in his life. The right to receive the insurance amount belongs to the person in whose favor the contract was concluded.

A personal insurance contract is considered concluded in favor of the insured person if another person is not named in the contract as a beneficiary. In the event of the death of a person insured under a contract in which no other beneficiary is named, the heirs of the insured person are recognized as beneficiaries.

A personal insurance contract in favor of a person who is not an insured person, including in favor of a policyholder who is not an insured person, can be concluded only with the written consent of the insured person. In the absence of such consent, the contract may be declared invalid at the claim of the insured person, and in the event of the death of this person, at the claim of his heirs.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 935 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the obligation to insure one’s life or health cannot be imposed on a citizen by law.

The above legal norms indicate that loan agreements may provide for the borrower's ability to insure his life and health as a way to ensure the fulfillment of obligations, and in this case the bank may be indicated as a beneficiary. At the same time, from paragraph 1 of Art. 422 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation it follows that the contract must comply with the rules binding on the parties established by law and other legal acts (imperative norms) in force at the time of its conclusion.

Based on the explanations set out in paragraph 4.4 of the Review judicial practice in civil cases related to the resolution of disputes regarding the fulfillment of loan obligations, approved by the Resolution of the Presidium Supreme Court Russian Federation dated May 22, 2013, when providing loans, banks do not have the right to independently insure the risks of borrowers. However, this does not prevent banks from concluding relevant insurance contracts on their own behalf in the interests and with the voluntary consent of borrowers.

According to paragraphs. 1,2 tbsp. 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation dated 02/07/1992 N 2300-1 “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”, the terms of the contract that infringe on the rights of the consumer 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 some goods (works, services) on the mandatory acquisition of other goods (works, services).

By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 166 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (as amended at the time of conclusion of the contract), a transaction is invalid on the grounds established by law, due to its recognition as such by the court (voidable transaction) or regardless of such recognition (void transaction).

According to Art. 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (as amended in force at the time of the transaction), except for the cases provided for in paragraph 2 of this article or other law, a transaction that violates the requirements of the law or other legal act, is contestable unless it follows from the law that other consequences of the violation not related to the invalidity of the transaction should be applied.

A transaction that violates the requirements of a law or other legal act and at the same time encroaches on public interests or the rights and legally protected interests of third parties is void unless it follows from the law that such a transaction is contestable or other consequences of the violation not related to the invalidity of the transaction must be applied.

From the case materials it follows that DD.MM.YY G.S.A. applied to the bank with an application in which the corresponding box was not marked with a refusal to participate in the bank’s borrower insurance protection program. This statement was signed by G.S.A., which was not disputed in the court of first instance.

The fact of familiarization with G.S.A. with the terms of the insurance program for credit card holders, confirmed by the signature of G.S.A. in a statement - a questionnaire, which indicates that the defendant agrees to be an insured person, instructs the bank to connect him to the insurance program and withhold a monthly fee in accordance with the bank's tariffs. At the same time, the defendant is familiar with the terms of the agreement, the general conditions for servicing credit cards of Tinkoff Credit Systems Bank (CJSC).

In accordance with the accession to the collective insurance agreement N *** TK from DD.MM.GG, concluded between the bank and the Open Insurance Joint Stock Company "RESO-Garantia", the insurance conditions under the insurance protection program for credit card holders "Tinkoff Credit Systems" Bank ( CJSC), insured under the insurance protection program are bank clients - credit card holders, who at the time of inclusion in the program were no more than 85 years old, who are not disabled people of groups I and II and who did not specifically indicate their disagreement to participate in the application form in the insurance protection program developed and provided by Reso-Garantia Insurance Company for holders of bank credit cards.

In this case, the client can refuse to participate in the program at any time by contacting the bank by phone, and the program in relation to this client ends on the day the account is generated - a statement for the period in which the client refused to participate in the program.

The bank client is independent in choosing and concluding life, health and disability insurance contracts for the bank borrowers in order to secure obligations under the loan agreement with insurance companies at their discretion.

The insurance protection program does not imply and does not provide for activities to limit or create obstacles to competition in the market of insurance and (or) banking (financial) services, providing Reso-Garantia Insurance Company with advantages over other insurers operating in the territory of the Russian Federation . The terms of the loan agreement cannot be interpreted as conditions obliging the bank to directly or indirectly impose on its clients the insurance services of Reso-Garantia Insurance Company.

Thus, the loan agreement concluded between the parties does not allow us to assume that if the borrower refused to join the insurance program, she would be denied a loan.

By concluding an insurance agreement for the borrower and charging a fee for connecting to the insurance program, the bank acted on behalf of the borrower. This service, like any contract, is subject to the provisions of Art. 972 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 3 of Art. 423 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, compensated. In case of unacceptability of the conditions, including connection to the insurance program, the borrower was not limited in his expression of will and had the opportunity to refuse the insurance service.

The borrower's participation in the voluntary insurance program is one of the ways to ensure the fulfillment of the obligation. Ensuring the fulfillment of an obligation in the form of life and health insurance is a condition that does not contradict current legislation and is based on the agreement reached by the parties to the contract.

The defendant's arguments that the inclusion of G.S.A. into the insurance program were imposed by the bank, verified by the court and given a proper assessment. Any evidence that her refusal to join the insurance program or to pay the insurance premium could have resulted in a refusal to conclude a loan agreement, that is, there was an imposition of the purchase of services subject to purchase, prohibited by Article 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” There are no other services in the case materials.

Since the defendant’s arguments do not refute the conclusions of the trial court, the judicial panel does not see any grounds for overturning the court’s decision.

The appeal does not contain any other arguments leading to the cancellation of the decision, and therefore the judicial panel does not find any grounds for satisfying it.

Based on the above and guided by Art. 328, 329 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, judicial panel

DEFINED:

the decision of the Rubtsovsky City Court of the Altai Territory dated April 1, 2015 is left unchanged, the appeal of the defendant G.S.A. - without satisfaction.

Chairman.

The defendant invited the plaintiff to submit orders for a card account, a deposit agreement, a universal agreement with a visit to the bank’s office in Moscow. The bank motivated these actions by the fact that the plaintiff assessed the quality of the services provided by the bank extremely low, leaving reviews on the bank’s website, ordering certificates confirming the conclusion of agreements by the bank for each agreement. These actions of Tinkoff Bank JSC are illegal and violate the rights of the consumer of financial services under a public contract. The bank has a single bank office in Moscow; all banking activities are carried out remotely, via the Internet; the bank does not have offices in Perm. In addition, the plaintiff believes that the provisions of clauses 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 of the Terms of Comprehensive Banking Services of Tinkoff Bank JSC violate consumer rights and contradict current legislation.

Please enable javascript

The claim should state the subject of the claim, for example, write that the bank has violated the terms of the contract and is demanding payment of a larger amount than required. Reviews from those who sued Tinkov Judging by the reviews, the outcome of the case depends on both the person’s behavior and the amount of debt. Marina, Tver. I signed up for a Tinkoff Platinum card with a limit of 123,000 rubles.

Attention

I cashed out by accident and fell out of the grace period, and interest began to accrue. But I didn’t know about it, and I just continued to use my credit card. As a result, it turned out that I needed to pay more than 15,000 rubles, and I did not expect such a debt.

Collectors started calling and threatening to sue me, I turned to a lawyer because I wanted to get rid of this card altogether... According to the court decision, I had to pay about 25,000 rubles, but I was able to terminate the contract. I have spent less than 10,000 rubles on a lawyer over the entire period. Mikhail, Moscow.

An error occurred.

The terms of comprehensive banking services of JSC Tinkoff Bank contradict the current legislation and were declared invalid by the court, the plaintiff’s demands to recognize the actions of JSC Tinkoff Bank to limit remote services, disable the Internet bank as illegal and infringing the rights of the consumer of financial services, as well as the obligation of JSC Tinkoff Bank to connect the Internet service bank are subject to satisfaction. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 103 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, a state fee is subject to recovery from the defendant, from which the plaintiff was exempted when filing this claim, in the amount of 300 rubles. Guided by Articles 194-198, 233 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, I DECIDED: To satisfy the claims of Sergei Viktorovich Gornostaev.
Declare illegal and violate the rights of consumers of financial services.

Pravda-tv

At the same time, in the case materials there is no evidence that it was impossible for the defendant to refuse to enter into a loan agreement on the proposed terms, as well as evidence that the agreement was concluded under the influence of deception, violence, threats or unfavorable circumstances. Argument about the need to release Osina Z.M. from paying penalty interest for late payments, taking into account the difficult financial situation, is not confirmed by evidence. The amount of penalty interest in the amount (amount) is proportionate to the consequences of violation of the obligation; the court had no grounds for reducing the penalty interest.

Request from Osina Z.M. in the appeal about reducing the amount of the accrued penalty, taking into account the provisions of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the judicial panel cannot take into account, since the defendant did not declare the application of the provisions of this article in the court of first instance.

Banker's blog

Important

The bank can use the funds available in the account, guaranteeing the client’s right to freely dispose of these funds. According to the rules of Article 849 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the bank is obliged, by order of the client, to issue or transfer the client’s funds from the account no later than the day following the day the bank receives the corresponding payment document, unless other deadlines are provided for by law, banking rules issued in accordance with it or bank account agreement. Article 858 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation stipulates that restrictions on the client’s rights to dispose of funds in the account are not allowed, with the exception of seizing funds in the account or suspending operations on the account in cases provided for by law.

Based on the above, the provisions of paragraph.

Tinkoff Bank played with justice

Two months before the decision was made by the regional court, Volsky Paradise. the court issued performance list Bank, and the bailiffs began to withhold 50% of my pension from me. Now I’m reading about the lawlessness of the Saratov courts when making illegal decisions, I thought it was time to continue the fight against the courts???? credit disputes, loan from Tinkoff Bank, loan from Tinkoff, complaint against Tinkoff Bank, Tinkoff Bank sued Collapse Victoria Dymova Support employee Pravoved.ru Similar issues have already been addressed, try looking here:

• Are there any examples of judicial practice on establishing the right of authorship of a dance?
• Is there a basis for a private complaint against a court ruling on the issue of the debtor’s jurisdiction?

Lawyers' answers (2)

• All legal services in Moscow Reduction of cash payments on a Moscow loan from 20,000 rubles. Assistance in refinancing a loan in Moscow from 5,000 rubles.

Court with the bank. how to get fees and fines canceled and not be left without pants

Here is your Lipetsk. Not just the shaggy years, but today. Lipetsk Regional Court (Lipetsk region) - Civil Essence dispute: Claims for collection of amounts under a loan agreement, credit agreement 3 LIPETSK REGIONAL COURT Judge Shatokhina G.A. Case No. 33-476/2016 Speaker Lepekhina N.V. APPEAL DECISION On February 15, 2016, the judicial panel for civil cases of the Lipetsk Regional Court, consisting of: presiding Fomina N.V., judges Lepekhina N.V., Malyk V.N., with secretary Karlina I.I.
considered in open court the appeal of the defendant Z.M. Osina. against the absentee decision of the Dankovsky City Court of the Lipetsk Region dated November 12, 2015, which decided: To collect from Osina Z.M.
General terms and conditions issuance and servicing of credit cards, bank tariffs for credit cards, which is confirmed by her signature (case sheet 9). Osina Z.M. does not dispute the fact of receiving and activating a bank card, as well as the fact of making debit transactions on the card and the amount of debt on the loan. The bank's demand for repayment of loan debt in the amount (amount) kopecks.
(ld. 16, 17) the defendant did not comply. Satisfying the claims for collection of credit debt in favor of the bank, the court came to the correct conclusion that Osina Z.M. failed to fulfill obligations to repay the loan and pay interest. From the calculation provided by the bank, it follows that the amount of debt under the loan agreement is (amount), of which: principal debt - (amount), amount of overdue interest - (amount), penalty interest for late payments - (amount).

Positive court decisions with Tinkoff Bank

Info

If their actions do not produce results, the dispute is resolved by the court. The period within which a claim will be filed is determined individually and depends on many factors, including whether the person gets in touch and whether he has paid at least one minimum payment. By law, a claim can be filed as early as the next day of delay, but in practice, litigation usually begins no earlier than a year later.

What to do if Tinkoff Bank sues? Usually, upon receiving a pre-trial claim or subpoena, people become confused. You can solve the problem in 2 ways:

1. On one's own.
2. With the help of a lawyer.

If problems with debt payment arose due to financial difficulties, there may not be money to pay for a lawyer.
The plaintiff did not appear at the court hearing, submitted a statement with a request to consider the case without his participation, and insists on the claims. The defendant's representative did not appear at the court hearing, was duly notified of the date of the court hearing, which is confirmed by information about the delivery of the postal item, did not present any objections to the stated demands, and did not ask to postpone the hearing. Thus, the court recognizes the reason for the defendant’s failure to appear as disrespectful, and considers it possible to consider the case at this appearance, in the absence of the defendant, in absentia proceedings.
[the following is a text that is not presented here; for the essence of the matter this is not important to us] According to Part 1 of Art.

• Civil law
• Lending
She sued the Tinkoff bank for illegal commissions and inflated interest rates in Volsky Paradise. court Initially, I filed a lawsuit myself with a request to exclude illegal commissions and recalculate the debt at the promised interest rate (proposed - 36% per annum, in fact - 43.8%) The court ignored the laws of the Russian Federation, my claims, appearances in court, without delving into my evidence, calculations in the claim is denied. The minutes of the court hearing are drawn up in a template manner, without questions or comments to the Bank. I am filing an appeal to the regional court. The court is just as easy, without question - leaves the decision to heaven. the court is in force. Next, the Bank files a claim to collect debt in the amount of 138 thousand rubles, consisting of 92 thousand rubles of commissions and inflated interest. I submitted to the court a calculation confirming that I had settled with the Bank at a rate of 36% per annum.

In particular, it is part of our life. Conflicts that arise between a banking institution and a client are unpleasant, as they are fraught with financial and moral losses. In controversial situations, both one and the other party may act as a defendant. Let's consider how to act if Tinkoff Bank sues you or violates the terms of the agreement itself, demanding that you seek justice from Themis. We will also give several examples from existing judicial practice.

Information about Tinkoff Bank

This banking institution was founded in 2006 by Russian businessman Oleg Tinkov and was previously known as Tinkoff Credit Systems (TCS). In January 2015, the company was renamed Tinkoff Bank.

Initially, the bank was created as a remote financial institution similar to the American Capital One and Wells Fargo. Tinkoff Bank's specialization today is plastic cards, so it does not have regional branches, ATMs and other familiar infrastructure. There is only one office - the head office and all issues are resolved either there, or over the phone or online.

In this format, it is not easy for everyone to quickly resolve emerging misunderstandings, problems and difficulties. As a result, borrowers, bank clients and the financial institution itself are forced to go to court to resolve disputes.

The bank may resort to legal proceedings in the event that the client evades fulfilling his obligations and other ways to resolve the problem are ineffective. Most often, difficulties arise in relations with borrowers. Some, out of ignorance, out of reluctance to understand complex financial issues, difficult life situation evading mandatory loan payments. In this case, the bank can act against the client in court.

Litigation is not profitable banking institutions for several reasons:

• it is necessary to pay for the work of the legal service;
• once the trial begins in court, the accrual of penalties for non-payment of contributions is suspended;
• the court often makes a decision that obliges the client to pay the amount of the principal debt, without penalties or fines;
• if the decision is positive for the bank, the borrower’s debt will be divided into a large number of payments.

Thus, the bank loses time, money and legal proceedings mainly those financial institutions that have sufficient resources and a well-functioning legal service resort.

Tinkoff Bank rarely resorts to such a solution to the issue. The possibility of going to court depends not so much on the amount of debt, but on the length of the period during which there were no payments on the loan. Employees of the financial institution first work with the borrower and try to convince him to resume payments. If the client makes contact and also provides objective evidence of his insolvency, he may be offered a review of the loan repayment terms, that is, restructuring.

But sometimes negotiations with the borrower drag on for weeks or even months. At the same time, the client may persistently avoid contact with the bank, oppose any offers and, without reason, refuse to repay the debt, without presenting any documents confirming his difficult financial situation. But even in this case, Tinkoff will not necessarily go to court.

Note! Sometimes the bank reserves the opportunity to contact a third party to resolve the problem and transfers to the collection agency the right to collect the debt on a commission or in its entirety.

If Tinkoff Bank sues you, be sure to take part in the consideration of the dispute, since the failure of the defendant to appear negatively affects the court’s attitude towards the defendant, which may affect the severity of the final decision.

Often clients file a claim against Tinkoff in court, wanting for one reason or another to recognize its actions as unlawful.

The reasons for disputes with the bank are:

• unilateral change in the terms of the transaction;
• delays in transferring funds;
• decrease in profitability on deposits before the expiration of the contract;
• other.

To go to court, you must draw up an application and submit it to your place of registration. If consumer rights have been violated, such a claim is not subject to state duty.

Important! The borrower can sue only if the terms of the lender’s agreement violate the law - the civil code or the Law on Consumer Rights.

A statement of claim against Tinkoff Bank, if all other possibilities for resolving the dispute have been exhausted, must be carefully prepared. To do this, you can contact specialists or prepare all the paperwork yourself.

A statement of claim is drawn up independently using a template or with the help of a lawyer and sent to the court by registered mail (required with acknowledgment of receipt). After some time, usually from two weeks to a month, a subpoena arrives.

In some cases, a lawsuit may be brought by a group of people and supported by various influential organizations. For example, in August 2015, clients of Tinkoff Bank filed a lawsuit with the Khoroshevsky District Court of Moscow due to a unilateral reduction interest rate, and, therefore, the yield on bank deposits from 16-18% to 13%.

This statement was supported by the Consumer Protection Society. The financial institution was forced to change the conditions and stated that for deposits opened before July 1, 2015, i.e., before the interest rate changed, the rate specified in the original agreement continues to apply.

There is another example of a successful resolution in court of a conflict situation between a client and Tinkoff Bank. In December 2015, a financial institution lost a court case in the city of Perm. The plaintiff was a Tinkoff client, who was blocked from accessing cards and Internet banking without explanation, having been asked to fly to Moscow to the only office in the country to receive money in cash.

Throughout the year, there was litigation regarding violation of the requirements of the Law “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” under contracts with financial and credit institutions, which resulted in a decision by the Dzerzhinsky District Court of the city of Perm, recognizing the violation of the client’s rights and the illegality of three points of the Terms of Comprehensive Services.

In controversial situations arising between banking services, you can use different ways regulation. But if the only option seems to be to go to court, then there is no need to be afraid to defend your rights. As the experience and practice of those who have gone through litigation show, it is possible and necessary to fight for justice and the possibility of compensation for damage in the legal field.