Submit your application

CCC: customers are not obliged to pay for the “mistakes” of ATMs!

“For the extra money issued by the ATM, the client is not responsible if there is no proof of receipt of funds!” – the Civil Court of Cassation expressed its decision in case No. 296/3921/15-c.

The situation is in detail!

A PrivatBank client withdraws a certain amount of money from a credit card at a “foreign” ATM, but gets 10 times more! In a week, he pays off the debt on the credit card, taking into account the commission.

The bank does not agree that the loan has been repaid and calculates to the client the amount that went in surplus!

The citizen, in response, also does not agree with the additional charge and goes to court with a claim to recognize the loan obligation as terminated due to its proper performance.

The first court took the client’s side!

The appeal court considered the findings of the first instance court hasty, justifying the client’s wrongness with an account statement containing information about the withdrawal of the increased amount. Also, a letter from FGDI was taken into account, stating the incorrectness of the loaded denomination of the cassettes during encashment (instead of the “twenty” in the cassettes, there were “two hundred”).

“The civil court of cassation canceled the decision of the appeal court and took the side of the court of first instance! In its decision, the court indicated that the plaintiff in this situation, as a user of banking services and a weaker party, insists that he had withdrawn the amount he ordered, which is confirmed by checks. The defendant’s objections are not supported by anything except words.”

The CCC also noted that the result of an official check in this situation cannot be objective evidence that the plaintiff received money not in the amount ordered from the ATM, but exceeded the credit limit of UAH 2,000 established for the card.

In addition, the obligation to preserve money in bank accounts is legally assigned to the bank, as well as responsibility for the security of the payment system (part 3 of article 1092 of the Civil Code and article 33 of the Law of Ukraine “On payment systems …”).

The client is liable under the law if he conducts illegal transactions! In the actions of the plaintiff, which consists in withdrawing cash through an ATM, there is obviously no illegality!

Legal consultation

In the analyzed situation, the bank’s attempt to “hang” on the client the responsibility for those who made a mistake when loading the ATM, fortunately for the client, ended unsuccessfully!

The situation was “saved” by the CCC, having indicated to the financial institution that compensation for the damage caused in this case should be considered in another court proceeding at the bank’s claim against the actual tortfeasor!



Aspects of calculating court fees when collecting a mortgage

“On claims for foreclosure on the subject of a mortgage, the court fee is calculated based on the value of the pledged property, and not on the amount of the debt obligation!” – expressed the Supreme Court of Ukraine by the decision on the case No. 307/23/18 dated 02.10.19. The conclusion was made after considering […]

Ukrainian Supreme Court prevented the bank from recovering the shortage from the cash collector

On October 23, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 522/6582/16-c published a legal conclusion regarding the wrongness of the bank, which was collecting funds to pay off the loan debt under a non-existent loan agreement. Details of the proceedings A citizen-former employee of the bank went to court with a claim against […]

The Supreme Court to the Prosecutor’s Office is a friend and comrade! Don’t believe? Read on!

The case № 638/8636/17-c considered by the Supreme Court, 05/13/2020, was closed by a legal conclusion, according to which the inactivity of the prosecutor’s office is not evidence of moral harm, therefore, it cannot be compensated! Initially, the lawsuit was initiated by a citizen who believes that the inaction of the law enforcement system is […]

Personal mortgage property of a bankrupt entrepreneur: is it subject to collection?

Cassation economic court of the Supreme Court “stood up” for the mortgage apartment of the borrower of the bank, delimiting the personal and business rights and obligations of individual entrepreneurs, as well as limiting the rights of claimants to this property. So, with the conclusion in case No. 922/4404/15, promulgated on 06/04/19, the Supreme Court […]

The plaintiff threatened the judge for not explaining the terms of the lease

Even a solution to an economic dispute can become a breeding ground for threats! For example, the consideration of one of the cases, during which the plaintiff asked to explain to him certain clauses of the land plot lease agreement, ended with the tenant dissatisfied with the court decision not in his favor, took it […]

The Supreme Court of Ukraine on the cancellation of the “old” will with a new one

The citizen applied to the court with a claim against two other persons, demanding the recognition of property rights by inheritance. The claim was motivated by the fact that after the death of her aunt, an inheritance for real estate (house, land) was opened. She, within the time period established by law, turned to the […]