En
Submit your application

You need to pay for heat, even if it is turned off in the apartment

Is the unauthorized disconnection of the apartment from the heating network a basis for canceling charges for heat? The Supreme Court of Ukraine, by a decision on case No. 522/401/15-c of 25/09/19, answered the question in the negative. The consumer is obliged to pay for the service that has not been consumed anyway!

Analyzing – why?

Initial situation: CE “Teploset …” goes to court with a claim against a consumer who does not pay for heating and hot water and therefore has a large debt. The court ruled that the demands of the heating network are fair, the appeal instance too …

In short, the solution was: “use – pay”!

The consumer did not agree with this and filed a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court of Ukraine. In the complaint, he asked the said decisions of the courts of previous instances to be canceled, arguing that he was right by the fact that the debt is not subject to collection, since:

  • the plaintiff missed the statute of limitations;
  • the consumer is disconnected from the heat supply networks;
  • it is impossible to conduct a legal analysis of the contract, since it does not exist.

The Ukrainian Supreme Court analyzed the circumstances of the case and established that it was true: there was no contract, the consumer was a defaulter who had arrears for heat and was unauthorizedly disconnected from the heat supply network. But, these moments are not a reason for non-payment, because …

“The obligation to pay for housing and communal services is regulated by a number of legal acts, a systematic analysis of the norms of which suggests that the absence of an agreement on the provision of services is not a reason for exempting the consumer from paying in full volume. Consequently, the absence of a treaty is not an argument for justice.”

The fact that the consumer unauthorizedly “cut off” from the heating network is generally a violation (Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine № 630 of 21.07.2005 prohibited to do this without permit). There is a special permitting procedure for disconnection, regulated by the “Disconnection Procedure…” approved by the order of the Ministry of Regional Development No. 4 dated November 22, 2005.

In the analyzed situation, “on the side” of the heating network, the Laws of Ukraine “On Housing and Utilities Services” and the Laws of Ukraine “On Heat Supply”, annulling the arguments of the cassation about that the consumer did not actually receive services, that means that charging for them is illegal.

The Ukrainian Supreme Court also spoke about missing the statute of limitations. The courts of the previous instances “did not notice” that it was interrupted, therefore, this justification of the cassation appeal is not taken into account.

The case was sent for review to the appellate instance, which must decide it taking into account the fact of the interrupted limitation period and with due justification of the court decision obliging the defendant to pay off the debt.

24.12.2019

74

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
Forge a document and not go to jail? Is it real?

Interestingly the judges are judging! There is no other way to say after analyzing case No. 750/5469 / 18, which reached the Supreme Court and ended with the publication of a legal conclusion on it on 03.03.2021. In the beginning there was an acquittal … The District Court concluded that the citizen was innocent of […]

The conditions of the “repayment” of the debt on the IOU explained by the Supreme Court of Ukraine

Analysis of the decision of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 524/4946/16-ts dated 08.07.2019, is answering the question of what should be recorded in the IOU so that the debt repayment is not in question. Professional legal advice – to everyone who borrows and lends! Debt situation initially The citizen applied to the […]

INTERACTION WITH BAILIFF AT THE STAGE OF ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS

In the previous article, we considered one of the tools for collecting debts abroad (in the Russian Federation) – encashment settlement accounts of debtors. We will not re-list the entire toolkit. Let’s move on to the next stage of recovery – the answer to the question “how to effectively cooperate with bailiffs?”, Because the success […]

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 […]

CEC-Supreme Court of Ukraine: what should the economic court find out before rejecting the claim?

The Joint Chamber of the CEC of the Supreme Court of Ukraine spoke out on the motivation for refusals to consider claims. In the ruling in case No. 910/6642/18 of 06/14/19, the courts were explained what exactly they should find out before deciding to dismiss the claim when considering economic disputes in the context of […]

Supreme Court of New York: debt collection from a citizen of the Russian Federation

Indicative case for international judicial practice the case of businessman Igor Mavlyanov, ended with the fact that the American court recognized Moscow’s court decisions as fair. The case was considered in a New York court for a little over a year. Why is it so far from the defendant’s homeland? Because it was there that […]