Market Analysis

Investors troubled banks through the courts trying to recover their deposits amounting to more than 1 billion UAH. However, even a positive court decision does not guarantee the return of the deposit.

  

Many lawyers and politicians are calling for investors to seek the return of their savings from the troubled banks through the courts. At the same time, the practice of recent months shows: appeal to the court not only fails to produce positive results, but also can harm the investor.

Debts not give
  

troubled banks at the beginning of 2010 owed its depositors - individuals on their deposits of about 15 billion UAH. Another 7 billion UAH. Bankers should be legal persons and private entrepreneurs. Frozen funds totaling more than 22 billion UAH. concentrated in those banks, which operate the temporary administration of NBU. According to the norms of the Law "On banks and banking activity", in such cases, a moratorium on satisfaction of creditors" rights, therefore, investors are denied access to their own means. At the same time st.1066 Civil Code guarantees the depositors access to their own savings on demand.

&1000amp;quot;There is a conflict in the law", - noted Anatoly Drobiazko, the interim administrator of the bank "Vladimir". Using this legal conflict, many investors return their savings through the courts. I must say that the courts often side with bank clients. "Practice, when investors are suing the banks, widely distributed," - says Yuri Bully, vice president of law firm Gramatsky and partners.

Although representatives of commercial banks and the NBU claim that litigation between banks and investors did not become a mass phenomenon, according to lawyers, about 15 thousand investors have already made positive decisions of the courts for the recovery of troubled banks deposits totaling about 1 billion UAH . According to Mr. Drobiazko at 17 thousand depositors of the bank "Vladimir" has more than 330 court decisions.
   

As of October 1, 2009 troubled banks failed to comply with commitments totaling more than 10 billion UAH. Almost 60% of this amount - obligations to entities. Most of all outstanding obligations were recorded at Ukrprombank - more than 5.7 billion UAH. Following this is "Nadra Bank" with the volume of "filing" of 2.4 billion UAH. At the same time, the beginning of 2010 the volume of outstanding commitments decreased slightly and amounted to 8.3 billion UAH. This is explained by the fact that in November last year Cabinet and the National Bank decided to transfer the contributions of people from Ukrprombank in Rodovid Bank. As of January 13, 2010 is a financial institution has already paid out to depositors Ukrprombank deposits at 1.4 billion UAH.

Pursuant
   

Without exception, all figures of the deposit in court proceedings, noted the difficulties with the execution of judicial decisions. "Get a judicial decision can be, but that"s actually execute it, ie, to write off funds from the bank"s correspondent accounts is problematic," - said Denis Mirgorodskii, president of the law firm of "Dynasty."

lawyers noted that in early 2009 Executive Service still managed to recover funds from banks despite the moratorium. "The original legislative interpretation of the moratorium was not entirely conclusive, and lawyers tried to" twist "it in favor of depositors," - explains Mr. Bully. However, July 24, 2009 adopted the Law number 1617, which amended the Law on Banks and Banking Activity "in the definition of" moratorium ". Thus, execution of court decisions in favor of depositors became impossible.

"The first half of 2009 the courts rather successfully exacted the debt from the banks, despite the moratorium. When the amount of such claims has become critical, the National Bank has initiated changes in the law" On banks and banking activities. "Furthermore, it was a letter of explanation from the National Bank (№ 18-312/4592-20287). It says that banks must comply with the executive service ", - says Mr. Mirgorodskii. Therefore, even lawyers are not currently recommend the depositors of troubled banks to apply to the courts. They warn that the litigation with the banks may even harm investors.
    

For example, serious difficulties in the process of translating the deposit of Ukrprombank in Rodovid Bank experienced investors, who sought the return of their savings through the courts. The fact that "Rodovid Bank refused to accept such deposits in its balance sheet. The reasoning is as follows: the bank is not a successor Ukrprombank, so judgments about the recovery of funds from the bank can not run "Rodovid Bank. Thus, in order to gain access to savings, investors were forced to withdraw their claims.

"Treat1000y on the Transfer of liabilities, provided that" Rodovid Bank accepts the obligations of those depositors who had voluntarily withdrawn an enforcement proceeding, or signed a tripartite agreement with the world Ukrprombank and Rodovid-Bank "and have his court statement," - report in Ukrprombank.

Counselor temporary administrator Ukrprombank Igor Vlasjuk explained that this procedure is necessary to avoid such cases, when the investor can receive their money in two banks. The lawyers note that the procedure for withdrawal of the claims may be delayed. The fact that the executive office of materially interested still comply with the decision of the court, as in this case will receive compensation amounting to 10% of the collection. If the plaintiff takes the (recalled) a writ of execution, the performers are left without income. Nevertheless, Mr. Vlasjuk insists he did not know of cases that the executive office refused to dismiss claims by depositors Ukrprombank. At the same time there is a group of investors who, for various reasons do not wish to litigation against Ukrprombank stopped.

According to the Chairman of the Board "Rodovid Bank Sergei Shcherbina, entrusted to him by the bank has taken on the balance of about 1 thousand deposits from Ukrprombank, which were legal cases totaling $ 200 million UAH. For comparison: the whole "Rodovid Bank has received from Ukrprombank 342 thousand deposit contracts on 7 billion UAH. "About 95% of investors who sued Ukrprombank already transferred to our bank and began to receive payments. Others, for various reasons continued to plead with Ukrprombank", - said S. Shcherbina.
   

At the end of December 2009, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko has unexpectedly announced the transfer of individuals" deposits of "Nadra Bank" in "Rodovid Bank. Now the volume of deposits of the population in "Nadra Bank" is 7.5 billion UAH. Sergei Shcherbina admits that the payment of savings depositors of the financial institution may begin as early as February this year. At the same time, the interim administration report to his bank on the actual extent of obligations owed to clients on the basis of 2009 in the amount of 3.5 billion UAH. At the same time about 2.8 billion UAH. - Is paid to individuals with deposit accounts (1.9 billion UAH.), Current account (more than 347 million grn.) And interest payments (more than 534 million UAH.).

likely after the transfer of household deposits in Rodovid Bank "to start liquidation proceedings largest problem banks - Nadra Bank" and Ukrprombank. Remember: in 2009 the National Bank took action on the Elimination of 7 troubled banks. Currently under external control knob are 13 banks.

official - a moratorium

Ruslan Gritsenko, Deputy Director of the Directorate of National Bank of Ukraine on banking regulation and supervision:

- In accordance with st.85 Law "On banks and banking activity" after the introduction of a moratorium on satisfaction of the rights of creditors of the bank with the interim administration is forbidden to carry out enforcement proceedings of court decisions. In addition, to satisfy the obligations of clients in full does not allow the financial condition of troubled banks. Thus, while there is a moratorium, the court will not help expedite the return of the deposit. Typically, the moratorium is terminated, if the troubled banks could find an investor (including the State. - Ed.), Which is sanitized bank. But, as practice shows, all investors with equal access to their deposits, regardless of the presence or absence of judicial decisions. If during the moratorium "revitalize" the bank faile1000d, then the decision to eliminate it. This means that investors can expect to receive compensation from FGVFL. In this case, the court decision also does not give any advantage.

interim administrator - the dialogue

Anatoly Drobiazko, the interim administrator of the bank "Vladimir":

- If you have a moratorium on satisfaction of creditors of the bank, that bank can not execute the court decision before the expiration of the ban. At least ten times subscribed to a court order - if the money is not physically, then the bank does not pay them. At the same time obtaining a court decision contributor worth the money. Only the mandatory payments to the state would be approximately 500 UAH. plus a lawyer. At the end of the moratorium a temporary administrator of the Bank pursuant to judicial decisions must transfer the funds to an account executive service, that is, in fact - in the budget. To get them out to investors will be very difficult. There were instances when they received at the hands of their money in six months or more. Do not forget that sometimes the bank an opportunity to fulfill their obligations even under the moratorium. When there are no court decisions, the investor can expect at least a partial payment of the deposit with the extension of the balance of the deposit amount. If the depositor comes from a court decision, we no longer make interest accrual, ie his money just "hang" until the end of the moratorium. So I would advise investors to engage in dialogue with the banks, rather than go through the courts.

Lawyer - about schemes

Yuri Bully, vice president of law firm Gramatsky and partners ":

- The practice of collection of deposits through the courts began to mass for two reasons. First, because of unfair advertising lawyers who often promise unrealistic things. Secondly, it works psychological factor. When the bank discourages investor to go to court, a person goes there to spite the bank. There was the mass of suggestions from lawyers who promise to return the deposit within a few days. As far as I know, such schemes do not work. I am not aware of that without the goodwill of temporary administrators of banks perform such court decisions. At the same time, a trial could harm the client (investor). To court makes sense only to large depositors (deposit of more than 150 thousand grn.) Smaller problem banks (they are more likely to be eliminated). In this case, the court decision only confirms the legitimacy of claims of the depositor to the bank. This will help the depositor, if the liquidator of the bank will oppose the amount of claims.

Dmitry Grinkov

Asian stock exchanges are now showing mixed dynamics indices
Dollar exchange rate has risen - a review of cash markets
"Kommersant": Internet Explorer hit Vulnerabilities
Payment to bribe

officials made a show of whipping institutions prefer to issue during the last inaugural campaign ...

Speculative recommendation on shares of Gazprom, LUKoil, Polyus Gold, Sberbank and VTB
Given the abundance of data in the current environment with relative certainty in the market today Russia can only predict high volatility
Dollar exchange rate to the ruble now stands at 29.69 rubles against the ruble at 29.52 yesterday morning auction
The level of support for the RTS Index futures for today - 161 000
Russia"s indexes are near annual highs, trying to find drivers for continued upward movement

News and Comments