MILES AXLE Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Source: Mainfin Bank –
What was the dispute between the bank and the borrower that was being considered by the court?
The decision on the inadmissibility of imposing services was made by the Supreme Court in the context of a civil dispute between a bank and a resident of the Sverdlovsk region. The citizen had previously taken out a loan, but the bank imposed insurance on him and refused to terminate the contract during the “cooling-off period”. The borrower managed to restore his rights with the help of the financial ombudsman – the bank did not agree with this decision and went to court.
The Supreme Court found that the bank had violated the requirements of the law by including a clause in the terms of the loan agreement requiring the borrower to purchase an insurance policy from a specific company. At the same time, the client did not check the box about consent to connect the protection, although he agreed to the proposed terms of the loan. The highest court overturned the decisions of the lower courts and sent the case back for a retrial on the merits.
What restrictions apply to creditors when connecting additional services?
The Supreme Court’s decision on the dispute that arose imposes a number of restrictions on banks when provided to borrowers credits and connecting them to additional services. Thus, the court recalled that:
the bank’s duty is to provide the client with a choice: to agree or refuse imposed services; the lender does not have the right to put notes on consent or include clauses in the terms that provide for the mandatory connection of additional services; it is prohibited to create conditions within which the borrower’s unambiguous consent to the purchase of individual services is assumed.
“A bank that fails to comply with these requirements violates the rights of the borrower and the norms of the law, since the imposition of insurance and other services is unacceptable,” the Supreme Court panel noted.
Thus, the court prohibited banks from including in loan agreements the obligation to purchase insurance – the borrower must independently agree to take out the protection.
15:50 10/15/2024
Source:
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Please note; This information is raw content directly from the information source. It is accurate to what the source is stating and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
http://mainfin.ru/news/to impose-it-will-not-work-on-all-Russian-Russian Federation-has-recognized-illegal-insurance-without-consent-borrowing