In times of economic instability in Ukraine, people are forced to turn to banks and other financial institutions for loans. Due to the demand for money loans, there is a supply of loans from banks, microfinance organizations, and other dubious financial institutions, such as "payday loans," "quick cash," and the like.
However, not all banks and microfinance organizations faithfully fulfill their contractual obligations and often take advantage of the opportunity to profit from their own clients. We draw your attention to the fact that the largest but not the most reliable bank in Ukraine, PrivatBank, is no exception to these rules.
In December 2018, a client approached the legal company "Monarch Business Consulting" in despair because she had learned that a default judgment had been issued against her without her participation. The judgment was in response to a lawsuit by PrivatBank, which sought to collect a sum of money totaling more than 100,000 (one hundred thousand) hryvnias to cover the debt on a loan that was originally only 4,000 (four thousand) hryvnias. The client had obtained this loan from PrivatBank many years ago in the form of a credit card.
Given that our client learned about the existence of an ex parte court decision rendered against her, meaning a decision made without her knowledge and her participation in the debt recovery court proceedings totaling 108,000 UAH for non-compliance with the terms of a credit agreement, which is an amount exceeding the 4,000 UAH loan provided by JSC CB "PrivatBank," and with the purpose of protecting her violated rights and seeking justice, the client had to seek legal assistance and a qualified attorney specializing in credit cases to safeguard her violated rights and guarantees from the financial institution she had trusted in the past due to life circumstances.
Indeed, from December 2018 to July 2020, the courts of Vinnytsia Region reviewed the unlawful ex parte decision and justifiably rendered a new lawful decision in the credit case concerning our client filed by JSC CB "PrivatBank."
It is worth noting that the decision resulting from the first-instance court review of the case was made with full consideration of our client's position and lawful interests. Consequently, only the principal loan amount of 4,000 UAH was collected from our client. Interest, penalty sanctions, and fees, which exceeded 100,000 UAH in total, were entirely canceled due to their illegitimate imposition.
The biggest challenge in resolving this case was that the ex parte decision against our client was issued by the same court that was obligated to review it and make a legal and substantiated decision in favor of our client. In our opinion, this circumstance was the reason for the extended duration of the credit case review, which took over a year in the first-instance court alone, as the district court had to acknowledge its mistakes and render a new decision, nearly dismissing the plaintiff's claim, filed by representatives of JSC CB "PrivatBank."
While the resolution of this dispute took a considerable amount of time, the victorious outcome was ultimately achieved, leaving the client more than satisfied. It's important to note that the resources and time invested in resolving disputes of this category are undoubtedly worth the results that can be achieved by turning to the attorneys at Monarch Business Consulting legal company!
Court decision in absentia (page 1)
Court decision in absentia (page 1)
Court decision in absentia (page 2)
Court decision (page 1)
Court decision (page 2)
Court decision (page 3)
Court decision (page 4)
Court decision (page 5)
Court decision (page 6)
Court decision (page 7)
Appellate court ruling (page 1)
Appellate court ruling (page 2)
Appellate court ruling (page 3)
Appellate court ruling (page 4)
Appellate court ruling (page 5)
Appellate court ruling (page 6)
Appellate court ruling (page 7)
