People or hope that everything will somehow be solved, or prefer not to mess with. And in vain. Defend their rights can and should be.
In the crisis year, the office of the Gazette-estate "for advice a lot of potentially defrauded real estate investors, borrowers and clients of unscrupulous companies. We took the comments in "SU-155, PIK, Peresvet, OPIN, and so on. But in court against the AMT to the bank "(" BTA Bank ", it Slavinvestbank) went only Natalia and Alexei Ionkin. A year later they won it.
Related article: Safety Tips transactions
Ionkin signed an investment agreement with the developer "Stroyrazvitie" to build a country house in the village Svetlogorye. Developer, as the plaintiff in court, "strongly advised to obtain the target credit only Slavinvestbank. With this bank was contracted to receive special credits to build a house. Payments were to be two tranches of 50% of the value of the house. The first tranche of the bank transferred, interest on the loan's family paid ahead of schedule. But when he came second tranche of the date of transfer - 05/01/2009, the bank refused to cash. Rationale for rejection (from 06/01/2009) it was strange: "With the increase in the CBR refinancing rate. But with this answer, Natalia Ionkin and came to the office. An article with the comments of lawyers and official unsubscribing at that time already "BTA Bank". Ionkin invited one of our experts - attorney Andrew Samoryadova conduct business.
The Bank began to offer refinancing to borrowers in connection with the economic crisis at a rate of 26,9% in the initial 14% interest. While walking the dispute, the rate of CB decreased more than 10 times and at the time of adjudication was 8.75%.
The petition Ionkin besides issuing the second tranche required to charge interest on the bank for using another's money. Meshchansky District Court in January 2010 concluded that "a breach of contract the defendant refused to perform the obligations unilaterally" and ordered "BTA bank" to pay the plaintiffs a second tranche under the loan agreement satisfied the requirements and compensate for legal fees and expenses attorneys' fees. But the demand for payment of interest the court is not satisfied.
Challenging the decision of the Meshchansky court, the bank tightened the process is still almost half a year, during this time having had time to change the title twice: with Slavinvestbank to "BTA bank" and then on the "AMT Bank. Each time had to send requests to the Central Bank, which also increased the time trial. Total family had to wait almost a year, when the court will compel the bank to do what he and so had to do. Often, the people whose interests are harmed, not judged or drop the case because of judicial red tape, commented Andrew Samoryadov.
Although the process of borrowers and won, the bank did not lose. He just has fulfilled its obligations are delayed for a year. "Why in order to force the company to obey the law and fulfill its obligations as should the court decision?" - Is perplexed lawyer.
Gentleman in this story acted developer. According Ionkin, "Stroyrazvitie" not presented to them within a year no penalty, although the timing of payments, of course, have been violated. General manager Ilja Sviridov was skeptical of the idea of the court. "Indeed, few believed (and still do not believe) that the banks can fight - adds Ionkin. - I hope we will not be the only ones who did it. "
If the bank - or any company - he knew that 90% of the defrauded customers will go to court, trying to cheat it would be much less confident Samoryadov.
Svetlana Danilova, Vedomosti