Russian court: one law, and the solutions are different

June 8 Supreme Arbitration Court (IAC) found the actions of Home Credit and Finance Bank (HCF-Bank) as legitimate. The story begins with the fact that the Federal Service authorized the check HCFB at the request of one of the clients of the credit institution. Experts have found a violation of the law department in the credit agreement, which banks offer to sign their clients. In particular, the financial institution has not informed the consumer about the fact that he charged a commission fee of 1.99% per month on loan size. In addition, the contract was written the creditor's right to unilaterally at any time to modify or amend the conditions of the contract. HKF the Bank has decided to compete with Rospotrebnadzor. And won three consecutive trial. According to the court, the contract was signed, it means that the consumer agreed to all terms and conditions. But officials did not give up. In the end, it came up to you. And the Supreme Arbitration Court sided with the bank. Many bankers took this news with optimism. While lawyers and, especially, financial journalists, non-market participants are confused by the decision. Since it is in any case, at first glance, contradicts the decision in a similar case, which concerned the Russian Development Bank (CB "Opening"). March 2 Presidium in the Russian Development Bank acknowledged that the actions of the bank for opening and maintaining the loan account are not self-service, recalled Irina Kazhikina, head of mortgage services company RELAYT-Real Estate. Thus, the inclusion in the loan agreement conditions of payment of commission for the opening of loan accounts violate the statutory rights of consumers (the administrative offenses provided st.14.8 Part 2 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation). Federal Service for the Irkutsk Region has filed suit against the Bank Home Credit and Finance Bank of involvement in administrative responsibility in Part 2 st.14.8 Code of Administrative Offences. In the bank loan agreement with the borrower-citizen was a condition of charging a monthly fee for service on the loan and the right bank at any time unilaterally amend and supplement the terms of the contract, including fees of the bank. That is, the decision of the RF from 03.02.1910 year made a similar case. However, Rospotrebnadzor was denied transfer the case to the Presidium of the Russian Federation. Of the RF is already an official explanation of the arisen situation, said Irina Kazhikina. The whole thing in particular proceedings in EAC, it turns out, the legal position of the RF on the case is certain from the moment of posting on the court or the relevant resolution of the Presidium of the Russian Federation Supreme Arbitration Court. Ruling of the Russian Federation of 02.03.2010 on case № 7171/09 was published on the site April 9, 2010, and the definition in the case of Bank Home Credit and Finance was taken April 7, 2010. "It turns out that it is impossible to consider these two things as contradictory. Moreover, now that the position of the RF is defined, in Rospodprebnadzora have every chance to review by Bank Home Credit and Finance "on newly discovered evidence»,