Can the bank not return the money to the depositor. The bank does not pay

The Collegium of the Supreme Court for Civil Disputes examined how justified the actions of the bank, which did not give the client the money transferred from another credit institution, suspecting "dubious transactions." Can the bank, based on its suspicions, "freeze" the deposit and require documents confirming the legality of the origin of the funds? Two instances decided that in such a situation it was right not to give out cash and to add the account holder to the bank "stop list". The Sun put an end to the matter.

The Collegium for Civil Disputes of the Armed Forces, consisting of judges Vyacheslav Gorshkov, Andrey Maryin and Alexander Kiselev, considered a complaint from a citizen who was not given cash from the account, suspecting him of money laundering (case No.). The 22-year-old individual entrepreneur Sergey Budeny* had an account with City Invest Bank JSC. At the end of 2015, he transferred 56 million rubles. to a Sberbank account. As the purpose of the payment, it was indicated: “Funds for personal consumption. Not subject to VAT". The very next day after receipt, he decided to withdraw cash, but it did not work out. Such a transaction seemed doubtful to Sberbank.

Budyonny was asked for documents confirming the economic meaning of the operation and the origin of the money. In response, he submitted a 2013 software supply agreement concluded with AlfaSharp LLC, a product acceptance and transfer certificate of 2014, and a product transfer acceptance certificate of 2015. Sberbank studied the documents, but suspicions remained: the bank had neither information about the counterparty, nor confirmation of payments, nor the ability to determine the real value of the contract, and Budyony was again not allowed to withdraw cash. The money was recommended to be sent back to the account in JSC City Invest Bank. Then the next day Budyonny tried to withdraw a smaller amount - 1 million rubles. But the issuance of cash was not agreed again - with similar conclusions and recommendations. The bank sent notifications of refusals in operations to the Rosfinmonitoring Department, and Budyonny was included in the bank stop list as a person using the bank to perform dubious operations - in this case, to cash out money.

Then the Sberbank client decided to go the other way: through Sberbank Online, he opened five deposits, to which he transferred money. At the end of the term, he closed the deposits, and transferred the money with interest back to his account. Some time later, he opened two more deposits, on which he put almost 57 million rubles. When, a month later, the applicant wanted to withdraw money with interest accrued at the end of the deposit period, he was refused: bank employees "orally stated that it was impossible to issue the deposit." The money remained in Sberbank, and the term of the deposit was extended.

Then Budyonny went to court. He demanded the return of the invested money, interest and a penalty for illegal withholding of deposits. Both the first instance and the appeal were denied (cases No. 2-2865/2016 ~ M-3181/2016 and No. 33-893/2017 (33-27139/2016)). Violations that the bank extended contracts and did not issue cash, the courts did not see. There was no reason to give the money without verification, since Budyonny was already on the stop list at that time, and he did not apply to the bank with an application to terminate the banking service agreement. At the same time, the bank noticed that Budyonny could still manage the money, but only with a wire transfer - by the way, this is how he eventually returned the funds to his account in another bank.

But the client complained to the Supreme Court, trying to prove that the contract with him was not terminated, but deposits were opened, which means that the bank actually approved the plaintiff's operations. He also insisted that he tried to close the accounts, but was refused, while only one application is enough to close the account. Representatives of the bank who participated in the meeting, in turn, drew attention to the fact that the opinion that, having carried out one operation, the bank is obliged to carry out the rest, contradicts the essence of compliance. Only cash transactions were closed to the client, but he could well transfer them to another bank by bank transfer, that is, there was no deduction of funds.

"The rule of law does not contain an obligation to issue money in the form in which the client requested. The bank can issue money both in cash and by bank transfer.", - said the representative of the bank. The board supported Sberbank, not satisfying the client's complaint.

In general, according to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an individual who owns an account or a deposit in a bank can terminate the contract at any time and receive money, this is one of the cornerstones of legal regulation in this area, recalls Alexander Ermolenko, partner. However, in practice, banks very often resort to numerous tricks in order not to issue money.

Anti-laundering legislation should work at the stage of "entry" of money into the banking system, Yermolenko emphasizes: "If the money is "dirty", the bank has the right to check the source and not accept it, in addition, the bank is obliged to identify the contributor of funds and report the suspicious transaction to Rosfinmonitoring. at the stage of issuance, the money is already “white”, their very passage through bank accounts should “whitewash” them. Therefore, it is too late to control at the issuance stage, and besides, it is illegal. However, in our realities, with incoming control, they turn a blind eye to many things, so Sberbank is trying to control funds "at the exit".

Alexander Ermolenko, Partner

Until recently, the not fully formed practice in such cases was in favor of citizens, but today the decision in favor of the bank in such disputes is far from an isolated case. Banks themselves are increasingly refusing to carry out account transactions with clients, and this is due to increased control over operations by the state. Today, the volume of suspicious transactions, above which banks risk being left without a license, is 1 billion rubles. - the amount is half as much as before August 2017, and is small for the bank, the lawyer notes Yulia Andreeva, AB Project Manager. Not the last place is occupied by the "anti-money laundering" law 115-FZ. In such circumstances, banks find themselves between private and public interests.

"Banks are in a situation where, on the one hand, the pressure of the Central Bank is growing in order to combat the shadow economy, and on the other hand, it is necessary to respect the interests of customers who entrusted them with their money," Andreeva explains. The number of cases where the court will side with the bank will only grow, she is sure.

*Names and surnames have been changed by the editors.

Panic among the population is an integral part of any financial crisis. While the stock markets were “shaking”, ordinary people watched it from the side, saying “we have nothing to lose, but let the rich cry.” But as soon as the recession hit the banks, the population became worried. That loans are not given is bad, but you can survive. But if you can’t take your hard-earned money from the deposit, this is absolutely a guard.

The first sign that not all is well in the banking system, for many, was the situation with Globex Bank. According to press reports, for some time he suspended the early issuance of deposits concluded for a certain period. However, deposits that have expired and interest on them are issued in the usual way.

A ban on early termination of the deposit agreement was introduced by several other banks. In some places, such termination is possible, but with the payment of a commission to the bank, and the money is handed over only after 7-10 days.

The bankers themselves explain that these measures are caused by the desire to maintain a stable situation, and urge the population not to panic. And market experts call this decision unprecedented and note that in the Civil Code there are no grounds for refusing to issue a deposit or charging a fine.

Those who urgently need money should understand what kind of contribution they are talking about, - said "AiF" Vice President of the Association of Russian Banks Oleg Ivanov. - If it's about a current account on demand, to which the minimum interest is credited and which can be withdrawn at any time, then this is one thing. In this case, the bank often asks to notify about the decision to withdraw funds in 1-2 days in order to be able to bring cash to the cash desk. If you have a term deposit, then you can pick it up before the expiration date only by losing interest. In this case, you need to come to the bank and write a statement in which you indicate that you agree to this. Usually we are talking about 7-10% per annum, so there is something to think about.

In extreme cases, you can ask the bank to issue a cashless money transfer - this is done instantly.

But the decision has been made. Further, the norm of the Civil Code, which regulates the procedure for early termination of the contract, comes into force. The law does not specify a specific period for which the bank is obliged to issue money. Here it may take from several days to two weeks - it all depends on the specific amount and the location of a particular branch.

In some places it happens that you need to send a whole truckload of money, says Ivanov. However, he warned AiF readers against panic. - No need to rush headlong to the bank to get your money at any cost. Nothing will happen to them if the bank is included in the deposit insurance system. The State Duma raised the bar for guaranteed payments in the event of a bank failure to 700,000 rubles. This is a pretty decent amount, so you can sleep peacefully.

But what if the bank still goes "in failure"? Lawyers give categorical recommendations - it is better to solve such problems through the courts. As explained Dmitry Glazunov, Partner at Liniya Prava law firm, the algorithm of actions in this case is as follows. A person who has suffered from banking arbitrariness must first write a statement indicating the number of the agreement, the amount available on the account and a request to issue it in whole or in part. It is written in free form. We must try to ensure that the bank employee, having accepted it, puts a mark on the copy of the document that the application has been received. If this is denied, you must go to the bank with a notary and ask him to certify the fact of the refusal. Then, with this document, there is a direct road to the court, where a statement of claim is written demanding the return of the money.

Do you have any claims against a credit institution regarding your contribution or deposit? In this case, find out from this article how you can defend your interests and whether you need the help of a lawyer.

Why is the bank not repaying the deposit?

It would seem - wildness! The bank refuses to give its client his own money. However, thanks to the law 115-FZ, this has become not only possible, but has generally become a common practice. Credit institutions cover up their unwillingness to part with the client's money by requiring them to provide sources of finance. And here begins the "most interesting".

By and large, not everyone will be able to prove the actual origin of funds. For example, how to explain that a person put aside the entire salary, while he himself lived on the "foot stern"? Even worse, when the grandmother made savings under her pillow, and before her death she gave the 500,000 saved from her pension to her grandson for adulthood. And how can a person at the age of 18 provide convincing evidence of the origin of money? Alas, there are more questions than answers...

But people complain that they do not give back for other reasons:

internal regulations of a credit institution - some banks do not issue the requested amount immediately, but some time after the request;

the absence of the required amount in the bank's cash desk - this is how the bank can evade the client's requirements for many months, until the person's patience runs out.

How much is to be frozen?

There is no special limitation in the law, except for the mention of the amount of 600,000 rubles. But this does not mean that the bank will not be able to demand an economic justification for an operation in the amount of 50 thousand rubles. There has already been a precedent when a credit institution blocked a client's card when a specified amount was credited to it.

On the other hand, many citizens have several hundred thousand rubles on deposit. There are still no cases of a total refusal to issue funds, just as there is no unequivocal statement that all banks refuse to pay out money, so far.

What to do if the bank does not issue a deposit

And yet, if the bank unexpectedly refused to issue funds to the client from his account, you should use all the tools of pressure on the bank that are guaranteed by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Claim procedure

It is worth trying to settle the controversial decision amicably. To do this, it is necessary to require a bank employee to provide a written refusal to issue a deposit with a mandatory indication of the reason.

the essence of the problem, that is, the refusal to issue a deposit, indicating the time, place and date of application;

details of the agreement between the depositor and the bank;

norms of laws that were violated by a specialist of a credit institution;

notification of going to court if the deposit is not issued by the time specified in the claim (usually 2-4 weeks).

Grigory D., the bank refused to issue a deposit in the amount of 350,000 rubles with accrued interest and demanded an economic justification for the man to receive this amount initially. However, the depositor turned to lawyers who helped to draw up a claim against a credit institution. The bank considered the client's request and decided to issue funds without confirming the source of their receipt.

If the amount does not reach 600,000 rubles, then with a high degree of probability the credit institution will meet the client halfway. If a bank cares about its reputation and does not want unnecessary publicity, then it will certainly resolve the issue amicably for fear of losing some of its depositors.

court order

If the bank does not return the deposit even after receiving the claim, the depositor has no other way to get his money, except to apply to the judicial authorities. There are precedents for challenging the illegal actions of the bank.

Citizen Alekseev placed 1,000,000 rubles on the account, 80,000 of which were his personal savings, 120,000 savings of his wife, 800,000 money received from the sale of a car. At the end of the year, the bank refused to issue cash, demanding confirmation of the legal origin of the money. Since Alekseev could not confirm the origin of 200,000 rubles with documents, the bank refused to operate.
The man turned to lawyers who studied the case and recommended going to court, backing up his claims with the norms of the Law on Consumer Protection, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and other regulations, as well as a banking service agreement between Alekseev and a credit institution. The court sided with the client, forcing the bank to issue a deposit, pay a penalty and reimburse the plaintiff's costs for legal costs and a representative.

Algorithm for going to court

a statement is made to the court indicating the reason;

a package of documents is attached (loan agreement, letters to and from the bank, responses to claims, etc.);

participation in the court session and with reasoned upholding of one's position.

The decision of the court on the deposit may not satisfy the plaintiff, which allows the dispute to be transferred to the next instance. However, if the income is obtained legally and there is at least one justification for this, then the court will most likely take the side of the depositor. Negative decisions are in most cases made if the plaintiff cannot explain the origin of the funds.

Sberbank is a sought-after financial institution in our country. It offers favorable conditions for cooperation in various areas. The presence of branches and ATMs throughout Russia proves the fact that every second resident prefers this particular bank. All these obvious advantages are overshadowed by the fact that Sberbank has recently been legally entitled not to issue cash to a client. This innovation caused a lot of dissatisfaction and indignation on the part of citizens who are served by this financial institution.

Such cases when Sberbank does not give money to a client on a deposit began to occur since 2015. The restriction on cash withdrawals and their transfers applies only to transactions of large amounts of money, ordinary payments, including salaries, do not fall under these actions of the bank. The receipt of funds to the account that exceed the established limit, Sberbank may also suspend the possibility of performing any operations.

The procedure for refusing to issue cash to a Sberbank client began in 2015. This case received wide publicity thanks to the story of a Russian citizen who was served by Sberbank. He transferred 56,000,000.00 rubles from a personal account of one bank to another at Sberbank. He then expressed a desire to withdraw this amount. In a financial institution, the client was denied this, due to suspicions of obtaining these amounts in an illegal way. The bank's specialists asked the visitor to submit documents confirming the legitimacy of the money. But he refused, and instead decided to split the funds and put them in several non-long-term deposits, also in Sberbank.

After the completion of the established deadlines for deposits, the client risked trying again, but Sberbank again refused to issue cash. After that, the citizen decided to go to court so that Sberbank would not prevent him from withdrawing cash from his account. The lawsuit also demanded that Sberbank pay interest and provide material compensation. The court sided with Sberbank, which refused to issue money without providing the necessary documents.

Sberbank at the legislative level, relying on legal norms, reserves the right to choose how to issue the client his own money: in cash or non-cash. The Supreme Court of Russia also supported Sberbank in this decision.

In such situations, you can transfer your funds to another bank and withdraw through their branch. But the interest for transferring such large amounts is at least 5 percent. Commission fees are one of the main sources of income in many banking organizations.

Another way to get around this limitation is to terminate cooperation with the credit institution and terminate the agreement with it. The bank will be required to close all accounts and issue funds in cash or non-cash. Sberbank will no longer be able to influence decisions on how to receive these finances, since the citizen will no longer be their client. But this option is also risky, since the client may be blacklisted by the banking system. This will mean that he will be denied access to all banking services.

To avoid possible difficulties in the future, you should know the main reasons why the bank can refuse to issue cash. This will avoid many difficulties in the future.

Reasons why a bank may refuse to issue money

Recently, Russian legislation has approved a law that empowers banks to require documents from customers confirming the legality of the origin of money. This was done to combat various types of fraudulent transactions in which funds are transferred from one account to another.

Also, the bank may refuse to receive cash for the following reasons:

1. The amount requested by the client exceeds the limit set on the Sberbank bank card.
2. Request for a large sum of money. The bank, without receiving supporting documents on the legitimacy of the money, has the right to freeze the account or refuse to issue.

Blocking a client's account for various reasons:

1. Arrest of the account by employees of the Federal Bailiff Service.
2. If the client is suspected of fraudulent or other illegal transactions.
3. Incorrect provision of information.

What to do if Sberbank refuses to issue cash

If difficulties arise, it is necessary to carefully analyze the situation, and then develop a sequence of measures and stick to them. The action plan should be as follows:

1. Finding out the reasons on the basis of which the bank refuses the service. If the refusal occurs due to the arrest of the account, then it will be necessary to deal with the bailiffs themselves.
2. After excluding the arrest, an appeal to the leaders of Sberbank, and drawing up an application for blocking the account and the inability to receive cash.
3. After finding out the reasons, the manager will give an answer. If the reason is to exceed the established limit, then you will simply need to indicate a smaller amount to receive. And so get the entire amount in several approaches. If there are suspicions of fraudulent transactions, the bank will require documentary evidence to confirm their legitimacy.
4. After all clarifications, Sberbank can independently decide to unblock accounts and open access to cash. Or a financial institution applies for a decision to higher authorities, that is, to the court.
5. If these actions do not give a result, the client must apply to the prosecutor's office with a statement about the illegal blocking of the account.
6. If the outcome of the case is positive, after the prosecutor's check, the bank will be obliged to unblock the account and issue the requested funds.

Important. If the funds are obtained legally, and there are no other attendant circumstances, then the client will be able to withdraw cash and make cash and non-cash transactions.

It is only necessary to confirm the basis for receiving funds. Such documents may be sales contracts, certificates 2-NDFL.

Features of going to court

If, nevertheless, difficulties arise and litigation cannot be dispensed with, then the client of Sberbank must file a lawsuit. When applying to the court, the necessary list of documents is provided:

1. A statement of claim, indicating his requirements and a description of what results he wants to receive after the completion of the proceedings.
2. Copy of applicant's passport.
3. A copy of the agreement for opening an account with Sberbank and other related information on the client's account.
4. Documents confirming the ownership of the blocked funds by the client to the plaintiff, i.e. the client of Sberbank. In rare cases, testimonies can also become evidence in this matter.
5. Extract from the current account of Sberbank. It should indicate the amounts and dates of income and expenditure transactions.

When applying to the judicial authority, specialists may request additional documents, depending on the circumstances of the alleged case. After the application is accepted and the document is registered, the date of the court session is set.

On the day of the hearing, the client will have to prove the illegality of the decision of Sberbank to refuse to issue him funds. The plaintiff can use as evidence base any sources of information that will be obtained legally and without offense. Financial institution, i.e. the defendant also has the right to defend himself by any means that do not contradict the legislation of the Russian Federation.

After considering the evidence of both parties, the court makes a decision in favor of one of the parties. At the end of the hearing, both the plaintiff and the defendant receive an order. If a decision is made in favor of the plaintiff, then the unblocking of the account must be carried out precisely on the basis of this court decision. The court sets a specific period of time for the implementation of the necessary measures.

Important. But we must remember that all of the above written will be relevant only after the entry into force of the verdict. Each such case is individual and must be considered by the court with special care.

Sberbank can legally block a client's account if more than 1,500,000.00 rubles are credited to his account at a time. This will not depend on the sources of payment receipts or other circumstances.

If the client requests from the bank more than 600,000.00 rubles, then in this case the financial institution has the right to refuse it.

To avoid unforeseen situations related to the withdrawal and transfer of large funds, you should consult before making transactions. Advice can be obtained directly from Sberbank branches, or from other special companies providing legal and consulting services.

The dispute between Sberbank and Sergey Budnik about receiving cash from the account, which lasted about 3 years, is finally resolved. On January 30, 2018, the civil collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation recognized the correctness of Sberbank, which refused to issue funds from the account to a citizen due to their dubious origin.

Let us recall the essence of the dispute. In 2016, Sergey Budnik received a transfer to his account in the amount of 56 million rubles, and a day later he tried to withdraw cash at the cash desk. But the bank did not issue a deposit, but requested documents confirming the origin of the money. Having studied them, Sberbank refused to issue a deposit, and then Budnik opened several term deposits, transferred money there, but when he tried to cash out, he was again refused.

Courts of all instances, including the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, supported Sberbank. The judges noted that the citizen failed to provide evidence that the funds on the deposits were not acquired illegally. In addition, the courts noted that Budnik did not lose the ability to control the money - he could transfer them to an account in other banks, but did not.

As many experts note, this decision creates a dangerous precedent for banks not to issue money on a deposit in almost any disputable situation. At the same time, this problem can affect both an individual who has opened a deposit or an account with a banking institution, and a legal entity that has a deposit or account with a bank. On what basis can banks not issue deposits, and also impose restrictions on the disposal of funds in the account?

To answer this question, let's turn to Article 6 of the Federal Law No. 115. It says that the following operations are subject to mandatory control, the amount of which is equal to or exceeds 600 thousand rubles:

1. Operations with cash in cash:

• withdrawal or crediting of cash to the account of a legal entity in cases where this is not due to the nature of its economic activity;
• purchase or sale of cash foreign currency by an individual;
• acquisition by an individual of securities for cash;
• receipt by an individual of funds under a bearer check issued by a non-resident;
• exchange of banknotes of one denomination for banknotes of another denomination;
• contribution by an individual of cash to the authorized capital of the organization.

• opening a deposit in favor of another person and placing cash in it;
• placement of funds in a deposit with the execution of documents to the bearer;
• transferring money to a deposit opened in another country to an anonymous owner;
• receiving money from abroad from an account (deposit) from an anonymous person;
• crediting or debiting funds if the legal entity has existed for no more than 3 months or if no transactions have been made on the account (deposit) since its opening;

Other operations specified in the law are also subject to mandatory control (transactions with real estate in the amount equal to or exceeding 3 million rubles, operations under the state defense order, operations of persons involved in extremist activities and terrorism, etc.)

Article 7 of Federal Law No. 115 states that a bank may refuse to execute an order for a client (a citizen or an organization) to carry out an operation (with the exception of an operation to credit money to an account), in particular, the bank has the right to refuse to issue funds from an account or deposit, if the client does not provide the documents necessary to record information in accordance with the procedure specified in this article of the law, as well as in the event that employees have suspicions that the operation is carried out in order to legalize (launder) proceeds from crime or finance terrorism . The law also provides for a procedure for suspending operations on an account or deposit in respect of persons included in the list of those involved in extremist activities or terrorism. Simultaneously with the suspension of operations or refusal to conduct an operation on an account or deposit, the bank sends the relevant information to Rosfinmonitoring.

It is on the basis of these provisions of Art. 7 of the Law "On counteracting the legalization (laundering) of proceeds from crime and the financing of terrorism" banks and currently refuse to issue cash from the accounts and deposits of citizens and organizations.

In addition, in recent years, banks, primarily subdivisions and branches of Sberbank of Russia, are increasingly blocking citizens' funds on accounts opened for servicing plastic cards (both debit and credit). In this case, as a legal justification, bank employees refer, in addition to the aforementioned Law No. 115-FZ, to the Instruction of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation of May 30, 2014 No. 153-I, the provisions of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation on the obligation to notify the tax authorities about open accounts used in business activities, as well as the conditions for issuing and servicing plastic cards, approved by the bank itself and reflected in the agreements on opening an account by almost all banking institutions, according to which the use of cards in the field of entrepreneurial activity is prohibited.

Unfortunately, in such cases, the principle of the presumption of law-abidingness of the cardholder practically does not apply: in all cases when bank employees suspect that the Card is being used for commercial purposes, information is first requested from the person who transferred money to the card; if it is indicated that the money was transferred to pay for the service, for the goods sold, etc., the operations to withdraw money from the card are suspended. Therefore, when using the Card in commercial settlements, you should avoid indicating the purpose of the payment, and when calling a bank employee to the person who transferred the money, keep in mind that you should refrain from providing any information, especially by phone.

Banks were allowed not to issue money from deposits?

Currency control in Russia has become stricter, and this is quite understandable: the state seeks to identify and stop all schemes for the legalization and laundering of criminal proceeds. But this does not mean that banks were allowed not to issue deposits and keep the money for themselves - credit institutions simply ask firms for additional information.

What do banks request most often?

• copies of contracts with counterparties containing information about the profit received;
• acts of work performed, payment orders;
• information about the counterparty who transferred the money to the company;
• statements from the account of another bank where the money was previously kept;
• other documents confirming the source of origin of money in a deposit or account.

Sometimes banks send a written request to their client with the requirement to provide the necessary documents even before the client is going to make any transactions. The list of securities is established by each bank independently.

How to prevent "blocking" of the deposit

The main snag of Law No. 115 is that there are no clear criteria for classifying a particular transaction as suspicious, as well as determining the sufficiency of suspicion to restrict transactions, and there is no closed list of documents confirming the origin of money. This leaves room for abuse by lending institutions: banks may not lend money from an account or deposit for virtually any reason. At a time when the company will be engaged in an urgent search for documents, the bank will use the depositor's money, and without interest.

What do companies need to do in order for the bank to issue money on a deposit?

1. If you want to deposit money, provide evidence of their legal origin immediately.
2. Collaborate only with trusted contractors with a good reputation.
3. Keep all contracts, deeds of transfer, acts of work performed, payment orders, even if you have not cooperated with a particular company for a long time.
4. Familiarize yourself with the rules of internal financial control, which can be found on the website of almost any bank.
5. If the bank doubts the legal origin of the money, provide it with all the documents that it requests.

But even if the collected documents were not enough, and the bank did not issue a deposit, an experienced specialist will not only prove that your company's funds were acquired legally, but also. Remember that the suspicion of money laundering can not only undermine the stable operation of your company, but also be the starting point for criminal prosecution under Art. 174 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.