The Federal Antimonopoly Service recognized as unlawful the actions of Tinkoff Bank, which unilaterally changed the rates for replenishing existing deposits. Will clients be able to recover lost money?

The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) on Monday, October 26, recognized Tinkoff Bank as a violator of antimonopoly legislation for unilaterally changing the rates on additional contributions on existing deposits.

Deputy Head of the FAS Andrey Kashevarov told the TASS agency that “Tinkoff Bank’s actions to unilaterally change the terms of the deposit agreement are contrary to banking legislation.” According to him, the bank could be fined from 100 to 500 thousand rubles. and will receive an order to stop violating antimonopoly laws.

From July 1, the bank unilaterally reduced rates on additional contributions to existing replenishable deposits. The bank stated then that it considers additional contributions on existing deposits to be new deposits and is ready to accept them at 13% per annum in rubles and 4% per annum in foreign currency.

In the winter of 2015, bank clients could open replenishable deposits at rates of 18% per annum in rubles and 6% per annum in foreign currency, so the losses for them were significant. Clients believe that the bank’s actions are illegal: they violate the essential terms of deposits, which is contrary to the Civil Code. According to it, the bank does not have the right to unilaterally change the rate.

Tinkoff Bank stated that they do not agree with the FAS decision and will appeal it in arbitration court. “Tinkoff Bank acted fully in accordance with the deposit agreement, notifying both clients individually and the market as a whole more than a month in advance about the upcoming changes,” says the bank’s comment received by RBC. The bank says that the possibility of such changes is spelled out in the conditions of comprehensive banking services.

One of the bank’s clients, Alexander Khokhlov, who suffered from the bank’s decision, evaluates the FAS decision positively and is going to take part in the bank’s upcoming legal proceedings with the FAS on the side of the antimonopoly service. “The FAS will be the defendant, but they said that it would be possible to join the case or just attend the meeting, which is what I’m going to do,” he said.

It is premature for investors to expect the return of lost income, says Grigory Kolesnikov, a lawyer at the European Legal Service. The FAS does not have the right to oblige the bank to pay anything to its clients - this must be done by the court. In addition, the situation is complicated by the fact that the opportunity to change the conditions was initially enshrined in the contract, and the client voluntarily signed it, explains Kolesnikov.

Mikhail Alexandrov, partner of the A2 legal bureau, agrees with this position. According to him, based on the decision of the FAS , Tinkoff Bank should not pay lost income to its clients. The only chance for the investor to receive such compensation is to go to court himself, appealing to the decision of the FAS. True, one must understand that this is rather a matter of principle: the costs of running such a business (at least 50 thousand rubles) are unlikely to exceed the amount of lost income, Aleksandrov believes.

Tinkoff Bank became the third bank to unilaterally change rates since December last year, but the first to do so with deposit rates. At the end of December 2014, Avangard Bank increased rates on existing card loans by 6 percentage points. In April of this year, another bank, Russian Standard, invited clients to agree to a new tariff plan, which implied an increase in the interest rate on existing credit cards by almost 7 percentage points. — from 28% to 34.9% per annum. In case of refusal, clients could repay existing debts at the old rate, but the credit limit on the card would be closed for them.

Tinkov Bank was accused of violations when reducing deposit rates