A Lviv woman opened a credit card and spent 74,235 hryvnias after a call from a “mobile operator” – what the court decided

The woman created a credit account, increased the credit limit and stole 74,235 hryvnias. She indicates that the funds were taken by an unknown person who called and introduced himself as an employee of “My Kyivstar”. The citizen demands to terminate the credit agreement with PrivatBank. This is stated in the decision of the Pustomyty District Court of Lviv Region, published on November 26, 2024.

On January 17, 2024, an unknown person, having called a woman on a mobile number from an unknown mobile phone number, introduced himself as an employee of «My Kyivstar» by illegal use of electronic computing equipment, independently creating a credit bank card and increasing the credit limit, took possession of funds in the total amount of 74,235 hryvnias, which were debited from the account in three separate payments. On January 18, 2024, she contacted JSC CB «PrivatBank» and reported fraudulent actions. The citizen also filed a complaint with the police, where her complaint was accepted, qualifying a criminal offense under Part 4 of Art. 190 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, information about which was entered into the ERDR under No. 12024141360000295 and she was recognized as a victim. 

“On January 17, 2024, the client logged in to «Privat-24» using the plaintiff's financial phone number with confirmation of registration by entering the card's PIN code. During this procedure, the client enters his/her username, login and password, which are known only to the plaintiff. After logging in to «Privat-24», he/she creates the necessary payment, enters the access key known only to him/her, and after that, a payment order is received by the bank, according to which the bank transfers funds. The specified actions could only be carried out using the plaintiff's financial phone. In the due diligence questionnaire of the client – an individual dated October 30, 2023 and item 14 of the application for accession to the Terms and Rules for the provision of banking services dated January 17, 2024, she signed an agreement with the bank on the use of a simple electronic signature. The defendant fulfilled his/her obligations under the loan agreement dated January 17 2024 was fully executed, and the plaintiff did not allege any violation of her rights, namely JSC KB «PrivatBank». He referred to the positions of the Supreme Court set out in the resolutions of April 10, 2019 in case No. 144/287/17-ts (proceedings No. 61-31835св18) and of April 10, 2019 in case No. 524/3979/16-ts (proceedings No. 61-20290св18), according to which the presence of criminal proceedings cannot indicate, due to the presumption of innocence, the commission of a crime against a person before the verdict is passed, by which such circumstances will be established. In addition, the criminal proceedings filed with the ERDR have been closed, the guilty parties have not been established and the plaintiff's lack of guilt has not been proven, let alone the presence of guilt of other persons in the implementation of the transfers of funds and the conclusion of agreements on January 17, 2024,” PrivatBank said. 

What was the court's decision?

The court refused to satisfy the woman's claim. She applied to the bank after the value date, that is, after the funds were credited to the recipient's account, and therefore the deadlines for taking actions to revoke the transfer were missed by the plaintiff as the initiator transfer.

“However, no evidence was provided to the court that, following the results of the consideration of the application for the commission of a criminal offense, would have reliably established the facts of fraudulent actions with the plaintiff's card accounts,” the court emphasized.