Today, non-repayment of loans and debts is an acute problem of our society. Loss of work, reduction of wages, illness - all this can lead to delay in mandatory payments. As a result - calls from collectors, bank employees. Their voice, as a rule, is serious, persistent, confident. However, many of them intentionally do not voice one important rule of law - the limitation period (article 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). We will try to clarify the main points in this article.
What does the total limitation period mean (Civil Code of the Russian Federation)
The limitation period (hereinafter referred to as the abbreviation LED) means only one thing - the lender has run out of time when he can legally go to court to pay off the debt. This takes 3 years. After that, any threats to collectors “sue”, “seize property”, “put in custody for fraud” will be just words. Fraud is generally not applicable to the debtor, who took a loan from his bank according to his documents. Unfortunately, some do not know this, and collectors and employees skillfully use such a horror story.
Another thing is to sue and seize property, through bailiffs, of course. It is in order to prevent such problems that you need to know the rule of law - this is Article 196 of the Civil Code. It says after what time you can legally not pay on obligations. But for this, you first need to understand from what time it is necessary to count three years? We will analyze this in more detail.
Determination of the limitation period
Lawyers often mislead themselves and many citizens. Article 196 of the Civil Code seems to be understandable, the LED is defined. However, from what point is it necessary to count down? There are three different points of view among professionals:
- Since the expiration of the loan agreement.
- From the day when the person ceased to pay obligations.
- From the moment the creditors tried to establish contact with the debtor (telephone calls, mail, etc.).
Let's try to understand from the point of view of the law
So, the rules of law make it clear to us that the course of the LED begins from the day when the lender found out about the violation of his right. However, there is another rule. For obligations with a maturity date, the LED begins from the moment when these obligations end. Here is the main problem in the interpretation of the rule of law.
Comments on the law
As we know, loan agreements have a deadline for fulfillment of obligations. Some argue that this is exactly what is specified in the law when defining LEDs. Recall that the general grounds are provided by Article 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and the norms listed now are enshrined in Article 200 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
Term Definition Example
We will simulate a conditional situation. Ivanov took a loan on September 10, 2016 for a period of 5 years. Stopped paying on November 15, 2016. The loan agreement determines the termination of obligations. Therefore, the LED starts after it ends. In this example, the bank has the right to sue before September 10, 2024 (5 years contract + 3 - limitation period).
However, judging by the verdicts, the courts do not think so. The bank has the right to terminate the contract ahead of schedule if you do not pay for obligations. This is recorded in all loan agreements. Monthly payments also relate to obligations that have a period (month). This means that if a citizen did not pay on November 15, 2016 for his obligations, the bank has the right to appeal to the court ahead of time and return the funds. Therefore, the limitation period is applied by the courts precisely from the moment when the citizen had to pay the next monthly amount.
Supreme Court Position
The Supreme Court has the same position. The LED begins to be calculated separately for each payment. Let's get back to our example. The bank filed for repayment of the entire loan amount on December 20, 2019. Article 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in this case legally exempts the debtor from payment. But if the bank sues the monthly payments for which the deadline has not yet expired, then in this case the creditor will have to pay through the court. The amount of the principal debt will decrease by three payments from September 2016 to December 2016, as the statute of limitations has been issued for them. The remaining amount will have to be returned by court order.
Talked - have to pay?
Of particular interest is the point of view when the limitation period is canceled during a telephone conversation between the creditor and the debtor. It is based on the alleged recognition of the right of debt last, which gives reason to interrupt the limitation period. After that, three years begins to be re-calculated. However, the courts do not agree with this interpretation.
Do not know the law - pay the full amount
We want to warn that the court itself is not entitled to apply the statute of limitations. If the bank has sued even after a ten-year period, when the contract was supposed to expire, the court must consider the lawsuit and make a positive decision. Only the defendant’s motion to apply the statute of limitations gives the court the right to dismiss the creditors ’claim. This means that ignorance of just one rule of law can result in a round sum. As they say, ignorance of the law does not exempt from liability.
However, there are times when a decision is made without the participation of the debtor. He learns about them at best by post. At worst, when property is seized and accounts are blocked by bailiffs.
In this case, it will be necessary to file a request for the application of the limitation period upon filing an appeal. To do this, you must first calculate the deadlines for filing, as very often people learn about court decisions after missing all legal deadlines for appeal. The algorithm of actions will be as follows:
- Determining the type of court decision (in absentia, ordinary, court order).
- Recovery of deadlines for filing complaints, objections.
- Cancel decision.
A complaint or objection shall be filed with the application for the restoration of the term. Failure to notify parties is generally a good reason for recovery.
The end of the limitation period does not exempt from debt
I would like to note that the end of the three-year period for claiming obligations through the court does not exempt from the debt itself. That is, no one forgives a citizen. The court may continue to claim the amount of the debt. However, the following arguments must be indicated as arguments: “have a conscience”, “please give us the money”, etc. Any action that is outside the scope of the law can automatically be made from the creditor of the criminal. The only lawful way to “knock out” money is only through bailiffs. However, this can only be done through a lawsuit. If you skip the statute of limitations, as well as with competent protection, such an opportunity may not exist.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I want to say that you do not need to be a professional lawyer to protect your rights. Sometimes knowledge of one or two laws can be very useful. The legal norm that we have examined (the limitation period for receivables) does not require much effort to understand. However, it can save a lot of money.
Of course, you need to repay debts. We do not urge them to refuse. However, there are various situations. Sometimes there are various unforeseen situations when the borrower is physically unable to pay. He turns to the bank in order to restructure the debt. A credit institution does not immediately make concessions. And only then, when people refuse to pay, do they offer various ways.
Giving money at a percentage is a commercial activity that is insured. We must not forget that the rejection of debts is not a personal offense to the owner, it is the cost of production. Claiming debts is legal - this is one aspect of such work.
For borrowers, we say that if a bank no longer has the right to demand debt through a court, the credit history will be damaged. Do not forget about it. There may be various situations in life when money may be needed again, but no one will.