PrivatBank denied a woman access to her deposit due to an arrest. She is seeking compensation of 12,500 hryvnias - what did the court decide?

A woman decided to withdraw her savings from PrivatBank, but was denied due to a freeze on her funds. She demands that the financial institution terminate the bank deposit agreement and pay her compensation of 12,500 hryvnias. This was stated in the decision of the Vin'kovets'kyi District Court of Khmelnytskyi Oblast, published on February 17, 2025.

On October 31, 2023, the woman entered into a bank deposit agreement with PrivatBank for a period of five months. However, after the expiration of this term, on April 1, 2024, when she approached the bank with a request to return her savings, she was denied due to a freeze on the funds in her deposit account. Subsequently, she made several more requests to terminate the agreement and withdraw her funds, but to no avail. The bank branch employees did not provide her with documents confirming the freeze and did not explain when and by whom it was imposed. The client believes it is unlawful that the bank did not notify her about the freeze. She indicated that she is ill and needed the funds for treatment. Such actions by the defendant caused her moral and material harm, as her health and emotional state significantly deteriorated after this, forcing her to pay for treatment.

"The plaintiff, a bank client, had a 'Standard' term deposit for 5 months (in the case of early closure) through the signing of an accession statement, which was subsequently extended on March 31, 2024, and August 31, 2024, until January 31, 2025, inclusive. On February 23, 2024, based on the order of the chief state executor of the Yarmolynets'kyi Department of the State Executive Service in the Khmelnytskyi District of Khmelnytskyi Oblast of the Central Interregional Office of the Ministry of Justice (Kyiv), a freeze was imposed on the debtor's funds. On September 9, 2024, a resolution to lift the freeze was received by the bank, and the freeze was removed," - stated PrivatBank.

What did the court decide?  

The court denied the woman’s claim. PJSC "PrivatBank" did not violate her rights and did not cause her property (material) or moral (non-material) harm.

"The court concluded that there were no grounds for satisfying the demands for the termination of the agreement, return of the deposit, or compensation for moral and material (property) damage," - emphasized the court.