A disabled veteran is being asked to pay a utility debt of 50,867 UAH for services that were never provided. What was the court's decision?

A man is registered in a room and is a consumer of housing and communal services provided by the military academy. However, he has failed to meet his obligations and has an outstanding debt for housing and communal services amounting to 50,867 hryvnias. The citizen claims that after the Russian shelling of the dormitories, services were not provided. This is stated in the decision of the Malinovsky District Court of Odessa, published on October 29, 2024.

According to the directive of the Minister of Defense of Ukraine "On the Re-equipment of the Released Fund of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine into Temporary Housing for Homeless Servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and Their Families" dated June 11, 2001, No. D-14, building No. 93a was converted into temporary housing for servicemen and their families, which is currently used for the temporary residence of homeless servicemen. The man and his family, consisting of two people, are users of the room. During his residence from 2011 to the present, he has violated his obligations regarding payment for housing and communal services, resulting in a debt of 50,867 hryvnias as of October 1, 2023.

At the court hearing, the man did not acknowledge the claims and asked the court to dismiss them. He is a person with a disability due to war of the third group. Before the onset of armed aggression by Russia, he lived with his wife in a room that was a dormitory for families of servicemen of the Odessa Institute of Land Forces at the time of their settlement, based on a report dated November 21, 2002. In late February 2022, he and his wife temporarily moved to live in their daughter’s apartment. On May 4, 2023, two dormitories of the Military Academy (in Odessa) were damaged as a result of shelling, where families of homeless servicemen and military pensioners of the Odessa garrison were still partially residing. The roof and upper floors of the two five-story dormitory buildings were destroyed. According to expert examination, the extent of the damage is 59%, and the technical condition of the buildings is defined as emergency. As a result, the dormitories were disconnected from electricity, water, and heating, forcing the residents to vacate the buildings. Despite these circumstances, the military academy unjustly continues to charge fees for accommodation in the dormitories.

The man is entitled to a legal benefit of a 100% discount on accommodation and utility services, but the building management, where he resides, does not provide these services in full. In light of these circumstances, he has repeatedly contacted and submitted documents regarding the receipt of benefits to the building manager and supply organizations in accordance with the Law of Ukraine "On the Status of War Veterans, Guarantees of Their Social Protection." Since February 2023, a subsidy has been credited to his pension card without his knowledge, which he fully transfers to the account of the Military Academy (in Odessa). The area of the room where he lives with his wife does not exceed the norm required for a 100% discount on accommodation and room usage.

What did the court decide?

The court granted the claim. The man is ordered to pay the military academy (in Odessa) the debt for communal services as of January 1, 2024, in the amount of 50,867 hryvnias.

"The defendant did not provide their own calculation of the charges for the supply of communal services and did not refute the correctness of such charges made by the claimant. The case materials also do not contain claims regarding improper provision or non-provision of services, confirming the defendant's assertion about calculations for non-provided services. Furthermore, there is no proper and admissible evidence that services were not provided to the defendant, that he did not use the provided services, and that he had no need for such services, which is not confirmed by the case materials. Consumers must pay for housing and communal services if they have practically used them. The absence of a contract for the provision of services alone cannot be a basis for exempting the consumer (defendant) from paying for the services in full," the court emphasized.