A woman denies signing a loan agreement with Monobank. Did the court order the recovery of 20,008 hryvnias?

Monobank has charged a woman a debt of 20,008 hryvnias on her loan. However, she refuses to settle it, claiming that no loan agreement was made between the parties. This is stated in the decision of the Dnipro District Court of Dniprodzerzhynsk (the court's legal name), published on February 7, 2025.

On November 20, 2020, the woman approached Monobank to obtain banking services, during which she signed an application form for a banking services agreement. She was granted a loan of up to 30,000 hryvnias in the form of a credit limit on her current account. Nevertheless, she failed to provide the bank with timely funds to repay the loan debt, interest, and other expenses as per the terms of the agreement. Due to these breaches of obligations under the loan agreement, the client has an outstanding debt of 20,008 hryvnias.

On December 19, 2024, the woman submitted a response to the lawsuit to the court, in which she did not acknowledge the claims and stated the following. On November 20, 2020, she signed an application form for a loan. The application form does not specify the terms under which the loan is granted, and it also lacks the amount of the loan she received. No loan agreement was concluded between the parties in accordance with the requirements of Articles 1054 and 1055 of the Civil Code of Ukraine. Only the signed application form regarding the provision of banking services dated November 20, 2020, exists. This form lacks the conditions for providing her with 20,008 hryvnias, as well as the terms for interest calculation and any penalties for the late return of 20,008 hryvnias. To support the debt claim, the bank provided the following evidence: the application form for the banking services agreement; a calculation of the debt; an excerpt from the "Bank Tariffs"; and an excerpt from the "Conditions for servicing the accounts of individuals." However, these do not confirm the debt of 20,008 hryvnias. Among the aforementioned evidence cited by the bank, the citizen only signed the application form for the banking services agreement dated November 20, 2020. The application form does not contain the terms under which the loan was provided, and it also lacks the amount of the loan she received.

What was the court's decision?

The court granted Monobank's claim. The woman is to repay the debt under the banking services agreement "Monobank" dated November 20, 2020, in favor of the joint-stock company "Universal Bank" in the amount of 20,008 hryvnias as of July 11, 2024.

"According to the statement of account activity for the card, during the entire time of using the card, the debtor made deposits to the card account totaling 48,819 hryvnias and incurred expenses on the card amounting to 68,828 hryvnias. Consequently, the amount of funds that has not yet been returned to the bank is 20,008 hryvnias (68,828 hryvnias - 48,819 hryvnias = 20,008 hryvnias). All deposits were used by the defendant for her own needs and were not left in the account, so they cannot be considered returned. Since the defendant only partially made deposits to her bank card, which were significantly less than her current expenses on the card account, a debt arose. Her series of deposits indicate that she was aware that she owed the bank the funds she used from the credit limit, and thus fully understood the consequences and was familiar with the terms of using the funds provided to her. The amount of the regular payment relates to the principal of the loan, as the bank provided the funds for use, and the client repays them according to the agreement. Since the defendant did not make payments to cover these services, the debt on the principal of the loan increased. Given the above, there are legal grounds for collecting the debt from the debtor in full," the court emphasized.