It’s not right, just if the Agreement states that the bank has the right to transfer the right of claim to third parties, then the bank lawfully transfers the right to third parties. Already a similar practice exists and with the correct execution of documents the transaction of assignment of the right of claim to persons who do not have a banking license is legal. Here the peculiarity is that in accordance with the law "On Banks and Banking" lending does not fall under Art. 26 On Bank Secrecy and Art. 1 of the same law does not provide loans as the core business of the bank for which a license is required. Here it is worth recalling the law "On Protection of Consumer Rights" which obliges the bank to open an account for paying a loan. Also, the right to sell debt to third parties is also now enshrined in the Law on Consumer Lending, but with the consent of the Borrower. And the consideration of the case in court is just on the basis of that chapter of the Civil Code that I now describe. Here the nuance is not the availability of a license from the Collection Agency, the judicial practice and in their favor made positive decisions, if necessary, I can look for solutions in favor of the Collectors without having a license and specifically provide data on these decisions. Here they hit on the nuance that I will describe later, namely on the significant value for the Debtor of the Lender, and this violation also leads to the invalidity of the transaction on the transfer of the right of claim. It is also worth remembering that the banks are selling their old debts to the Collectors where there are already decisions in favor of the banks, and here, too, the documents for collecting the Debt from the Debtor legally by the Collectors of the debt in their favor should be correctly drawn up, and here they should already act in accordance with the law "On Enforcement Proceedings". When I wrote that when transmitting information and documents from banks and collectors, everything was bad and I meant that they transmit incomplete information and there is not enough "little mind" for collectors, then this was a hint. It is worth considering that there is a lot of information on this issue and I have to put it in parts so that my dear Colleagues can get a little insight into the essence of the matter, and in summing up the results, options will be given where KNAPKA cannot compete and transfer cases to each other or by buying they are simply called on the phone trying to pay the client’s debt, even though you openly tell them that you’ll go to court and there we will solve the problem, don’t go there, knowing full well that they will lose in court.
Original message
