Self-prohibition on issuing loans has revealed risks

In Russia they want to introduce a self-ban on issuing loans. If a fraudster somehow manages to conclude a loan agreement for a person who has restrictions on loans, the citizen will be able to relieve himself of the obligation to pay under such an agreement through the court. And law enforcement officers and the regulator will have the opportunity to identify a credit institution that issues loans in violation of the ban.

Experts assess the proposal positively, but call for finalizing the bill and not forgetting about the risks: the initiative could backfire on ordinary consumers who change their minds and want to take out a loan for their own needs, but cannot.

The State Duma Committee on the Financial Market supported the bill on a self-ban on issuing loans. Further consideration is scheduled for September 26. It is assumed that a prerequisite for the implementation of this mechanism should be the use of SNILS or TIN.

If information about the restrictions is ignored and the lender still makes a positive decision on the application, then the client has every right not to pay the loan and interest on it.

In this case, the financial organization cannot make any claims – the loan was issued in violation of the law, and its recipient, most likely, was not the client himself, but the fraudsters who filled out the application in his name.

Also, according to the bill, it will be possible to place restrictions not only on the issuance of loans and credits, but also on setting restrictions on the amounts available for online transactions (for example, a limit on transfers from card to card of no more than 20 thousand rubles per day), limiting the execution of timed online transactions, a ban on receiving cash or other withdrawal transactions (except for purchases) on credit cards, a complete ban on online transactions and permission to carry them out exclusively at the office of a financial institution.

Meanwhile, if we take statistics for 2022, more than 14 billion rubles were stolen from the accounts of Russians, while the average amount of one-time theft was approximately 15 thousand rubles.

Three out of ten Russians have a positive attitude towards the initiative and want to establish a ban on issuing loans to themselves as soon as the corresponding functionality becomes operational, follows from a survey of a popular employment resource. We emphasize that the purpose of the bill is quite obvious – to cut the ground from under the feet of fraudsters who illegally use the stolen personal data of citizens to take out loans for them. But will such a mechanism help?

Unfortunately, in recent years, Russians have increasingly found themselves in situations where they become unwitting debtors of credit institutions, says Polina Gusyatnikova, senior managing partner of the law firm PG Partners. Fraudsters obtain passport data and, on behalf of the citizen, apply for loans from microfinance organizations (MFOs).

MFOs do not particularly check borrowers. All they need is passport data without personal presence, any telephone number to confirm receipt of a loan, and a bank account to which to transfer money. The telephone number and account details can belong to anyone, not necessarily the borrower. That is, getting a loan for someone from an MFO, having the person’s passport data, is easier than it seems. “A self-ban on issuing loans can be a real salvation for a large number of conscientious citizens,” the expert notes.

In practice, it is possible to introduce an administrative (legislative) ban for credit institutions to issue loans to certain citizens upon receipt of a corresponding application from them in advance, says Evgeniy Mironyuk, stock market expert at BCS World of Investments. In this case, it is logical to use the personal number in the TIN, SNILS as an identifier (to avoid identification errors based on full name and other data).

“In general, this is safe,” says MK’s interlocutor, “since the transfer of INN or SNILS numbers to a wide range of credit institutions does not create significant risks of additional personal data leaks. But these databases, when they reach credit institutions, must be subject to additional control over their use.”

Using SNILS will be a completely safe tool if the insurance number and the State Services portal (through which, among other things, the ban will be placed and lifted) are protected from attacks by fraudsters, emphasizes Anastasia Chumak, a specialist at the Intercession law firm. But even now, some citizens independently disclose their SNILS number to scammers. For example, during personal communication on the phone.

“There are cases when fraudsters found out SNILS data through fake recruitment agencies, during a “door-to-door visit”, when they introduce themselves as employees of the Pension Fund and request data from residents, continues Chumak. — Self-prohibition will not be able to protect citizens 100%, but there is no doubt that the percentage of fraudulent actions will be significantly lower. Unfortunately, scammers will find new ways to deceive citizens.”

Meanwhile, according to financial analyst, founder of the “School of Practical Investment” Fedor Sidorov, the main danger today comes from social engineering methods: when attackers introduce themselves as “bank security officers” or “employees of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation” and, under one pretext or another, convince a person to either register to take out a loan on himself, or to disclose his personal data, according to which they themselves later “put” a loan on him. If a person is prohibited from taking loans, then such options will be excluded.

“In general, the measure is quite relevant and necessary. But we need to work out a mechanism for establishing and lifting this ban so that the initiative does not backfire on citizens who will then change their minds and at some point want to take out a loan for their own needs,” he emphasizes.