The bill on self-ban on loans was approved in the first reading

The State Duma on Tuesday unanimously adopted in the first reading a bill on the right of citizens to establish a ban on concluding loan agreements with them. The idea of ​​the authors of the document – to put an additional barrier to fraudulent actions using social engineering – was warmly approved by the deputies, but they also proposed a number of other measures to strengthen the fight against scammers and other antisocial elements.

Plastic bag amendments to the laws “On Credit Histories” and “On Consumer Credit” was introduced to the Duma last spring by a group of deputies led by the chairman of the financial market committee, a member of the A Just Russia – For Truth (SRZP) faction Anatoly Aksakov (see “Kommersant” dated April 21). They proposed giving citizens the right to establish in their credit history a ban on concluding consumer loan agreements with them. This measure should make it difficult for fraudulent actions to transfer funds without the client’s consent, the explanatory note notes: “The main tool for the theft of funds remains the use of social engineering techniques and methods, when a person, under psychological influence, voluntarily transfers funds or discloses bank information that allows attackers to commit theft.”

According to the amendments, in order to establish or remove a self-ban, a citizen must submit an application to all qualified credit history bureaus through the government services portal.

But even after the ban is lifted, it will be possible to conclude a loan agreement only after three days. “The ‘cooling period’ will eliminate the risk of fraud with the immediate lifting of the ban and the conclusion of a consumer loan agreement, and will also allow the citizen to think again about whether he needs to take out a loan,” Mr. Aksakov explained to the deputies.

Market participants and experts previously pointed out a number of shortcomings of the project, for example, excessive detail of the conditions for self-ban (see “Kommersant” dated September 25). But deputies mainly focused on what was missing from this document.

Thus, Elena Drapeko (SRZP) proposed to include credit restrictions for some individuals in the draft: “There are citizens who, while remaining legally capable, are still at risk. These are gambling addicts, because gambling addiction is not currently recognized as a mental illness. These are drug addicts. Perhaps we should introduce a measure that would limit the ability of such categories of citizens to take out loans?” “Let’s look at the amendment,” Mr. Aksakov responded lively. “There are still shopaholics – those who go to the store and spend money, and then grab their heads.”

Yana Lantratova (SRZP) praised the bill, but proposed, in order not to give scammers a single chance, to provide a mechanism for lifting the self-ban only in the personal presence of the citizen. Anatoly Aksakov did not agree with this: “A person does not always have the opportunity to come to the bank.”

Alexey Kurinny (Communist Party of the Russian Federation) expressed the opinion that “for a normal healthy adequate person such a mechanism is not needed and rather it is aimed at protecting our pensioners.”

He suggested that if a citizen wishes to lift the self-ban with his consent, his relatives should be notified through the same “State Services”. Mr. Aksakov replied that he was ready to consider such an amendment, but did not agree that the project was aimed only at the older generation. And as proof, he told how recently “a relatively young man, an employee of the State Duma, a lawyer,” ran into his office with the words “I just transferred money to a fraudster with my own hands.”

Oleg Nilov (SRZP) went even further and suggested that the bill is “a temporary measure until we restore order and eradicate fraud as a class.” At the same time, he spoke in favor of increasing the punishment for fraud to 15 years in prison. “Make amendments, but not to this bill, that’s a different topic,” Anatoly Aksakov gently reminded his colleague.

Vladimir Plyakin (“New people”), speaking from the faction, called the project “extremely relevant,” but this tool alone, in his opinion, is not enough in the fight against fraud.

“This is about a right, not an obligation. People in everyday life do not think about the possibility of establishing such a ban until they personally encounter scammers. Therefore, the “New People” faction introduced a bill in which it proposed to oblige banks to notify about a loan taken using the phone number left by the borrower,” the deputy said. The faction intends to formalize this initiative in the form of an amendment to the second reading.

Finally, the co-author of the bill, Konstantin Bakharev (United Russia), cited a request received recently from a Moscow pensioner who was tired of constant calls from scammers and asked to speed up the adoption of the law on self-banning loans. “But it is most difficult to read citizens’ appeals in cases where threats have already been realized, fictitious loans have been taken out in their name,” complained the United Russia member. In his opinion, the bill will become an effective tool because “a normal working scheme has been proposed.”

The Duma unanimously agreed with this conclusion: 412 deputies voted for the adoption of the amendments in the first reading, with no votes against or abstentions.

Ksenia Veretennikova