Cases related to capital markets and investment services

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT: loss sustained on an investment account

The petitioner noticed that he incurred a loss on his investment account, which was caused, in his view, by the fact that financial service provider liquidated his positions in leveraged transactions without proper prior notice. He requested the financial service provider to partially reimburse him for the sustained loss. He stated that he was aware of the fact that he had taken a risk by concluding the deal, but due to the absence of notification he suffered a higher loss. The service provider disputed the petitioner's claim; in its opinion it committed no infringement or breach of contract, and it acted in accordance with the business regulations when closed the positions. It stated that the notification systems represent an extra service compared to the contractual terms, but they do not provide automatic protection against potentially bad investment decisions. It did not dispute that during a certain period the notification system received no data from the system of the fulfilment partner due to a system error at the partner's end.

As a result of the procedure the parties concluded a settlement agreement, and the service provider reimbursed the petitioner for part of the investment loss and paid the agreed amount to him.

RESOLUTION TO TERMINATE: long-term investment account

The petitioner opened a long-term investment account at the financial service provider, and placed a larger interest bearing deposit on it for a fixed term of 5 years. Upon the maturity of the deposit, the financial service provider informed the petitioner that it could pay the amount due to him only on 31 December 2015 free from tax. The petitioner's position was that due to the financial service provider's conduct, he lost interest for 42 days and asked for the reimbursement thereof. The service provider stated during the procedure that the petitioner could have withdrawn the deposit amount at maturity, but in this case he would have lost the exemption from the withholding tax on interest and would have paid additional fees. Pursuant to the statutory provision laid down in Section 67/B of the Personal Income Tax Act, the withdrawal exempted from the tax on interest was possible only upon the lapse of the calendar year, and the service provider duly observed this rule.

During the proceedings the parties discussed the contractual and legislative background of the case in detail, after which the petitioner – having understood that the service provider acted properly – withdrew his petition.