‘UralTransBank has been trying to exert some pressure on us through various civic organizations such as the Association of Regional Russian Banks, for example. Rather than trying to look for a suitable compromise, the bank keeps fighting the information battle. However, we don’t feel like joining in the fight as we don’t believe it’s in any way ethical,’ the spokesperson for ROSNO Insurance Company said to UrBC relating to the company’s clash with UralTransBank over insurance payments.

UralTransBank has not made any decision so far as to what to do about a number of insured events ROSNO refused to cover financially. Earlier on, the bank did say, though, that it did not agree with the insurer’s explanations as to why the company wouldn’t pay, so the bank was going to handle the problem accordingly. It was never explained, however, what ways and methods of handling would be used. UralTransBank has numerously announced that it has the right to sue the insurer, but no legal action has been taken so far, reports the bank’s press officer.

The insurance company decided all the cases fell into three categories; they agreed, with some provisos, to cover the events belonging to the first and second categories but refused to pay for the third-category events claiming it was not provided by the general agreement or additional agreements signed by ROSNO and UralTransBank.

The dispute originally started with both parties accusing each other of failing to meet the general agreement requirements regarding credit risk insurance related to consumer loans. UralTransBank claimed that the insurer had been paying no bad debt compensation since April 2006. In the meantime, ROSNO accused the bank of not producing enough papers needed to identify and confirm these debts as insured events.