ElitExpert continues to deal with the conflict situation related to the ownership of the house at 2 Lvivska St. After publication of the previous part of our material, representatives of the "VULKAN Security Service" enterprise, which is one of the parties to the conflict, contacted the editorial office, informing them of new details.
We will remind that, according to Olena Romayska, the house belonging to her was raided in June of this year, as a result of which the family was thrown out into the street, and the property, including works of art, ended up in the hands of the private security agency "Security Service "VOLCANO"
This happened due to the fact that back in 2008, entrepreneur Yury Naida, who at that time was the husband of Elena Romayska, through the company "Slavutich-95", which belonged to him, took a loan from the bank "PUMB" in the amount of 2 million 600 thousand dollars . The house at the address Lvivska, 2, in which they lived, was given as collateral to secure credit obligations. This loan to the spouses was not repaid on time, as a result of which, according to the court's decision, ownership of the object was transferred to the "PUMB" bank. In the spring of 2023, the bank resold the house and the remaining debt obligations to VULKANA.
ARGUMENTS "SB "VOLCAN"
As the company told ElitExpert, "From May 31, 2023, VULKAN is the sole legal owner of this object. The right of ownership of the specified building and land plot was acquired by him on the basis of the contract of purchase and sale of the real estate object concluded between SB "VULKAN" and JSC "PUMB". During the conclusion of the contract of purchase and sale of home ownership at the address of Odesa, st. Lvivska, 2, the seller provided a certificate that there are no registered persons at the specified address».
Moreover, the company claims that now it is Olena Romajska who is violating the rights of the company as the legal owner of the house. According to their version, "already after the purchase of the specified home ownership, SB "VOLCAN" became aware that unknown persons live in the house, who reported that they rent the specified house for $2 per month, and provided the corresponding lease agreement».
"VULKAN" saw in this a violation of its rights and appealed to the law enforcement agencies with a statement about the commission of the crime provided for in part 2 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (Fraud), information about which was entered into the Unified State Register of Pretrial Investigations No. 12023162480000781.
The VULKAN company also draws attention to the fact that, contrary to the information available in the mass media, there is no children's center at the specified address, and the object is an ordinary residential building:
This is evidenced by the official response of the Department of Education and Science of Odesa Oblast from November 25, 2022, signed by the head of the department Oleksandr Lonchak:
ARGUMENTS OF ROMAISK
In turn, Olena Romajska provided documents stating that her daughter, Kristina Romajska, registered as an FOP, with the main type of activity - "preschool education" as well as "day care for children", therefore she had the right to conduct classes with children for address of his residence on Lvivska St.
The situation with the right of residence of Olena Romayska and her children in this building remains the most confusing.
Olena's position is based on the decision of the Kyiv District Court No. 520/12378/13-ts dated September 11.09.2017, XNUMX, according to which the FUIB bank was denied a request to evict her and her children from the house. Especially since the youngest daughter, model Kristina Romajska, is a person with physical disabilities.
EVICTED CANNOT BE REMAINED
Two years later, in the process of fulfilling the requirements of the decision of the Kyiv District Court of Odesa in case No. 520/13299/16, all the defendants, i.e. Olena Romayska and members of her family, were recognizedlost the right to use this house. The decision became legally binding August 5, 2019. Behind the brackets remained the question of the moral and ethical sphere: is it possible to deprive a family, under whose care is a child with limited physical capabilities, of a single home?
"VULKAN" in this economic dispute calls itself a bona fide buyer, providing a document from the "PUMB" bank, dated May 24, 2023, stating that no one was registered in the house at that time:
Olena Romayska considers this certificate to be fictitious, and provides her own documents as confirmation, issued by the Department of Administrative Services of the Odesa City Council dated June 7, 2023. They testify that Olena and Kristina Romayski are registered at the address: Odesa, Lvivska, 2.
How the Department within 14 days issued two conflicting documents relating to the same household remains unclear.
Also, the question of Olena Romayska's personal property, which, according to her, remained in the specified house and has a great value - more than half a million dollars - remains unresolved. These include childcare center equipment, personal furniture, belongings, limited art collections, and more.
BANK PISHOV VA-BANK
After studying the documents, ElitExpert came to the conclusion that the most unclear role in this conflict remains the role of JSC "PUMB".
Since it was the bank that could dot all the dots in this dispute, we made a formal request to the financial institution. However, FUIB refused to comment on the situation, referring to the fact that the bank is a legal entity under private law and is not subject to the provisions of the Law "On Access to Public Information".
At the moment, the situation looks as follows: tired of long lawsuits and uncertain prospects in this case, JSC "PUMB" decided to abandon the problematic asset, putting it up for sale, after which it was bought by the enterprise "SB "VULKAN". At the same time, the rule of law was ignored, according to which the bank had to offer the right of priority redemption to the Romaisky family registered in this house.
Olena Romajska wrote a statement to the police about taking possession of the property, turned to the executive service and intends to continue legal proceedings for her house.
And, apparently, the current situation will serve as a subject of consideration in various courts for a very long time.
