Business support: banks massively block remote servicing of companies
Russian companies are being blocked from accessing remote banking services - there have been massive complaints from businesses about this, lawyers who conduct such cases told Izvestia. According to them, the number of such cases has increased in 2026. Organizations report that restrictions are sometimes not lifted for months even after submitting documents. The bank offered one company to close the account instead of restoring access, and another entrepreneur was disconnected from online banking for six months, the businessmen said. Without access to the DBO, company representatives must go to the branch. Why blockages have become more frequent is in the Izvestia article.
How banks block access to online services
In the first half of 2026, the total number of complaints to the Central Bank related to the refusal to conduct operations or the restriction of account usage jumped by a third compared to the same period of the previous year. In January – July, the Bank of Russia received 23.8 thousand such requests from consumers of financial services and investors. The regulator explained to Izvestia that about 8% of them are business-related (this is about 1.8 thousand).
Due to suspicious transactions, financial organizations restrict remote banking services to companies — entrepreneurs complain about such cases en masse. Izvestia was told about this by specialized lawyers who conduct cases on unblocking access. They clarified that there are more and more such cases this year.
The trend was confirmed by Anastasia Zhigompar, head of the Defense Strategy Law firm, and Dmitry Lomakin, Managing Partner of Formula Consent Law Firm. According to Sofya Lukinova, head of the Legal department at VMT Consult, the number of such cases has increased by at least 10%.
Banks may impose restrictions for various reasons: due to suspicions of questionable transactions under 115-FZ (this is the law on countering the legalization of criminal proceeds), the client or his payment details entering the database of the Central Bank on fraudulent transactions under 161-FZ (credit organizations respond to atypical transactions according to it), and also according to the decisions of government agencies, for example, the court or the tax service.
The triggers are unusual amounts and counterparties for the company, the transit nature of transactions (that is, when money arrives and then immediately goes further down the chain), the discrepancy between payments and declared activities, and frequent cash withdrawals, Dmitry Lomakin explained. According to him, the reason may also be transactions with one-day firms, suspicion of involvement in criminal activities, errors in details and documents, and failure to provide explanations at the request of the bank.
In case of blocking, businessmen have to go to the office with papers to carry out large transactions. They only approve small payments online.
The lawyers gave examples when the largest Russian banks blocked business access to online banking and cases went to court.
For example, in August of this year, the Moscow District Arbitration Court supported Amadon in a dispute with VTB, recognizing the restrictions on remote banking services as illegal. In the same month, the court of cassation upheld the decision in favor of the Thermalyux Trading House, which the PSB refused to restore access to the Internet bank even after providing the requested documents.
In April 2026, the Court of Cassation also confirmed the decision of the previous instance, declaring illegal the blocking of remote servicing of AzovEnergo by Blank Bank. Companies have limited, among other things, the ability to transfer salaries to employees.
The Supreme Court also considered one of these cases. In this case, the company tried to recover from the credit institution the damage caused to the business due to the blocking. Alfa-bank considered the operation "X-dzor" for 13.7 million rubles suspicious and limited remote service, setting a limit of 200 thousand per month for business transfers and only 50 thousand for salaries. For large operations, it was necessary to come to the bank branch every time. Due to the limit, the organization was unable to pay off the counterparty. In order not to disrupt the supply, I had to take a loan from an individual entrepreneur. As a result, the company tried to recover 7.2 million rubles of losses from the bank.
But the Supreme Court refused the plaintiff this compensation. The decision stated that the company retains the right to manage the money, but the method is simply changing (through a paper order at the branch).
The editorial board sent inquiries to all the listed credit institutions and companies.
Izvestia also studied the complaints against <url>. One company was limited to remote service, requiring it to provide documents on operations. But when this was done, the bank did not resume access, offering to close the account. Another entrepreneur faced the fact that he was cut off from online banking for six months, and in May he filed an appeal with the Central Bank.
Another businessman complained that the credit institution, in response to a complaint about the blocking, sent, as he put it, a reply. "There are no specific reasons, just a blank wall. They turned me into a schemer and a cashier out of the blue, ignoring the real construction contract, the official staff and a stack of checks," he said. Another entrepreneur was faced with the fact that the bank did not even accept his paper payment orders when he came to the branch.
Another similar case from his practice was reported to Izvestia by business lawyer Max Lowman. The Bank requested documents on construction contracts, including design estimates and evidence of the purchase and storage of materials. The lawyers prepared explanations, submitted documents, and the bank nevertheless restored remote service. In a number of other cases, the restrictions were also lifted without going to court, the lawyer said.
Individuals also face blockages from banks. Such cases also go to court. For example, in August of this year, the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District ruled that the refusal of a credit institution to restore access to the DBO is legitimate if the client has not submitted a complete set of documents or explanations at the request of the bank.
Izvestia sent a request to the Central Bank and major financial organizations.
Why do banks restrict access to online services
The reason for the large number of restrictions is not even the growth of fraud, but the tightening of regulation, says Sofya Lukinova. In 2026, the Central Bank doubled the list of criteria for suspicious transactions, and the state anti-fraud system was launched, which combines the databases of government agencies and banks. Because of this, the number of false positives is also increasing, the expert explained.
Automated systems evaluate financial flows in real time, Anastasia Zhigompar said. The programs impose limits on any atypical transfers that do not meet the established verification criteria.
However, the effectiveness of banking control should be measured not by the number of restrictions imposed, but by the ability to identify real violations without creating unnecessary obstacles for bona fide companies, says Artem Oknyaev, founder of the De Jure law firm. Ultimately, it is important for a business not only to have money in a checking account, but also to be able to manage it in a timely manner, he noted.
What difficulties do businesses have due to restrictions?
For a bank, blocking remote access can only be a change in the customer service procedure, but for an entrepreneur it is a real threat to the fulfillment of contracts and the financial stability of the company, Artyom Oknyaev is sure. Moreover, suspicion of a financial institution does not always mean that a business has indeed violated the law.
For example, difficulties may arise if a firm receives a large sum and immediately transfers it further, but it is unclear from the purpose of the operation what the company is paying for, said lawyer Andrei Milsky.
For an entrepreneur, this is an ordinary business transaction necessary to fulfill a contract. But a credit institution can regard such a sequence as a sign of the transit movement of money, Artyom Oknyaev emphasized. At the same time, while the bank checks the documents, the company needs to settle accounts with suppliers, pay wages, fulfill contracts and meet deadlines, he noted.
— As a result, the business suffers both inconveniences (delays in payments) and direct costs (resources are needed to promptly send a person to the bank with the original documents), as well as losses (due to supply disruptions and non-fulfillment of the plan). Moreover, refusals on transactions are accumulating, and after two such situations, a financial institution has the right to unilaterally terminate the bank account agreement," explained Sofya Lukinova from VMT Consult.
If a business is faced with such a problem, then it is necessary to request a notice of blocking with a basis and a list of documents that are not enough for approval, the expert recommended. It is also necessary to clarify the meaning of the economic transaction for which the bank did not miss payment. To reduce the risks, the expert also advised to undergo an audit. Among the red flags are the cashing out of funds in excess of a certain level, unreliable counterparties and the lack of payments such as utilities or rent.
For an unusual transaction for a company, it is better to prepare explanations immediately in advance, even before the transfer, Andrey Milsky added. And do not delay responding to the bank: a request left unattended can cost more than the contract itself, he is sure.
It would also be useful to have accounts in several banks for insurance, advised Sofya Lukinova. A spare one will allow you to continue operations and fulfill other obligations until the circumstances are clarified.
In addition, it is highly advisable to coordinate large transactions with the bank in advance, advised Dmitry Lomakin from Formula Consent.
If a financial institution allows at least payments to be made through a branch, this opportunity should be taken advantage of, especially when it comes to urgent obligations, said Artem Oknyaev from De Jure. However, all requests, payment orders, refusals, and correspondence must be saved. Subsequently, it is these documents that can become the main evidence in the dispute.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
