Under duress: consumers will increasingly be forced to pay their utility bills through the courts
11 March 17:15
ANALYSIS FROM 
Ukrainians’ debts for housing and communal services in the fourth quarter of 2025 increased to UAH 113.4 billion, according to data from the State Statistics Service. The number of attempts to recover debts through the courts is also growing. Komersant investigated why.
In Ukraine, there is a ban on the enforcement of debts for utility services only for people whose homes are located in combat zones or in territories that were temporarily occupied, as well as those whose homes were damaged as a result of combat operations. Other debtors may be required to repay their debts, including through the courts. Court cases involving the collection of debts for housing and utility services have always been among the most numerous. For example, in 2024, OpenDataBot counted 298,000 such cases, which is more than the total number of cases involving loan repayment and divorce. But recently, the prospect of ending up in court has become even more real for “utility debtors.”
Lawyers attribute the increase in court proceedings for the recovery of utility debts primarily to the resumption of the statute of limitations in Ukraine. The period of its “freeze” actually lasted from April 2, 2020, to September 3, 2025—first due to quarantine restrictions and then due to the introduction of martial law. However, since September 4 last year, the debt “freeze” mechanism is no longer in effect, and if, for example, a debt obligation arose during the period when the statute of limitations was suspended, then from September 4, 2025, the usual regime was restored, and with it the right to go to court.
The Zakhyst Law Firm confirms a clear trend toward an increase in the number of court cases involving the collection of debts for housing and communal services. Attorney Zoryana Zachepilo continues.
“Service providers have indeed become more active in going to court, in particular using a simplified procedure – obtaining court orders. After the renewal of the statute of limitations, suppliers were able to exercise their right to go to court regarding debts that previously could not be claimed due to the “freezing” of the statute of limitations. This means that debts accumulated in previous years can now be subject to judicial review. Accordingly, the number of such cases will objectively increase,” notes lawyer Zoryana Zachepylo.
She reminds us that, from a legal point of view, the mere fact of a monetary obligation being overdue is sufficient grounds for going to court.
“Formally, even a small amount of debt, if it is overdue and confirmed by calculations, is already sufficient grounds for filing an application for a court order or a lawsuit. Failure to respond to claims, refusal to restructure, or complete lack of communication often become the actual prerequisites for legal proceedings,” explains the expert.
Citizens who have debts for housing and communal services should also remember that such court cases may be considered without the debtor’s participation and even without a court hearing. Zoryana Zachepilo, a lawyer at Zakhyst Law Firm, continues.
“Most often, such cases are considered in summary proceedings when the debt is undisputed and documented. In this case, the court may issue a court order without the debtor’s participation and without a hearing. If the claim is disputed, the case is considered in civil proceedings. Even in this case, the debtor’s presence is not mandatory: the court may render a decision if there is proper notice of the hearing, even if the person does not appear,” the expert notes.
She said that in practice, debtors often do not learn about the court’s decision immediately: this happens when enforcement proceedings are opened and the debtor’s accounts are frozen.
Also, as practice confirms, service providers do not always calculate the debt correctly. And this is not the only ground for appeal in court. As noted by Zoryana Zachepilo, a lawyer at Zakhyst Law Firm, in cases involving the collection of debts for housing and communal services, the most common grounds for appeal are improper calculation of fees by the service provider and the provision of services of inadequate quality.
“This means that the consumer has the right to appeal the payment if excessive amounts or incorrect tariffs have been charged; fees have been charged for services that were not actually provided; fines or penalties have been charged unlawfully; services have been provided of inadequate quality—for example, water, gas, or heat were unavailable or supplied intermittently, or sewage or electricity services did not function properly. A lawyer will help you check the charges, gather evidence (receipts, reports, photos, correspondence), and prepare an objection to the court,” the expert notes.
Thanks to such professional assistance, the court may cancel or reduce the debt, and the user of housing and communal services will not have to pay the unlawful amounts, even if enforcement proceedings have been initiated or accounts have been blocked.
Author: Serhiy Vasilevych
