"The Dolina Effect" in Baranovichi: How a City Resident Sold an Apartment to Scammers and What Happened Next
She bought an apartment from a sweet pensioner, but a couple of days later it turned out that the pensioner had become a victim of scammers — the money disappeared, the housing was seized, and the owner, who personally delivered all the money to the criminals, had no intention of moving out. A familiar story? This is the very same "Dolina Effect" that happened not in Moscow, but in Baranovichi. How the buyer managed not to lose everything and why the court sided with her in this situation, writes "Nash Krai".
/photos/stock/renting_flats-47iyw.jpgIt all started with the desire to buy an apartment in the city center. Two years ago, Svetlana moved her business to Baranovichi but lived outside the city. The decision to move closer to work had been made long ago.
— My birthday was in September, and one could say it was a gift from my husband. We had part of the money for the apartment, and we took the rest on credit.
The purchase was important for the future of the family: the children were already grown, and they needed to think about additional housing. They were only looking for a three-room apartment in the center. For Svetlana and her husband, this was their first real estate transaction, not counting the purchase of a summer cottage.
— They found an option on "Kufar". We called, and a realtor answered. That's where it all began," she recounts.
"I was charmed by this woman"
The first impression was ideal: they were met in the apartment by the owner herself — a pensioner, her adult son, and a realtor.
— She was quite a smiling, positive, educated woman; I was charmed by her. I even noticed a large library; I always pay attention to details," says Svetlana. — The conversation was open; not a hint of doubt arose in me regarding the adequacy of her actions or her intentions.
The woman explained the sale simply: her husband had died long ago, it was difficult to manage a three-room apartment alone, so she needed to move. She hadn't decided where yet — to her son in Baranovichi or her daughter in Minsk. She asked for 12 days after the deal to calmly pack her things.
— Neither then, nor now, recalling what happened, do I see a single alarming "red flag" of a fraudulent scheme," says Svetlana. — The seller was so open. She wasn't rushing the sale, objectively explaining her motives.
Even a small discount from the original price, offered by the seller, then seemed like a gesture of goodwill. Svetlana later learned that she was the eighth or ninth person to be shown this apartment.
— I wasn't rushing either. We signed a contract with a designer to customize the apartment, and I only made a down payment after her approval.
The deal was scheduled for Friday, October 3rd.
Cash Only
The transaction took place at a notary's office. The seller insisted on cash.
— We offered to transfer it to her account. She immediately refused, saying "cash is needed." Which is generally understandable; sellers often prefer cash payments.
Besides the notary, the realtor, the seller with her son, and Svetlana with her daughter were present at the agreement. The money was counted, the documents formalized. According to the agreement, the seller had 12 days, until October 15th, to deregister and vacate the apartment. It seemed the deal was done. Repairs were just around the corner.
"Svetlana, did anyone call you from Minsk?"
Three days later, on Monday, the phone rang. The seller's voice was trembling.
— She called me personally and asked: "Svetlana, did anyone call you from Minsk?" I didn't understand the question immediately. From fragments of her phrases, I began to understand — something bad had happened. She had somehow ended up without money and without an apartment. I started asking questions, but in response — again, fragments of phrases and sighs.
Svetlana advised her to contact the police. That same evening, the daughter of the apartment owner called.
— The daughter said that her mother was at the police station. She began to ask me to give up the apartment. She started saying that everything would be returned. The next day, I met with the daughter in person. That's when I learned that their mother "had fallen victim to a scam."
They offered to return the money for the apartment, but I wasn't ready to agree immediately; I needed to understand the situation myself. I was very confused, but in response, I heard an ultimatum: "Mom won't move out. And you won't move in — the apartment has been seized as part of a criminal case."
Svetlana describes her initial reaction as a mixture of fear, panic, and complete incomprehension of what was happening.
— I had never been in such situations. But I understood that I needed to act. With an acquaintance who is a lawyer, we drafted a pre-trial claim demanding eviction within specified deadlines, but we received a refusal. Then my husband and I hired a lawyer and filed a lawsuit in court for eviction.
The lawyer immediately explained to Svetlana that this was a classic scam, but according to his practice, the case could be won. He immediately warned that the process might take time if the opposing side disputed it and demanded an expert examination to prove that at the time of the transaction, she was under the influence of scammers.
"Replace the Intercom Chip"
At the first court hearing, a terrible and, unfortunately, typical picture emerged. The apartment owner and her son described in detail how they fell into the hands of scammers.
The first call was an offer to replace the intercom chip, to which the son provided the criminals with some data regarding the apartment. The mother suspected something was wrong, but that same evening, she received a call from a person who introduced himself as a KGB officer. He informed her that the call about the chips was a trick, and, according to their information, "black" realtors were now preparing to illegally sell their apartment using forged documents. To "save" the housing, they had to follow the "special service" instructions: urgently put the apartment up for sale themselves through a legitimate agency, and then take the received money... to Minsk for a "check at the National Bank." After this "check," the transaction would allegedly be declared invalid, the money would be returned to the buyer, and the apartment to its rightful owner.
And they believed it. The question of how the scammers managed to trick two adults at once — the owner of the housing and her son — remains open.
But the fact remains: the day after receiving the money from Svetlana, the seller personally took the entire sum to Minsk and handed it over to a "courier" — an elderly woman. The son knew everything and also helped "save the housing."
The "Dolina Effect" Belarusian-Style
This is where Svetlana's story could have followed the well-known Russian scenario, where similar disputes drag on for years, and buyers cannot move into their purchased homes for years. However, Belarusian law enforcement proved to be different.
— I sought advice from a Minsk lawyer who is well-versed in the so-called "Dolina Effect." Her answer encouraged me. It turned out that the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus has clear instructions on how to act in such situations. Namely: if the transaction was made in good faith, cleanly, without any nuances, conducted in Belarusian rubles with the full amount paid, the law is on the side of the buyer. What the seller does with the received money does not concern the buyer.
The lawyer explained that in Belarus, the court considers not the apartment, but the money, as the subject of fraud. The apartment was sold cleanly — meaning it is the buyer's property. The victim can sue for the return of their funds, not the housing.
What Svetlana was previously threatened with — the seizure of the apartment as part of a criminal case — is not used in practice in such cases. This significantly strengthened her position in court.
Settlement Agreement
Realizing what had happened, the other side agreed to a settlement. At the second hearing, they offered to return not only the full cost of the apartment but also all of Svetlana's associated expenses.
— The amicable settlement of the dispute meant that they were ready to compensate for absolutely all losses. The lawyer's fees, the court filing, the payment of state duty, the bank interest on the loan we were paying. Even the lost advance payment to the designer. They were ready to give everything back… And they returned absolutely everything.
The money was collected within 2 weeks, and on December 15th, the parties met again at the notary's office. That same day, Svetlana deregistered from the apartment, which never became her home. The entire process, from purchase to money return, took a little over two months.
No Ill Will, No Resentment
During the conversation, Svetlana repeated several times that she felt no animosity towards the seller.
— I sincerely feel sorry for this woman; she's my mother's age, and I understand what a shock this is for her. I hold no ill will or resentment against her. And I am very worried about her. But I also learned a lesson for myself — to be more careful. Now I don't even share personal data with acquaintances over the phone. In general, I try to resolve any issues in person at official places, not through a phone call.
But this experience did not break her or make her give up her search for housing.
— Today I am finalizing a deal to buy a new apartment. And even if I face a similar situation, I already know perfectly well how to act and that the law in our country is on the side of the bona fide buyer. And I'm not afraid to go to court with such a position, even if I get scammed a second time.
Comments