Settlement of credit card dues dishonoured
In a complaint related to dishonour of the settlement by the bank in respect of credit card dues of the complainant where the bank had misplaced one cheque and the complainant was declared a defaulter for missing EMIs (equated monthly instalments) and was harassed for recovery, it was observed that the bank had caused avoidable mental harassment to the complainant without examining the issue at its end.
The bank was directed to waive the balance outstanding and pay a compensation for Rs 1 lakh towards harassment and mental anguish suffered by the complainant.
Losses due to delayed updation of CIBIL: In a case where it was proved that the bank had been negligent by not immediately updating the CIBIL (Credit Information Bureau (India) Ltd) record of their customer and, as a result, the home loan of the complainant could not be transferred to another bank, the bank was directed to pay a compensation of Rs 30,000 to the complainant as a rough estimate towards direct loss on account of loss of opportunity to go for a lower rate of interest in another bank and expenses incurred by him towards follow up of complaint on account of established deficiency of the bank.
Deficiency in operation of government accounts:
Three complainants having PPF accounts with the bank in HUF category approached the banking ombudsman's office alleging reversal of interest credited to their accounts. They stated that even after maturity of the PPF accounts they continued to deposit cash regularly. The bank also credited regular interest in those accounts even after maturity. Subsequently, the bank reversed the interest amount, resulting in a loss of the said amount paid in each of these accounts.
The bank submitted that the said PPF accounts were under HUF category and, as per the PPF rules; the accounts were not eligible for extension from the date of maturity and payment of interest for the period beyond the date of maturity. Hence, the branch had recovered the interest wrongly credited to complainant's account after the maturity.
On examination, it was observed that the PPF (HUF) accountholders were not eligible for the interest as claimed by them as they were expected to be aware of the Government regulations/notifications in this regard. However, the bank was found to be deficient in rendering services as they could have taken immediate action to close the account after maturity in terms of the Government Notification and RBI Guidelines.
Moreover, the bank also failed to bring this fact to the notice of the complainants. The bank was directed to pay Rs 1,000 to each complainant, by way of token compensation for loss caused to them arising out of the act of omission of the bank.
(Source: Annual report of the Banking Ombudsman Scheme.)
This is the Twentieth in the series on redressal of customer grievances by the Banking Ombudsman being carried in these columns.
+1.jpg)
0 comments
Post a Comment