BANK vs ACCOUNTS HOLDER et al

A CLEAR CAse of BReach of TRust

Jan 23

TOI

RBI directs banks to display all loan costs

The apex bank’s directive in relation to borrowers has not come a day to soon. Similar terse, no-nonsense and binding directive, in unmistakable language has been long pending in case of savings and fixed deposit account holders too. Banks ought to be likewise directed, not only to simply ‘display’, but to ‘disclose’ fully to the customer, in every detail, and even at the time account is opened.  Should require to be so disclosed in the account opening form itself, and be binding so long as the account is maintained by way of renewal or otherwise, until it is finally closed, even if prematurely,  and settled. Certain aspects requiring to be so specially covered and disclosed , in unequivocal terms, necessarily extend to premature closing,  by customer / account holder/ joint holder/ nominee , as the case may be, issuance of appropriate Certificate of TDS to the payee, etc..

To focus on and illustrate, consider a bank, in whose account opening form, these aspects are covered in the most dicey and confusing manner, thus: -
"Subject to such terms and conditions as the bank may stipulate ...make premature payment of the proceeds ... be at liberty though not bound and its absolute discretion , to repay the deposit before maturity , ..."

For the view taken by the RBI Ombudsman himself , that too in a case of foreclosure of home loan, refer report in a business Daily saying - Bank pulled up for “deficient documentation”.
Should that be so, is there not adequate justification / all the more reason why the same logic ought to be applied and followed, when withdrawal is out of , unlike in respect of borrowing by customer, his own monies lying in deposit? Are not the banks, in still, to the contrary, pursuing its own dubious way of thinking / in-house / in-box philosophy, taking advantage of the largely prevailing unawareness/ callous attitude on the part of customers, liable to consequences flowing from the patently wrong practice, being tantamount to criminal fraud, in breach of faith and trust ignorantly placed by customers?
Now that the ball is in RBI's court, it is for the regulator to take a conscious note of the widely obtaining discontent of the customers and bring succor to the frustrated banking  public, with no longer wait.

CRoss REfer >

a quixot •

Anthony Dmello (Mumbai) replies to A Quixot

The terms "unawareness and callous attitude" cannot be used so loosely as most of the time customers are at the mercy of these institutions. Caught in between the devil and deep blue sea is the average home buyer where loan givers and apartment sellers seem to be in collusion, with the government also not so friendly towards the common man. One can only hope good governance gets enough time to set in firmly and for that we have to ensure we keep the right people in office. Ultimately we have to help ourselves.