Forum asks RBI to instruct banks not to harass customers

A city-based consumer forum rapped HDFC Bank Limited for allegedly harassing a credit card holder though he had already paid the money, and asked it to pay Rs 60,000 to him.

BENGALURU: A city-based consumer forum rapped HDFC Bank Limited for allegedly harassing a credit card holder though he had already paid the money, and asked it to pay Rs 60,000 to him. It also directed the RBI to instruct all banks across the country not to take the law into their hands.

Allowing the complaint in part, filed by B M Bhageerath, resident of Rajarajeshwari Nagar, the Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum asked the HDFC Bank to pay Rs  50,000 towards damages for causing mental and physical harassment in demanding the amount already paid and also pay Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses to the complainant.

The forum, comprising president H R Srinivas and Member D Suresh, said that the illegal attempt to recover the amount which had already been paid was uncalled for.“The copy of this order be sent to the head office of HDFC Bank Limited to take stern action against the erring manager  and also
give instructions to the managers of its branches,” the forum said. “Even in the case of defaulters, as per the RBI guidelines and as laid down in various decisions of the Supreme Court, the banks and the financial institutions cannot hire third persons to recover the money,” it said.

40 missed calls in a day

According to the order, the complainant is the credit card holder of the bank and the manager of the bank had been harassing him for the payment of dues of Rs 4,500.The complainant had produced various mobile numbers from which calls have been made to him and 40 missed calls  were on the same day (April 27, 2017).  This apart, the bank had sent an SMS saying that ‘don’t impact on your CIBIL score’, though he had paid the money. Hence, Bhageerath moved the forum against the bank.

On this, the forum said: “The very act of HDFC Bank in  threatening the complainant that it would inform the CIBIL authorities  when the amount had already been paid, amounts to deficiency in  service and unfair method of recovery of money.”

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com