Date of filing : 06-04-2011
Date of order : 30-11-2011
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.81/2011
Dated this, the 30th day of November 2011
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
P.M. Sasidharan, } Complainant
S/o.Madhavan, Padivathukkal House,
Vellarikkundu.Po. 671533
(In Person)
1. Deputy General Manager, Federal Bank, } Opposite parties
Regional Office Fedaral Towers,
Mavoor Road, Kozhikode. 673016.
2. Manager, Fedaral Bank,
Bheemandy Branch, Nileshwar Via,
Kasaragod.Dt. 671314.
(Ops 1 &2. Adv. C.H. Vishnu Bhat, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
What is the morality in sending a belated notice by a Bank to the customer?
This is the question posed by the complainant Sri.P.M. Sasidharan in this complaint. According to him opposite parties sent a registered notice which belated and to which opposite parties collected notice charges also which is illegal and mere exploitation of the consumer.
2. According to opposite parties the complainant borrowed `5,00,000/- from opposite party No.2 on 10th December 2002 for the construction of his house and was repaying the same. The monthly instalment of the loan falls due on 10th December 2010 so notice is sent to the complainant on 301-12-2010 to clear the dues within 28th of December. The notice was served on the complaint on 3-1-2011, after six days from the proposed date of payment. After receiving the notice the complainant paid cleared the dues with interest and notice charges. According to opposite parties there is no deficiency of service on their part and the complainant has not suffered any loss or mental agony due to the act of opposite parties. Complaint is filed with malicious intention to harass the opposite parties.
3. Complainant filed proof affidavit in support of his case. Exts A1 to A6 marked complainant is cross-examined by the counsel of opposite parties. Opposite parties were cross-examined by the complainant. Ext.B1 marked.
4. Here the complainant is a consumer of opposite parties for the last 27 years and it is true that he has availed a housing loan from opposite parties by executing an agreement to repay the same in 120 monthly instalments with interest and penal interest and other charges. Instead of paying `8585/- per month complainant paid `10,000/- for the first 26 instalments. Certain occasions the repayment is delayed but the complainant cleared all arrears and paid more amount than actual dues. He is not challenging the notice charge. But the propriety of opposite parties is collecting the notice charge. The notice insisting to “clear the dues within December 28th of this month” was prepared by opposite parties on 20-12-20101 but it is posted on 30-12-2010. If the opposite parties sent the notice in time the complainant could have clear the dues within 28th of December. So that complainant will be exempted from paying penal interest. Here complainant paid interest and notice charges with the due amount. Due to the delay on the side of opposite parties, informing about the dues to the complainant. Opposite parties has double benefit. They charged interest from 28-12-2010 to 31-01-2011 with charge for the delayed notice `50/-. There is deficiency of service on the side of opposite parties in sending the notice in time for which penalty is imposed on the complaint. This is nothing but mere exploitation of consumer. According to the complainant if the opposite parties sent the notice in time the complainant could have clear the dues as per the instruction in the notice, i.e. within 28th December and he would be exempted from paying penal interest. The intention behind the notice is to help the consumers to clear the dues in time. But here the notice sent by opposite parties caused an additional liability to the complainant. No purpose is served by sending the notice after the due date. Soon after the incident the complainant informed his grievance to Deputy General Manager, Federal Bank. But he did not make a proper enquiry regarding the complaint but informed him that he is a good customer of the Bank. When opposite party No.2 was cross-examined by the complainant, he deposed that “The amount of one instalment is `8543/- and they used to change the interest rate. The amount claimed as per Ext.A1 is not any instalment, due but it is the amount due to the change in rate of interest”.
5. Complainant has paid all instalments as per agreement. The bank raised interest rate depending upon the rate of change of Ripo, reverse ripo rates of RBI. It is the duty of the Bank to inform the complainant as soon as they change the interest rate. The bank instead of informing the change in rate of interest at the first time as soon as it changed used to collect with the monthly instalments. This is nothing but a deficient nature of service. After entering into an agreement, if there is any change in the terms and conditions of the agreement it is the duty of the 1st party Bank to inform the same to the customers. A customer of the bank has every right to know what is the rate of interest charging from him by the bank from time to time. Opposite parties declared him as a good customer. It was the duty of the Deputy General Manager, to clear the doubts of the customers.
Hence the complaint is allowed and opposite parties 1 & 2 are directed to pay `3,000/-as compensation with `2000/- as cost to the complainant. Time for compliance is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt copy of this order. Failing which `5000/- will carry interest @ 9% from the date of complaint till payment.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1.20-12-2010 letter sent by Federal Bank to complainant.
A2 & A2 a. cover of Federal Bank.
A3.25-1-2011 photo copy of letter sent by complainant to Deputy GM Federal Bank
Calicut.
A4. 12-02-2011 letter sent by Federal Bank to complainant
A5. Photocopy of loan remittance details
A6. Photo copy of pass book of the complainant
B1. Photo copy of Agreement.
PW1. Sasidharan P.M.
DW1. Sunny D. Chittilappally.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
Pj/
