BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 219 of 2016
Date of Institution : 6.9.2016
Date of Decision : 10.10.2017.
Tarlok Singh son of Shri Gian Singh, resident of Sant Nagar, Tehsil Rania, Distt. Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
- Branch Manager/ Asstt. Manager HDFC Bank, Branch at Sirsa Road, Rania, Distt. Sirsa.
- Senior Manager, HDFC Bank Limited, Central Processing Unit, 169-A, IIIrd Floor Annasalai, Chennai-60002.
- Regd: Office: HDFC Bank Limited HDFC Bank House, Sonapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai-400013.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
SMT. RAJNI GOYAT ………………… MEMBER
SH. MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE …… MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Inderjit Singh, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
The case of the complainant in brief is that on the allurement by the authorized marketing agent of the ops who approached the complainant and assured for the best and fair services by ops offered for opening of an account with op no.1. That complainant while believing upon the version of said Marketing Executive got opened an account No.2320715300001482 on 27.1.2012 and the said account of the complainant is the regular account. It is further averred that since then he has been maintaining the said account properly and has been making the transactions as per his day to day needs and there has never been any kind of default on the part of complainant nor any kind of notice has ever been issued by the ops qua any kind of default on the part of complainant in the operation of the said account. It is further averred that complainant approached the op no.1 for the completion of the passbook upto date qua his account upon which op no.1 stated that passbook is not available with them for the time being and hence they issued the statement w.e.f. 27.1.2012 to 19.8.2016 and after getting the statement of his account he was shocked to know that the Bank has debited the huge amount of Rs.3,00,000/- approximately in the account of the complainant in the name of entries remarked as “AUTOPAY SI- TAD/MAD”. Detail of the amount by way of these wrong entries are as under:-
Date of Entry Amount debited
05.7.2013 1832.00
14.8.2013 11983.84
14.9.2013 8146.56
18.10.2013 57309.97
14.11.2013 9172.50
15.12.2013 4892.50
14.1.2014 5742.50
14.2.2014 7102.50
17.3.2014 7792.50
14.4.2014 8882.50
15.5.2014 10452.50
15.7.2015 9989.10
14.8.2014 11618.48
14.9.2014 11788.48
It is further averred that besides above there are number of such like other wrong entries which have been made in the account of the complainant in the name of Autopay, complete detail of such entries is recorded in the statement of account of the complainant w.e.f. 27.1.2012 to 19.8.2016. That on detecting all these deductions by the ops by simply making the entries with remark as “Auto Pay”, the complainant was shocked and he approached the op no.1 Bank and complained about the same and also them to explain in express that how and why these deductions have been made out of the account of the complainant because the complainant has never consented for any such auto deductions out of his account nor there is any such order of the court which can be relevant for the alleged deductions, upon which the op assured the complainant that these deductions are the outcome of the wrong entry of deductions which has been happened only because of the wrong entry in the operating system attached with the account of the complainant. They also assured him that they will definitely refund the said amounts in the account of complainant but till today the amount has not been refunded to the complainant. It is further averred that since then the complainant several times approached the op no.1/ Branch Manager/ Asstt. Manager of the bank branch at Rania but they failed to redress the grievance of the complainant rather even on the personal approach of complainant the op no.1 always put off complainant with one lame excuse or the other. That due to act and conduct of the ops, the complainant has suffered huge financial loss as well as harassment and mental tension. That the cause of action for filing the complainant arose to the complainant only when he came to know about the alleged wrong deductions of entries in the name of Autopay as the complainant has obtained his complete statement of account upto 19.8.2016 only in the month of August, 2016. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that the ops are banking company within the meaning of banking regulation Act and is inter-alia engaged in the business of banking, financing and providing credit card facilities to the customers. The complainant had availed a credit card on the basis of his request through online application reference no.13060714411980RI dated 7.6.2013 from the answering ops. On the basis of complainant’s request credit card bearing No.4617873001722534 was issued on 7.6.2013. The aforesaid card was lost and on request of complainant another card no.4617873001751939 was issued by answering ops, which was further upgraded to 4854990000420530, further upgraded to 4854991900379230. The aforesaid card no. 4854991900379230 was lost from complainant and on request of complainant, another card No.4854991902688539 was issued to complainant. It is further submitted that at that time he was made clear about all the terms and conditions governing the usage of the credit cards. It is further submitted that prior to the issuance of the same the complainant had represented to be being financially strong enough to repay the credit card bill amount and as such assured to make payments regularly and punctually as per the statements raised upon him for the use and utilization of the credit cards above mentioned by signing the application and declaration etc. It is further submitted that Autopay facility has been availed by the complainant and the bank was authorized to debit the account of the complainant held with the bank for the minimum amount due as per the monthly credit card statement. The monthly credit card statements were sent to the complainant on his address but the complainant did not pay his dues on time and even as per the statement dated 24.11.2016, an amount of Rs.324835.29/- was pending against the complainant. Even the ops sent legal notices to the complainant on 19.9.2016, 18.10.2016 via E-mail to complainant regarding autopay return in the account of complainant but the complainant has put a deaf ear to the notices and did not pay the dues of the bank and as such he is willful defaulter. It is further submitted that details as to payment of ‘Fees and Service Charges’ & ‘Interest’ are explained in Card member agreement. Further details as to ‘Payment’ & Monthly repayments to card member’s card account are elucidated and ‘statement of Accounts’ are explained in card member agreement further lien and right of set-off is explained in the card member agreement. Similarly, ‘Fee’, Late Fee charges, finance charges etc. and the schedule of charges were also explained in the MITC. Hence, the complainant was completely aware of the charges applicable to him when he was issued the credit card and is also aware of the charges levied if payment is not paid in the schedule time. With these averments, dismissal of complaint has been prayed for.
3. The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.C1 and copy of statement of account Ex.C2. On the other hand, ops produced affidavit Ex.R1, copies of documents Ex.R2 to Ex.R56, affidavit Ex.R57, copy of statement of account Ex.R58 and documents Ex.R59 to Ex.R67.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. From the written version of the opposite parties and supported documents and affidavits, it emerges out that on the request of the complainant vide online application dated 7.6.2013 Ex.R2, account No.23271530001482 was opened and thereafter he was issued credit card No.4617xxxx22534 and credit limit of Rs.3,00,000/- was set up in his favour. Accordingly, the complainant has been enjoying the said credit facility and making various payments as per his need and requirements. Over the period of time, the complainant was issued new credit card No.4617xxxx1939, which was upgraded to credit card No.4854xxxx0530 and further upgraded to credit card No.4854xxxx9230. This credit card was lost by the complainant and on his request new credit card No.4854xxxx8539 was issued. The credit card facility was subject to terms and conditions of the bank policy. The Bank has been sending monthly credit card statement to the complainant from time to time and the complainant was fully conversant with the charges debited by the Bank on account of Autopay facility to his account No. 23271530001482. These charges included finance charges, service tax, cess etc., over due charges/ late fee etc. amounting to minimum amount due. Further, the complainant has been enjoying this facility since long and never objected to the bank about these charges. Hence, the plea of the complainant that he came to know about the alleged wrong deductions in the name of Autopay only in the Month of August, 2016 is not tenable. Hence, we are of the opinion that the bank authorities have charged/ debited the amount correctly for the facility of credit card. Moreover, the complainant has not been able to prove any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
6. In view of the above, we find no merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. However, the bank is at liberty to review the charges levied in the account of the complainant and if it is found that any amount has not been charged as per rules and regulations of the bank, same may be refunded to the complainant. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:10.10.2017. Member Member District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum,Sirsa
