Date of Filing:16.06.2007<br /> Date of Order:08.08.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1195 OF 2007<br /> <br /> <br /> Mirza Faizan,<br /> C/o Md. Samruddin,<br /> ½, II Floor, 8th Cross, I Main,<br /> Kempaiah Block, J.C. Nagar,<br /> Bangalore-560006. Complainant<br /> <br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> Hongkong and Shanghai Banking <br /> Corporation (HSBC)<br /> 7 Mahatma Gandhi Road, <br /> Bangalore-560 001. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant requesting that, the opposite party Bank be directed to remove his name from CIBIL defaulter’s list and for payment of compensation. <br /> The brief facts of the case are that, the complainant applied for Credit Card membership in June-2005 and received HSBC Gold Credit Card on 21st June-2005. The complainant did not receive Credit Card statement. He made an interim payment of Rs.1,000/- on 9th August-2005. Again he has made interim payment of Rs.12,000/- on 31st August-2005 to avoid any charges. He made complaint to the Bank about non receipt of statement. They assured him that it will be sent within 72 hours. Complainant states that he has not received statement from Bank till October-2005. He decided to stop make payment till he receives complete Credit Card Statement. The representative of Bank handed over all computer print out. On his statement there were 9 transactions. The 2 transactions were shown in some “Narmadha Bar”. He decided not to make payment unless Bank issues him a corrected statement and an apology letter. Complainant stated that because of neglect and carelessness of Bank he suffers both mentally and physically. The statement shows Rs.5,000/- which was done on SONY Showroom in Begumpet, Hyderabad on 16/07/2005. Complainant was in Bangalore on that date. He informed the Bank on 16th July-2005 that transaction is not of him. Complainant refused to make payment unless statement is corrected. On 14th December-2005 he addressed e-mail to the Bank stating the entire story and requested to send corrected statement. The complainant also stated that when he approached Bank to avail personal loan, loan was rejected because his name was in CIBIL defaulter’s list. This was a major blow to his entire family. He approached opposite party Bank and requested to settle the issue and remove his name from CIBIL. But they have told that complainant has to pay around Rs.96,000/- to get his name removed. Due to HSBC Bank’s mental torture the life and carrier had at stake. Complainant stated that he had developed suicidal tendencies and unable to perform his profession. Complainant further submitted that he has very clean and sound financial record. He possesses other 3 Credit cards. He has not missed a single payment in his entire life. <br /> Notice was issued to HSBC Bank. HSBC Bank appeared through advocate and submitted defence version stating that, complaint is not maintainable in law and same may be dismissed. Opposite party is having Crores of customers in India. Credit Card statements are generated and dispatched to the respective customers. It is submitted by the opposite party that immediately after purchase from the Merchant Establishments on swiping the Credit Card the said transactions are reflected with the Master or Visa Franchise. The complainant should have given complaint before the police thereafter intimate the opposite party to block the credit card. But the complainant has not filed any complaint to the police. If the dues are not paid within the time limit same will be reflected with the CIBIL, a subsidiary company of the RBI, for the same the complainant cannot blame the opposite party. Therefore, opposite party requested to dismiss the complainant. <br /> Arguments are heard. Perused the records and documents. During the course of argument the complainant submitted that he is due to the opposite party Bank and he is ready to pay sum of Rs.49,129/- and the learned advocate for the opposite party also submitted that he will pursue the matter with opposite party Bank and try to solve the problem and issues amicably if the complainant makes payment of dues. Complainant himself has stated in his complaint that on account of non receipt of Credit Card statement he has stopped to make payments. Therefore, it is now admitted fact that the complainant is due to the opposite party Bank and there is some dispute regarding the exact amount payable by the complainant. The question of actual payment and the balance due cannot be decided by the Forum. The complainant should approach Banking Ombudsman and submit all his grievances there and the Banking Ombudsman to look into the grievances of the complainant. The Banking Ombudsman is constituted by the RBI for resolving the dispute like the present nature. The Consumer Forum cannot go into the details of statement of account without there being any proper assistance and records. The only remedy available to the complainant is to approach Banking Ombudsman first and take corrective steps there. After the finding of Banking Ombudsman in one or other way if the complainant is not satisfied with the finding of Banking Ombudsman in that event he will be free to approach Consumer Forum for appropriate relief. Secondly, the complainant has not filed his complaint to the police for the misuse of his Credit Card soon after coming to know that there are some transactions of his credit card by 3rd party. The complainant has not made the Merchant Establishments as a party to the present proceeding in respect of misuse of his credit card. Therefore, this is one of the defect. As per the rules and regulations in respect of the credit card payment method it has been stated that billing disputes resolution the RBI has appointed an Ombudsman who can be approached for redressing customer grievances if they have not already been redressed by the HSBC Bank. It is also stated in the tariff sheet the customer can approach the Ombudsman if he does not receive a response within 60 days or if he is not satisfied with the response. In this case, the complainant is not satisfied with the response of the HSBC Bank and he has not received proper response within 60 days in respect of his grievance. Therefore, the remedy open to the complainant is to approach Ombudsman appointed by RBI. So, under these circumstances, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with a direction to the complainant to first approach Ombudsman appointed by the RBI for getting the proper relief and response. With this observation, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> The complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs. <br /> Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2008. <br /> <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />