Complaint presented on : 26.12.2011
Order pronounced on : 06.04.2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L., : MEMBER II
MONDAY THE 06th DAY OF APRIL 2015
C.C.NO.233/2011
Mr.S.Abdul Kareemullah,
S/O G.Syed Santhan,
Res.No.151,11th Street,
2nd Sector,
K.K.Nagar,
Chennai – 600 078. .. Complainant
..Vs..
| | 1.M/S Sandard Chartered Bank, Rep.by its Head-Customer Care, No.19,Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001. 2.M/S Standard Chartered Bank, Rep.by its Head-Service, CreditCards, India Card Centre 3rd & 4th Floor, Raheja Point, Magarath Road, Bangalore 560 025. 3.M/S.Shaha Fin;ease Pvt.Ltd., Office; No.102,Wellington Business, Park -1, Off Andheri Kuria Road, Morol, Andheri East, Mumbai 400 059. …Opposite Parties | |
| | | |
| | |
Date of complaint : 29.12.2011
Counsel for Complainant :M/s. S.Thiruvengadam,
Aruna Thiruvengadam.
Counsel for 1st & 2nd Opposite party : M/s S.Vasudevan,K.Krishnaswamy.
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.SC., B.L.,
This complaint is filed by the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.
COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:
1.The complainant is a customer of the opposite party bank and he was issued with the 4 credit cards on account of his credit-worthiness. The complainant was regular and prompt in payment of the dues in respect of his aforesaid credit cards and even though there were delay, such a delay never exceeded a couple of days. The complainant sent several representations against levy of exorbitant rates of interest and other charges. Even after acknowledgement the opposite parties failed to reverse the charges in the complainant account. However the opposite parties issued a reply dt 24.04.2003 regretting the inconvenience caused by the bank in reversing the charges back to the complainant account. Hence the complainant decided to close the cards account and accordingly on 25.02.2004 he had broken the card by duly cancelling the same and sent to the opposite party with the payment for a sum of Rs.9,899.53/-(Rupees nine thousand eight hundred ninety nine and fifty three paisa) towards final settlement in respect of his account. After a couple of months on 31.05.2004 again the bank sent a letter to the complainant claiming a one time payment of Rs.9,800/-(Rupees nine thousand eight hundred only) or a sum of Rs.9,900/-(Rupees nine thousand and nine hundred only) in 3 equal installments. The complainant on receipt of above said one time payment letter replied that he had already paid the said amount and also he issued a notice through his counsel on 29.04.2005. If really the complainant is due to the bank they could have very well taken steps to recover money from them. The opposite parties informed to the CIBIL that the complainant is having outstanding dues to the extent of Rs.1,28,528/-(Rupees one lakh twenty eight thousand five hundred and twenty eight only) This affected the reputation of the complainant and Mrs. Sundaram finance also denied him to grant loan to him that his name figured in the defaulter list maintained by the CIBIL. The opposite parties had claimed only a sum of Rs.9800/- which was disputed by the complainant on account of the fact that he had already paid the entire amount and quantum of amount of Rs.1,28,528/-(Rupees one lakh twenty eight thousand five hundred and twenty eight only) was never claimed by the opposite parties at any point of time and they also gave false information to CIBIL as a defaulter. Then the complainant caused a notice dt 24.03.2011 that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service and for which no reply has been given by them inspite of receipt of the notice. Hence the complainant filed this complainant is claimed compensation with cost and also direct the opposite parties to withdraw the complainant name from the list of defaulters submitted the CIBIL.
2.WRITTEN VERSION of OP 1 and 2 IN BRIEF:
The 3rd opposite party set exparte on 24.09.2014.The opposite parties 1 & 2 submitted that the complaint is barred by limitation, since alleged payment is dt 25.02.2004.The complaint is filed beyond the period of two years from 25.02.2004. The legal notice of the complainant dt 24.03.2011 will not give raise cause of action. The complainant is also liable to the dismissed for non jointer of necessary party i.e CIBIL. The complainant involves a creditor-debtor relationship and does not fall in the jurisdiction of Consumer Forum. Initially the complainant was issued with two credit cards on 1.07.2002 and additional credit card on 8.12.2003, apart from that another EMI card-primary on the same day. The complainant purchased for a sum of Rs. 27,948/-(Rupees twenty seven thousand nine hundred forty eight only) by using one of card on 24.04.2003. The statement for the period February 2002 – October 2004 was sent to the complainant returned as undelivered. The complainant did not pay for his account and hence the bank constrained to levy interest and the late charges in accordance with card member rules and regulations. As per the business decision in the year 2010, the credit card product was sold off to another financial institution viz. the 3rd opposite party and at the time of sale the complainant was due in respect of this card was Rs.1,62,072.80/-(Rupees one kakh sixty two thousand seventy two and eighty paisa only). However some of the charges reversed and communicated to the complainant dt 24.04.2003 on the basis of service gesture. The bank had not received any request for closure of the account of the complainant. The amount of Rs.9, 989.53 claimed to have been paid by the complainant had been adjusted only towards outstanding of Rs.14,126/-(Rupees fourteen thousand one hundred twenty six only) for his credit cards on 28.02.2004 reflecting in the 12.03.2004 statement. As per the statement dt 12.02.2004 the outstanding of Rs.17,585.36/-(Rupees seventeen thousand five hundred eighty five and thirty six paisa) is reflected. It is pertinent to mention that in the event of any full and final settlement offered to the complainant against the outstanding dues, the Bank should have issued a settlement letter containing the terms and conditions of the settlement. The said settlement letter is issued on the letter head of Bank and same is signed by a duly authorized official of the Bank. The opposite party sent various communications through e-mails informed the complainant that non payment may lead to temporary suspension of card facility, minimum payment due, facilities may be withdrawn permanently, facility stands cancelled, and his name included in the defaulters list. As the bank was regularly sending the statement, the customer is aware of payment towards the outstanding as accrued. The complainant also made a declaration that they will obtain card member rules and regulations. The opposite parties have not committed any deficiency in service and it is the complainant who is due to pay to the opposite parties in respect of his use of credit cards and therefore the opposite parties prays to dismiss the complaint.
3.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. Whether the opposite parties committed deficiency in service?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled?
4.POINT: 1
The admitted facts are that the complainant is a customer of the opposite party 1 & 2 by availing two credit cards on 1.07.2002, one supplementary credit card on 08.12.2003 and an another EMI card-primary on 8.12.2003 itself and the complainant also paying the amount to the opposite party 1 & 2 and during the year 2010 as per the business decision the credit card product was sold off to the 3rd opposite party who is an another financial institution.
5.The complainant contended that he is a very regular and prompt in payment and even if there is any delay in payment such delay never exceed a couple of days and he decided to close the credit cards accounts with the opposite parties and hence he had broken the cards on 25.02.2004 and also sent the sum of Rs.9899.53/- by way of cheque towards full and final settlement and he also sent ExA3 letter dated 25.02.2004 to close the account and the opposite parties included his name in the defaulters list of the CIBIL establishes that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service.
6.The opposite parties would contend that the amount paid by the complainant was debited in the outstanding amount of Rs. 14,126/-(Rupees fourteen thousand one hundred and twenty six only) as per statement dt 12.03.2004 and even as per that statement the complainant is due to pay to the bank and hence the complainant was issued with Ex.A9 & Ex.A13 one time settlement to pay a sum of Rs.9800/-(Rupees nine thousands and eight hundred only) or Rs.9900/-(Rupees nine thousands and nine hundred only) in 3 installments through and however the complainant did not pay the one time settlement amount and further the complaint is also barred by limitation and therefore prays to dismiss the complaint.
7.According to the complainant he sent ExA3 letter dt 25.02.2004 to the bank stating that the bank had charged late fee charge, interest and service tax additionally and such amount are deducted by him and he has to pay only a sum of Rs.9,899.53/- (Rupees nine thousand eight hundred ninety nine and fifty three paisa only) and for the said amount he enclosed a cheque and requested to close the account. The opposite parties gave Ex A9 reply to ExA3 letter that the complainant account attracts late payment charges that he had not paid the minimum amount due or before the payment due date and since there was delay in payment towards the statement, late payment charges are calculated and therefore as requested by the complainant reversal of financial charges debited in his cards account cannot be done and considering his long term relationship he has been advised to pay one time settlement of Rs.9,800/-(Rupees nine thousands and eight hundred only) or Rs.9,900/-(Rupees nine thousands and nine hundred only) in three equal installments. Again for the said Ex.A9 reply of the bank the complainant wrote ExA4 again asking to reverse the late charges, late fee, annual fee and service tax etc and thereafter issued ExA5, A7 and A14 notices to the opposite parties.
8.The complainant himself made his own calculation in Ex A3 was not accepted by the bank in Ex A9. However the bank itself made certain reversion in the account. The bank has filed Ex B4 statement of account of the complainant maintained by them. The complainant did not mention the calculation of the opposite party of the bank is wrong with reference to his statement of account. Further this Forum is vested with the power to deal with only deficiency in service Where as the claim of the complainant is that the account maintained by the bank is right or wrong and the same cannot decided in this Forum in respect of the account of the complainant.
9.The opposite parties strict to their defense that their calculation is correct and the complainant is due to pay to them. The complainant pleaded in para 8 of his written arguments that
“the payment of Rs.9899.53 has been adjusted towards the outstanding amount of Rs.14,126/- and therefore even according to the opposite party as on 28.02.2004 the outstanding amount was only Rs.4,226/-alone. Therefore claiming a huge amount and informing as if the complainant is a defaulter of such a huge amount is not only illegal but amounts to deficiency in service”
Even on own admission of the complainant that he is having outstanding amount of Rs.4226/-(Rupees four thousand two hundred and twenty six only) When the complainant himself admits his default of payment he cannot allege that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service by claiming huge amount. Further both of them have not arrived definite amount payable by the complainant or to the bank and hence it cannot be said that the opposite parties committed deficiency in service. Therefore with the available evidence and documents filed by both the parties, the complainant has not proved that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and accordingly this point is answered.
10.POINT: 2
Since it is held above in point no 1 that the opposite parties have not committed deficiency in service , the complainant is not entitled for any relief from them and the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to dismissed.
In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 06th day of April 2015.
MEMBER - II PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 28.04.2003 Letter sent by the opposite party Bank to the
Complainant.
Ex.A2 dated 18.06.2003 Letter sent by the opposite party-Bank to the
Complainant.
Ex.A3 dated 25.02.2004 Complainant’s letter to the Opposite party-Bank
With acknowledgement.
Ex.A4 dated 10.06.2004 Complainant’s letter to the Opposite party-Bank
Ex.A5 dated 29.04.2005 Advocate – Notice issued on behalf of the complainant
Ex.A6 dated 29.05.2010 CIBIL rating.
Ex.A7 dated 24.03.2011 Advocate-Notice issued on behalf of the complainant.
Ex.A8 dated 12.03.2004 Monthly Statement issued by the opposite party-Bank
To the complainant.
Ex.A9 dated 31.05.2004 Letter sent by the opposite party-Bank to the
Complainant.
Ex.A10 dated 23.08.2004 Complainant’s representation with acknowledgement.
Ex.A11 dated 07.09.2004 Complainant’s representation with acknowledgement.
Ex.A12 dated16.09.2004 Letter sent by the opposite party-Bank to the
Complainant.
Ex.A13 dated 21.09.2004 Letter sent by the opposite party-Bank to the
Complainant.
Ex.A14 dated 29.04.2005 Advocate-Notice with postal Acknowledgement cards.
Ex.A15 dated 28.03.2012 Proceedings of CIBIL
Ex.A16 dated 25.06.2012 Complainant’s representation to CIBIL with
Acknowledgement.
Ex.A17 dated 02.07.2012 E-mail received from CIBIL.
Ex.A18 dated 04.07.2012 E-mail sent to CIBIL.
Ex.A19 dated 05.07.2012 E-mail received from CIBIL.
Ex.A20 dated 06.07.2012 E-mail sent to CIBIL.
Ex.A21 dated 09.07.2012 E-mail sent to CIBIL.
Ex.A22 dated 09.07.2012 E-mail received from CIBIL.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
Ex.B1 dated NIL Credit Card application with terms of the Credit Card
agreement
Ex.B2 dated 24.04.2003 Letter of the Bank
Ex.B3 dated 09.02.2010 Assignment agreement
Ex.B4 dated NIL Statement of Account
MEMBER - II PRESIDENT
