View 404 Cases Against Credit Card
View 90 Cases Against Sbi Credit Card
M.S. Randhawa filed a consumer case on 13 May 2019 against SBI Credit Card in the DF-II Consumer Court. The case no is CC/578/2018 and the judgment uploaded on 10 Jun 2019.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH
Consumer Complaint No | : | 578 of 2018 |
Date of Institution | : | 17.10.2018 |
Date of Decision | : | 13.05.2019 |
M.S.Randhawa, aged 67 years, s/o S.Gurdev Singh, resident of House No.664, Sector 33-B, Chandigarh UT. HaryaHarHar
…………….Complainant
1] SBI Credit Card, DLF Infinity Towers, Tower-C, 10th -12th Floor, Block-2, Building-3, DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon 122002 Haryana through its Chief Executive Officer.
2] S.B.I. Card, SCO No.171-172, Sector 8-c, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, through its authorised person/authority.
3] Credit Information Bureau (India) Limited (CIBIL), Head Office at Trans Union CIBIL Limited One India Bulls, 19th Floor, Tower-2A-2B, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai 400013, through its authorised person/authority,
………. Opposite Parties
MR.RAVINDER SINGH MEMBER
For Complainant : Complainant in person.
For OP(s) : Sh.Sandeep Suri, Adv. for OP No.1.
Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Adv. for OP No.3.
OP No.2 exparte.
The case of the complainant is that the complainant was issued add on credit card by SBI Credit Card Division/OPs No.1 & 2 and Vikram Randhawa was primary card holder. The said credit card was surrendered by the complainant on 7.7.2015 by making full & final payment of Rs.16,280/- and Sh.Vikram Randhawa, Principal Card Holder, also surrendered his credit card, which was confirmed by Opposite Party No.2. The Opposite Party NO.2 issued letter dated 26.9.2018 (Ann.C-4) stating that there is nothing due against the primary cardholder. However, the complainant was shocked to know from CIBIL statement that default of rs.2879/- is on account of SBI Credit Card against the complainant and when the complainant approached the Opposite Party No.2 in this regard, they did not pay any heed.
It is submitted that the Credit Card default as depicted in the CIBIL relates to 1999 and the last payment done by the complainant is shown as on 15.2.2001, whereas the complainant has not made any payment in this regard nor he received any credit card in the year 1999. It is also submitted that more over OPs No.1 & 2 did not issue any letter regarding payment of the overdue amount during the last 18 years and even the default was reported to CIBIL on 30.8.2018 after nearly 18 years without any reference to the complainant. It is stated that thereafter the Opposite Party No.1 confirmed no dues and tendered an apology to the complainant, but even then the Opposite Party NO.2 did not rectify the default status of complainant in CIBIL and accordingly, the complainant cannot raise the loan from the bank for purchase of flat. It is also stated that when the complainant applied for a housing loan for purchase of flat and when his account statement was checked by Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sector 33-C, Chandigarh, through CIBIL system, then only the complainant came to know that he is a credit card defaulter and the balance has been shown due towards him and as a result, his CIBIL score came down drastically to 564 (Ann.C-2) and the banks generally do not finance at such a low score, whereas he had given a cheque of Rs.One Lakh as advance towards the purchase of flat while executing agreement to sell(Ann.C-3), but the same could not be executed due to deficient act of OPs. Hence, this complaint.
2] The Opposite Party No.1 has filed reply and stated that the complainant had not made the complete payments towards the outstanding dues. It is stated that further charges are levied as complainant has not made the complete payment towards the outstanding dues. It is stated that the complainant has visited Delhi Office of OPs at help desk on Sept., 2018 and requested to zeroized his card account and update the CIBIL and accordingly, the Opposite Parties has zeroised the card account of complainant and updated the CIBIL. Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the Opposite Party No.1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint being frivolous.
Opposite Party NO.2 did not turn up despite service of notice, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated
The Opposite Party No.3/CIBIL has filed reply stating that the complaint is not maintainable against it. It is stated that CIBIL merely reflects the information submitted to it by its member credit institutions and Opposite Party No.3 issued the Credit Information Report (CIR) in a standard format, which acts as a repository of credit information. Submitted further that it does not create information or provide inputs thereon of its own. It is also stated that Opposite Party No.3 can make correction, deletion or addition of the credit information only after such correction, deletion or addition has been certified as correct by concerned credit institution. It is further stated that Opposite Party No.3, on receipt of the complaint, verified its database and observed that the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 reported the Payment History (DPDs) as Standard for the month of Oct., 2018 till date and the current balance and amount overdue as Zero for the disputed account bearing No.0004006661015852580 of the complainant. The Opposite Party No.3 also raised the grievance of the complainant pertaining to said Account with Opposite Party No.1 & 2 for confirmation of information reflected in the complainant’s CIR as reported by them and/or for issue of necessary instructions for modification, if any, and pursuance thereto, the Opposite Party No.1 & 2 vide its email dated 15.11.2018 (Ann.R-2) confirmed the current balance and amount overdue, both as Zero to be correct. They have also confirmed the date of last payment as 15.2.2001 and account status as blank is reported correctly and there is no change in the DPDs. Rest of the allegations have been denied with a prayer to dismiss the complaint qua OP No.3.
3] Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
4] We have heard the complainant in person, ld.Counsel for OPs No.1 & 3 and have also perused the entire record.
5] The entire evidence on record produced by the parties as well as the pleadings on record, explicitly proves that the complainant M.S.Radhawa along with Gurmitinder Randhawa, jointly took 27 Loans under the following accounts (Ann.C-8):-
Account Numbers | Bank |
51106016000117 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108011001192 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015003269 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015003086 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51105015002848 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015002827 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015002393 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015002415 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015001778 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
00389031000129 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51106515001338 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51106515001272 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51104015001152 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000973 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51105015000962 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000941 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000918 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000686 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000699 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000645 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000439 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51106511000349 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108011001086 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51105011000897 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
07445101000062 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
51108015000385 | Oriental Bank of Commerce |
6] Out of the said 27 Loan Accounts, one was still stands overdue and the balance outstanding amount of Rs.20,67,654/-, stands due as on 25.9.2018 (Ann.C-8 Page–9).
7] Besides the above mentioned loan accounts, the complainant was also holding one add on credit Card bearing No.0004006661015852580, which was issued against credit card of Vikram Randhawa, primary credit card holder bearing No.4377484634124989.
8] The OPs No.1 & 2/SBI Credit Card through its letter dated 2.10.2018 considered the request of the complainant regarding settlement of overdue payment of Rs.2879/- as a matter of consumer friendly relationship and has waived of the said outstanding amount and zeroised the credit card account of the complainant. The letter dated 2.10.2018 issued by SBI Credit Cards conveying the apology/regret over the inconvenience faced by the complainant by pursuing his request to zeroided the credit card account, ipso-facto is not sufficient enough to hold the OPs/SBI Credit Card Limited responsible for any updating of financial transactions in the name of the complainant.
9] The complainant, as per Data Base Information (Ann.C-2 Page-15) was on error in making late payment on 30 occasions. He has sought nine enquiries to obtain his CIBIL Report, which is also contributed in lower CIBIL score in favour of the complainant. The information available in CIBIL with respect to all financial transactions of loan outstanding liabilities contributes towards assessment of CIBIL Score, for which any institution alone cannot be held responsible, rather it is an individual himself, who is sole responsible for his high or low CIBIL score, which is based on his own financial conduct.
10] Keeping into consideration the entire facts & circumstances of the case, as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the opinion that no case of deficiency in service is made out against Opposite Parties. Hence, the complaint being without merit is hereby dismissed.
The copy of this order be forwarded to the parties as per rules.
13th May, 2019
Sd/-
(RAJAN DEWAN)
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
(PRITI MALHOTRA)
MEMBER
Sd/-
(RAVINDER SINGH)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.