JUDGEMENT

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he is a credit card holder of the op bank being card No. 4196-0749-4019-7941 and it was issued on the basis of an agreement and executed on 26.04.2012 in between the complainant and op/bank.  But the discrepancy started from the very beginning and the bill for the month of June 2012 was calculated till 04.06.2012 amounting to Rs.2,245/- where as the due date was 26.06.2012 and the bill was received by the complainant on 07.07.2012 and the complainant somehow managed to contact the customer care of the op/bank and got assurance from the customer care that such thing will not be repeated further and the complainant paid the bill along with the late charges and interest.

          Thereafter the complainant made several representations at the office of the op/bank to send the bills in time but none of the requests of the complainant were paid any heed and none of the bills were received by the complainant within the due date and late charges and interest was charged for each of the bill.  So at each time the complainant had to pay hefty charges.

          Fact remains op/bank delivered the bills to the complainant after expiry of the due date deliberately with ill motive and with malafide intention to extract extra money from the complainant under the heads as interest, late charges and late fee which amount to gross deficiency of service on the part of the op/bank and it is also further alleged that according to the agreement executed by the complainant at the time of issuance of the credit card the annual fees as platinum rewards was for lifetime in case of the complainant but to the utter surprise the annual fees was charged from the complainant on 03.11.2012 which is reflected in the statement dated 04.11.2012.  It is also a part of deficiency in service.  But according to the RBI guidelines the op/bank there is no delay in dispatching bill and the customer or the complainant has sufficient number of days for making payment before the interest starts getting charged and in case of all bills regarding the credit card of the complainant, op did not supply the bills within the due date and specifically according to the bills for the month of August, September and October 2012, the statement was generated on 05.08.2012, 04.09.2012 and 04.10.2012 and those bills were received by the complainant on 31.08.2012, 30.09.2012 and 26.10.2012 respectively and the complainant was directed to make the payment of the bills immediately and no time was given to the complainant for making payment of the bills according to the RBI guidelines.

          Complainant on several occasions sent letters and email to the office of the op/bank and also made phone calls to send the bills in time and at each time assurance was given by the op/bank that the same will be done at the time of issuance of next bill, but the op/bank deliberately repeated the same thing each time.  Moreover on 03.11.2012 representative of the collection agent of the op/bank was sent to the office of the complainant and the agent demanded the bill amount from the complainant and thereafter the agent forcefully took Rs. 6,482/- from the complainant on 03.11.2012 for which acknowledgement letter dated 20.03.2013 was sent by the op/bank to the complainant and the agent used abusive languages and misbehaved with the complainant thereby hampering the image and reputation of the complainant at his working place which is completely illegal act.

          Subsequently the operation of the credit card of the complainant was suspended illegally and arbitrarily by the op/bank on July 2012.  Complainant used the credit card facility only for two months and thereafter the credit facility was withdrawn but the op went on sending bills month by month.  In letters dated 17.10.2012 and 15.02.2013 op threatened the complainant for leving of financial charges, detoriation of credit history and withdrawal of card facility whereas the credit facility of the complainant was suspended since July 2012.

          Subsequently op/bank sent a bill of Rs.10,238.76 paisa on 04.04.2013 and thereafter day by day op/bank was enhancing the amount arbitrarily without any reason and threatening over phone and sending men and agents at the office and the residence of the complainant to pay the same.  But according to the complainant there was no money due to the op/bank regarding credit card.  Such sort of act is completely arbitrary and under any circumstances complainant sent legal notice on 06.11.2013 which was received by op/bank on 08.11.2013 and 09.11.2013, but op/bank neither took any steps to redress the grievance of the complainant nor did give any reply to the same and practically op/bank has adopted unfair trade practice for which for redressal, complainant has appeared before this Forum for compensation and for such direction.

          On the other hand op/Standard Chartered Bank by filing written statement submitted that complainant deliberately suppressed the fact that he had also opted for e-statement facility and had been regularly receiving the same via e-mail.  So, the instant complaint filed on the ground of non-receipt of statements in time is completely false and moreover the regular monthly credit account was sent to the e-mail address of the complainant as recorded and hard copies were sent to the complainant through his mailing address and complainant as per his convenience had opted for the e-statement facility in addition to hard copy.  So, there is no possibility of overlooking the soft copy of the statement and misplacing the same.  As such the op/bank is within its right to levy late charges and interest for non-receipt of payment within the due date as per agreed terms and conditions.

          It is further submitted that payment of Rs.6,482/- had been adjusted towards the card account on 03.11.2012 and late charges were levied as per the scheduled of the service charges of the op/bank as per credit terms and customer terms and further the schedule of charges were mentioned in the important information document duly singed by the complainant and it was done as per RBI guidelines.  It is further submitted that op/bank responded to all the correspondences received from the complainant and they have also submitted that the entire claim is false and fabricated for which the complaint should be dismissed.

                                                        Decision with reasons

          The present complaint is taken up for final decision and for which we have considered the material evidences on record including the complaint and written version and the material documents as produced by the both parties and also argument of the Ld. Lawyers of both parties for decision.

          On in depth study of the same it is clear that as per bank record the gold reward credit card No. 4196-0749-4019-7941 was issued to the complainant on 01.10.2011 based on application duly signed by the complainant and other requisite documents and complainant opted for e-statement facility in addition to hard copy and as per op/bank that was sent regularly and on account of non-payment outstanding charges has been levied and credit account was invalidated on 06.05.2013 as per bank record.  Fact remains that op/bank submitted the original copy of the application for credit card wherefrom it is found that Birendra Kumar Jana/the complainant signed on 28.09.2011.  But complainant has tried to convince that his credit card No. is 4196-0749-4019-7941 and fact remains the bill was sent by the op/bank in respect of gold reward primary card being No. 4196-0749-4019-7941.  So it is clear that complainant is claiming that he is card holder of the op/bank and that number is admitted by the op/bank as given in the complaint and the bill was sent by the op also support that fact.  But from the bill, it is clear that it was for gold reward primary card but not it is platinum reward card.  But complainant in the complaint has not stated that he also enjoyed another card other than the present card as made in the complaint including another card that is platinum reward card.  But platinum reward card application was filed by the complainant on 26.04.2012 whereas the complainant’s admitted credit card No. is 4196-0749-4019-7941 as gold reward primary card and that was issued on the basis of application of the complainant dated 18.09.2011 and in respect of gold reward primary card, complainant received this.  But no bill was sent in respect of platinum reward card and the complainant has not stated in his complaint that he has two cards, one is platinum reward card and another is gold reward primary card.  But the present complaint is in respect of gold reward primary card not in respect of platinum reward card.  Moreover complainant has not mentioned the card number of platinum reward card and practically after proper evaluation of the materials on record it is found that this complaint is not related to platinum reward card.

          But complainant’s main grievance is that bill in respect of present gold card is not being sent properly.  Apparently it is admitted by the op that hard copies are being sent subsequently.  So, it was received at late stage.  But soft copies were sent by e-mail always because as per application dated 28.09.2011 complainant prayed for online banking, SMS alert, electronic statement and same are allowed and in this regard, op filed a document to show that complainant has such e-mail facilities and on different date details of the bill was sent by e-mail and it was received by the complainant and that statement is filed.  E-mail address of the complainant is birendrakumarjana@rediffmail.com and from the said statement of e-mail it is clear that on all occasions e-mail statement was sent to the complainant and complainant received it.  But all those matters have been suppressed by the complainant in this complaint no doubt.  So, apparently complainant’s main allegation for not giving proper relief as per platinum reward card is not established.  At the same time complainant has failed to prove that hard copy of statement of the present gold reward primary card was sent at belated stage.  But fact remains that e-mail statement was received by the complainant in due time in his e-mail address that is proved.

          So, apparently the complainant’s allegation as made in the complaint is proved a false story.  But even then we have consulted the statement and it is found that complainant did not pay outstanding regularly but enjoyed the card at random.  So balance was increased.  But in this regard after considering the bill as produced and issued by the op, it is clear that interest was assessed at a higher rate.  Fact remains as per RBI guideline late charges may be assessed only @ 1% or 2% and late charges can be assessed @ 1% or 2% but not more than that.  But after considering the bill it is proved that op has charged late charges at high rate against the RBI Rules.  But it is mandatory that if any private banking sector who has got license of the RBI shall have to follow the RBI guideline.

          But truth is that Standard Chartered Bank, Axis Bank, ICICI Bank and some other private banks are violating the guideline of the RBI in all respect and in the present case it is found that in respect of gold reward primary card, op has charged heavy late charges and other charges which are not at all permissible as per RBI Regulations time to time.  To that extent it is clear that op/bank arbitrarily charged the rate of late charges at higher rate and service charges and other charges which cannot be imposed and in respect of late payment against any credit card interest must be within the limit of 9% and not more than that.  But op has assessed huge interest that is no doubt uncalled for and no doubt in respect of gold reward primary card op charged huge amount as late charges and other charges that is not as per law.

          So in this regard we can say that complainant’s main grievance is when in respect of gold reward primary card and when we have found that there are some anomalies for charging late charges interest etc, then we direct the op to reconsider the matter and stop such sort of charging high rate service charges and other charges and only interest can be assessed but the late charges cannot be assessed.  Once interest is assessed per month late charges cannot be assessed because several type of interest cannot be charged in respect of one outstanding balance.  But fact remains Standard Chartered Bank and Axis Bank and other private banks invariably have been using such sort of practice and practically they are acting as Kabuliwala in this field and financial trade.  Considering the above we find that admittedly the act of the op/bank is not as per RBI guideline and if any agreement is made in between the complainant and op for granting such card that agreement shall be as per guideline of the RBI.  But the op/bank has not complied the RBI guideline but assessed huge late charges and interest etc that is not as per RBI guideline and for which op is directed to rectify the same and to settle the matter with the complainant.

          Accordingly the complaint succeeds.

          Hence, it is

                                                                ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the op but without any cost.

          Op/bank is hereby directed to settle the matter with the complainant in respect of credit card No. 4196-0749-4019-7941 and charge such interest over the outstanding as per guideline of RBI and no late charges shall be assessed in view of the fact interest is already assessed.  No penalty can be imposed for late payment when interest is assessed and accordingly dispose of the matter and final report must be filed within two months and if this dispute is not settled as per order of this Forum in that case op/bank shall have to pay punitive damages of Rs. 20,000/- which shall be paid to this Forum and shall have to compensate the complainant by paying a sum of Rs. 20,000/- for violating the order of this Forum, op shall have to follow the same very strictly and decide the matter with the complainant showing their corporate social responsibility as a banker to the consumer and in this regard it is to be mentioned that corporate social responsibility is highly required for such private bank for the social justice and RBI has already pointed  out that matter and the bank authority must have to note the sense of corporate social responsibility which is as essential part of the developmental strategy of the company and in this regard the present bank may learn the corporate social responsibility of the company from TATA, Birla who had been practicing corporate social responsibility for decades long before corporate social responsibility became the popular face.

          Op to comply the same failing which the matter shall be taken as a serious violation of the Forum’s order.