Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/248/2012

C.M.Sivakumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

06 May 2016

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   28.09.2012

                                                                        Date of Order :   06.05.2016.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

                 DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

 

C.C.NO.248/2012

FRIDAY THIS  6^TH  DAY OF MAY 2016

 

C.M. Sivakumar,

S/o. Late C.M. Manoharan,

Residing at old No.12 G,

New No.25/7, Sri Krishna Flat,

First Street,

Loganathan Nagar,

Cholaimedu, Chennai 600 094.                        ..Complainant

 

                                         ..Vs..

 

The Manager,

Customer Care,

The Hong Kong and Shanghai

Banking Corporation Limited,

Customer Connect 96,

Dr. Radha Krishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai 600 004.                                             ..Opposite party   

 

 

For the Complainant                    :   Party in person     

For the opposite party                 :   M/s. R & P Partners.   

 

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The  complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite party to pay the balance amount of Rs.1115/- with interest and also to pay interest for a sum of Rs.5200/- and also to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- as cost of the complaint to the complainant.   

ORDER

 

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-  

 

        The complainant submit that he was holding  credit card account with the opposite party bank bearing account No.4476921205565272.  The complainant has received the statement of account from the opposite party during the month of May, June and July of 2009 respectively.  As per the above statement complainant has made the complaint mentioned purchase with M/s. A.J. Alliance Resort for Rs.33,000/- on 02.05.2009.    He has paid Rs.33,021/- on 25.05.2009  to the opposite party bank in the said account towards the said due, as such the complainant  is not liable to pay any due to the opposite party in the said complaint mentioned account.    Whereas HSBC in the subsequent statement of account for the period from 7.5.2009 to 7.6.2009 while acknowledging the receipt of payment of Rs.33,021/- i.e. the entire full amount involved in this regard and also directed the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.5194.51 towards the first installment of the above said transaction.     Though he was not due to pay the said amount and despite of his objection, on the request of the opposite party bank he has paid the amount of Rs.5200/- to the opposite party bank in the month of June 2009 as mentioned.  After several effort made by the complainant raising objection and seeking refund of the said amount from the opposite party, the opposite party have returned a sum of Rs.4,084.39  on 25.05.2011 and the balance amount of Rs.1,115/- have not paid and also refused to pay the same by saying baseless reasons even after closing the said account which amounts to deficiency of service as well as unfair trade practice  on the part of opposite party.    As such the complainant has sought for claiming to pay the balance amount of Rs.1115/- with interest and also to pay interest for a sum of Rs.5200/-  and also to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- as cost of the complaint  to the complainant.

Written Version of opposite parties are  in briefly as follows:

2.     The opposite party denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein.    The opposite party submit that he has availed the said transactions of Rs.33,000/- as loan in the said account with agreeing to repay the same into 12 monthly installments  and the complainant was availing such facility the complainant is informed that if the complainant is desire to pre- close the facility upon the payment of necessary amount.  Whereas after availing such facility the complainant has without intimating or making request for pre closure of the said loan has paid the lump sum amount as such as mentioned in the statement of accounts the amounts due were calculated monthly and has been sent to him, however after complainant’s letter the opposite party bank has closed the said credit card account and no due statement for the month of July 2009  were sent to the complainant.  However on the  repeated request made by the complainant, as service gesture, the accounts was revised the complainant was returned  a sum of Rs.4,084.39, after deducting incrementing charges liable to be paid by the complainant  in the said account.  Therefore, there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice committed by the opposite party as alleged by the complainant, and complaint is liable to be dismissed.         

3.   Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Proof affidavit of  Opposite party filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B4 were marked on the side of the  opposite party.   

4.      The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

1.   Whether the opposite parties has committed  deficiency of

 service  as alleged in the complaint?

 

2.   Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief sought for in

the complaint? If so to what extent ?

 

5.  POINTS  1 and 2 :

 

            Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, the written version filed by the opposite party, proof affidavits filed by both the parties and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 filed on the side of complainant Ex.B1 to Ex.B4 (Ex.B3 is the CD of the conversation between the complainant and the bank staff and B4 is the written extract of the CD mentioned conversation)   filed on the side of opposite party and also considered the arguments of the both sides.

6.    Considering the both side case there is no dispute that the complainant was holding  credit card account with the opposite party bank bearing account No.4476921205565272.  The complainant has received the statement of account from the opposite party Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 during the month of May, June and July of 2009 respectively.  As per the above statement complainant has made the complaint mentioned purchase with M/s. Alliance Resort for Rs.33,000/-, the entry for the same is found in Ex.A2, dated 02.05.2009.  The complainant has contended that he has paid Rs.33,021/- on 25.05.2009  to the opposite party bank in the said account towards the said due, as such the complainant  is not liable to pay any due to the opposite party in the said complaint mentioned account.  Contrary to this the statement of account Ex.A2 received for the month of June 2009 from the opposite party was found   with mentioning that the complainant is due a sum of Rs.5194.51.  Though he was not due to pay the said amount and despite of his objection, on the request of the opposite party bank he has paid the amount of Rs.5200/- to the opposite party bank in the month of June 2009 as mentioned.  After several effort made by the complainant raising objection and seeking refund of the said amount from the opposite party, the opposite party have returned a sum of Rs.4,084.39  on 25.05.2011 and the balance amount of Rs.1,115/- have not paid and also refused to pay the same by saying baseless reasons even after closing the said account which amounts to deficiency of service as well as unfair trade practice  on the part of opposite party, as such complainant filed this complaint seeking refund of amount with interest as well as compensation.

7.     Whereas the opposite party have resisted the said complaint by saying the complainant has availed the said transactions of Rs.33,000/- as loan in the said account with agreeing to repay the same into 12 monthly installments  and the complainant was availing such facility the complainant is informed that if the complainant is desired to pre close the facility upon the payment of necessary amount.  Whereas after availing such facility the complainant has without intimating or making request for pre closure of the said loan has paid the lump sum amount as such as mentioned in the statement of accounts the amounts due were calculated monthly and has been sent to him, however after complainant’s letter the opposite party bank has closed the said credit card account and no due statement for the month of July 2009 as mentioned in Ex.A3 were sent to the complainant.  However on the  repeated request made by the complainant, as service gesture, the accounts was revised the complainant was returned  a sum of Rs.4,084.39  as per Ex.B2.  After deducting incrementing charges liable to be paid by the complainant  in the said account.  Therefore, there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice committed by the opposite party as alleged by the complainant, and complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

8.       However considering the facts and circumstances that as per Ex.B3 and Ex.B4 referring conversation mentioned by the opposite party during the month of May with the consent of the complainant the complaint mentioned purchase amount of Rs.33,000/- relating transaction was converted as loan of Rs.35,244/- (inclusive of principle and interest)  and   to be repaid by the complainant in 12  monthly installments at the rate of Rs.3,135/- is acceptable.   Further as per the said conversation   the complainant has also agreed to pay for Rs.660/- as process fee and if the pre closure of the said loan it will be charged with  3% or INR 250 whichever is higher, are all acceptable.  For the said amount of Rs.33,000/- availed by the complainant on 02.05.2009 by purchase, towards the said amount  the complainant has paid Rs.33,021/- by 25.05.2009 itself, the particulars of the same found in the statement of account Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 are reveals the same.   Such is the fact, though there was a conversation as mentioned by the opposite party between the complainant and the opposite party bank cashier through online and in which the complainant has also given consent for converting the said transactions of loan to be paid by installments to the credit card account, without obtaining any return document towards the said converted loan facility, since, the said amount was paid  by the complainant within 23 days, the opposite party contention that they have given effect to the consent given by the complainant for converting the said transactions and as if to be treated as loan to be paid by installment in the credit card account is not acceptable.  Further the different entries with regard to different charges and interest  found in the statement of account imposed by opposite party are also not appeared to be proper as the said amount  availed by the complainant in the credit card account was paid immediately within 23 days by him. Since the complaint mentioned account is of the credit card account of the opposite party, the entire balance of the said amount was paid by the complainant on 25.05.2009 itself, the opposite party not entitled to impose any interest or any other charges in the said account from the said date onwards and the complainant is also not liable to pay in the said account.  Therefore as contended by the complainant, the statement of accounts sent by the opposite party  in the month of June 2009 i.e Ex.A2 with mentioning a sum of Rs.5194.51 is due by the complainant is not proper and not sustainable on the above facts of this case.  Therefore as contended by the complainant despite of his objections he was requested by the opposite party to make the payment of Rs.5200/- by the opposite party by completion is also acceptable.  Even after receipt of the letter sent by the complainant  letter dated 22.07.2009  i.e Ex.A7 the opposite party have not taken proper steps to revise the said account and to refund the said amount of Rs.5200/- paid  by the complainant.  However complainant by taking so much of effort by sending complaint to the Commissioner, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection Department, Chennai and after  on their notice dated 18.03.2011  Ex.A6, the opposite party has  taken proper steps  and have returned a part amount of Rs.4084.39 only to the complainant that too saying on the basis of service gesture in the month of May 2011 are all proves that the opposite party has committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice towards the complainant in the dealing of complaint mentioned credit card account.

9.       Therefore we are of the considered view that as discussed above the opposite party have committed unfair trade practice and deficiency of service towards the complainant as mentioned in the complaint, as such they have benefited out of the said amount by retaining the same from 25.05.2009, which has caused monetary loss to the complainant also, whereas the opposite party has returned with part payment  of Rs.4,084.39 on 25.05.2011 by retaining balance amount of Rs.1115/- which is also unwarranted and liable to be refunded to the complainant.  Therefore we are of the considered view that the opposite party is to be directed to refund the balance amount of Rs.1,115/-  and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as just and reasonable compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation charges to the complainant.  Accordingly the points 1 and 2 are answered.

            In the result, this complaint is partly allowed.  The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1115/- (Rupees one thousand one hundred and fifteen only) as balance refund amount, and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as cost to the complainant, within six weeks from the date of this order, failing which the said amount Rs.1,115/- + Rs.10,000/- totaling Rs. 11,115/- will also carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this order to till the date of payment. 

Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the  6^th     day  of  May   2016.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1-         -       - Copy of HSBC monthly statement for the period

                               7.4.2009 to 6.5.2009

Ex.A2-         -       - Copy of HSBC monthly statement for the period

                             7.5.2009 to 6.7.2009.

Ex.A3-         -       - Copy of HSBC monthly statement for the period

                             8.6.2009 to 6.7.2009.

Ex.A4-  27.7.2009 - Copy of letter addressed to Nodal officer, HSBC,

Ex.A5-  8.7.2009   - Copy of HSBC letter.

Ex.A6- 18.3.2011  - Copy of Commissioner of Civil Supplies and Consumer

                             Protection Dept. notice.

Ex.A7- 22.7.2011  - Copy of letter from Commissioner of Civil Supplies and

                              Consumer Protection Dept.

Ex.A8- 30.5.2011  - Copy of HSBC wherein a sum of Rs.4,084.39. refunded.

 

 

Opposite parties’ Exhibits:-         

 

Ex.B1- 30.5.2011   - Copy of reply letter by the opposite party to the

                             complainant.

Ex.B2- 25.5.2011   - Copy of Cashier order bearing No.357333.

Ex.B3-    -            - CD (compact Disc) of the conversation made between the

                              Opposite party’s customer service agent and the

                              complainant.

 

Ex.B4-        -        - Transcription draft of the conversation made between the

                              Opposite party’s customer service agent and the

                              complainant. 

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.