Is it clause 13(a) or 13(f) of banking rules 2006 ?
Guest
(Querist) 07 May 2014
This query is : Resolved
A bank mark my FDRs as Lien under Banker's General Lien to recover alleged pension dues made twice due to phishing attack etc.Pensioner finds no such twice payment entries. Ask the bank to unblock FDRs and to provide more details. PCDA is also informed. The bank paid no heed.No confirmation recd from PCDA. The pensioner complained to the CMD bank. Nothing happens.Banking Ombudsman was then requested to interfere. It admits the complaint as maintainable No 201314009001276, obtains reply from the bank but dispose it off under clause 8 & 9(3) of BO Rules 2006. It informs the bank but not the customer. The bank informs the customer of the BO order but refuses to provide him a copy. Def Pensioner complains to the Min of Def GOI. It helps. PCDA ask the bank to furnish details.
The bank meanwhile exercised banker's general Lien and appropriates all the FDRs (valued at Rs 19 Lacs. The customer lodged the complaint to the BO afresh with all the supporting documents. BO takes no note of my complaint lodged afresh but sends me a mail with a copy of bank's previous reply informing its order disposing off my complaint under clause 13(a). Wouldn't it be under clause 13(f)?
P. Venu
(Expert) 08 May 2014
Is the queriest referring to Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 2006?
Guest
(Querist) 08 May 2014
Yes Sir..That's Banking Omb Scheme 2006 as amended.
krishna mohan
(Expert) 08 May 2014
What is the quantum of over payment claimed by the banker? You can ask for details to verify and confirm/deny on excess payment. If no authentic proof exercising lien over your FDS is arbitrary and unilateral. Normally BO passes order based on facts presented by both the parties and evidences and hence you are also having a right to seek copy of claim details and orders to defend your side. You can seek copy of orders and details under RTI also if they deny you verbally. You may consult a local lawyer to help if you need to present your application for relief from BO without any omission of facts to exercise your right.
Guest
(Querist) 08 May 2014
My question is to know whether BO disposed off rightly under clause 13(a) or it erred.Under clause 14(a) a complainant is debarred if it is rightly rejected under clause 13(a). As my complaint was admitted (clause 8 &clause 9 satisfied),as BO called for reply and obtain clause 11 & 10 stand invoked. Hence BO deemed to have erred.
Guest
(Querist) 19 May 2014
My complaint to the BO Hyd Sep 2013 ack on 15 Oct 2013 was disposed off by BO under clause 8 & 9(3).The bank was informed but not the complainant.I came to know from the bank. Went through clause 8 & 9(3). I asked for a copy from the BO Hyd time and again online. It was given.
Meanwhile I exhausted all the remedies available within the bank set. And then submitted my complaint afresh with all the supporting documents buy Regd Post on 14 Mar 2014. The BO Hyd now sent me a mail disposing my earlier complaint under Clause 13(a) with an attachment of an affidavit filed by the bank on 23 Oct 2013 stating they found no deficiency of service.
I have gone through clause 13(a) which is meant for rejecting complaint under clause 8 & 9 (complaint not covered under BO Rules 2006 or not following the procedures). Whereas my complaint stood admitted as a maintainable complaint, bank asked for reply from the bank and gave its verdict relying solely on the bank's affidavit without giving me chance to either contest the affidavit of the bank to present my arguments before the BO. If rejected at this stage it deemed to rejected under clause 13(f)where the complainant is allowed to file a appeal to the Dy Gov against the order of BO whereas if it is rejected under clause 13(a) the complainant is debarred from making an appeal to the Dy Gov.
I have already submitted my appeal to the Dy Gov RBI ..I may get a call and this point may come up. I need help to keep myself well equipped.
