One person one account
Guest
(Querist) 04 March 2012
This query is : Resolved
Is it possible for us to bring one simple amendment to our constitution to allow one person only one savings account in any bank of his choice with easy portability guaranteed?
The issue came up during one of my session with the banking ombudsman hearing against my complaint against a bank where I kept my savings account and hacked. A sum of Rs 90000 /- was hacked in 11 transfers from installments ranging from as small as Rs 1000/- to Rs 20000/- all within two days 01-02 Jan 2010. As per the IPs identified by the IT-experts of the bank hacking had been done from Australia, Nigeria and Canada to 5 savings accounts of the account holders in 4 branches of the same banker namely BOI in and around Mumbai and one near Ahmadabad.All the details were known to the banks but my money is yet to be returned to me with Banking ombudsman putting the blame to me for having compromised with my credentials with the hackers( that was the line taken by the banker).
What I gathered from the interaction at the banking ombudsman office that there is no rule against a person operating more than one savings account in one branch itself with sometimes different style of signature for its withdrawals.Rather banks do not just bother on the issue as long as people keep pouring money in any manner they like it.My hackers simply use multiple account withdrawals from ATMs / through internet within a hour of hacking without raising much alarm.
Nadeem Qureshi
(Expert) 04 March 2012
Dear Mr. Mandal
you can send a application cum suggestion to PMO house or Parliament for this amendment, may be any one of the Parliament member have taken any action on this
feel free to call
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 04 March 2012
Theoretically I do agree with your suggestion but practically do not know how to get it implemented.
So far your personal problem is concerned, it is really serious and requires attention of we all because almost all persons have bank accounts and such type of incidents may take place with any person on any day.
Apart from ombudsman, you should also file a consumer complaint and cyber crime cell of local police.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 08 March 2012
A serious matter needs thoughtful consideration .
Guest
(Expert) 08 March 2012
I don't think there is anything constitutional in the issue. It simply relates to Banking Law.
Also, it is just an academic query.
Anyway, you may, if liked, send your suggestion to the RBI, which controls the banking operations in India.
Anirudh
(Expert) 08 March 2012
Just because some one knows the term "Banking Ombudsman" does not mean that Ombudsman is a panacea for all the banking ills.
In fact as per Clause 8 of Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 2006, only the following items can get attended by the Ombudsman:
8. 1 GROUNDS OF COMPLAINT
(1) Any person may file a complaint with the Banking Ombudsman having
jurisdiction on any one of the following grounds alleging deficiency in banking
including internet banking or other services.
(a) non-payment or inordinate delay in the payment or collection of
cheques, drafts, bills etc.;
(b) non-acceptance, without sufficient cause, of small denomination
notes tendered for any purpose, and for charging of commission in
respect thereof;
(c) non-acceptance, without sufficient cause, of coins tendered and for
charging of commission in respect thereof;
(d) non-payment or delay in payment of inward remittances ;
(e) failure to issue or delay in issue of drafts, pay orders or bankers’
cheques;
(f) non-adherence to prescribed working hours ;
(g) failure to provide or delay in providing a banking facility (other than
loans and advances) promised in writing by a bank or its direct selling
agents;
(h) delays, non-credit of proceeds to parties' accounts, non-payment of
deposit or non-observance of the Reserve Bank directives, if any,
1 Substituted by Notification Ref CSD.BOS.No. 4736/13.01.01/2008-09 dated February 3, 2009
applicable to rate of interest on deposits in any savings, current or
other account maintained with a bank ;
(i) complaints from Non-Resident Indians having accounts in India in
relation to their remittances from abroad, deposits and other bankrelated
matters;
(j) refusal to open deposit accounts without any valid reason for
refusal;
(k) levying of charges without adequate prior notice to the customer;
(l) non-adherence by the bank or its subsidiaries to the instructions of
Reserve Bank on ATM/Debit card operations or credit card operations;
(m) non-disbursement or delay in disbursement of pension (to the
extent the grievance can be attributed to the action on the part of the
bank concerned, but not with regard to its employees);
(n) refusal to accept or delay in accepting payment towards taxes, as
required by Reserve Bank/Government;
(o) refusal to issue or delay in issuing, or failure to service or delay in
servicing or redemption of Government securities;
(p) forced closure of deposit accounts without due notice or without
sufficient reason;
(q) refusal to close or delay in closing the accounts;
(r) non-adherence to the fair practices code as adopted by the bank;
(s)non-adherence to the provisions of the Code of Bank's
Commitments to Customers issued by Banking Codes and Standards
Board of India and as adopted by the bank ;
(t) non-observance of Reserve Bank guidelines on engagement of
recovery agents by banks; and
(u) any other matter relating to the violation of the directives issued by
the Reserve Bank in relation to banking or other services.
The item under question does not fall under any of the sub-clauses of Clause 8.
If at all, one claims that this items falls under clause 8(u), then one has to show what RBI directive has been not followed by the Bank.
First of all, it was wrong for the Ombudsman to have entertained the complaint, especially when he does not have the jurisdiction at all.
In fact, a proper complaint ought to have been lodged with the Cyber Cell.
In this case, since the system is reported to have been hacked from different locations, the cyber cell will be in a better position to locate the IP addresses involved in those locations. It would be possible to identify the persons with reference to the accounts being maintained by them with the bank and to take appropriate action.
Obviously, the person who is the holder of the account and with appropriate credentials could not have been present at all the IP addresses simultaneously.
Guest
(Querist) 08 March 2012
After going through the I think a little back ground of the reported case may of importance here. Way back in Aug Sep 2009 my pension acct bank of India(HQ at Mumbai)blocked my acct unilaterally.I was inconvenienced when my debit card and internet banking facilities did not work.I reported the matter to the local bank manager who was also not aware(may or may not be true)spoke to someone at Mumbai and came to know that some hacking efforts had been identified at the main server and hence the account had since been blocked.It was unblocked in Oct 2009 and I was advised to change password which was done.
Again in Nov 2009 I reported the same problem. I was told again the same story.I spoke to the manager in charge there at Mumbai and asked him to unblock my account as I needed the money urgently.It was about 1830 hrs on 31 Dec 2009. We were outside city limit and needed the money from ATM. I was assured that the acct would be unblocked immediately.It did not happen.I managed it somehow. Pre-new year eve celebration was curtailed.
On 03 Jan 2010 the local Br informed me about hacking of Rs 90000/-from my acct and further blocking of my acct for all purposes.A few days later Zonal representatives of the Bank from Hyderabad came to my office and gave me the details:
That my acct was unblocked on 01 Jan 2010.
.
That it was hacked 11 times from 1700 hrs 01 Jan 70 1150 hrs 02 Jan for Rs 90000/- in installments of Rs 1000 to Rs 20000/-.
That hacking had been done(IP known to the bank)from Australia, Nigeria and Canada but transferred to branches of bank of India at Mumbai, Nasik and near Ahmedabad.
That they are in touch with the beneficiaries and soon it will be recovered.
I was further insisted to open another saving bank acct in the same bank with internet /debit card facility immediately. which I did then and there.
I was further advised to lodge a complaint with cyber cell at Hyderabad near AC Guard.
I went to the Cyber cell, the inspector was more eager to know my password than accepting my complaint. I was thoroughly interrogated for more than two hours.At the end the inspector directed me to the dy supdt in another office( the police HQ at hyderabad). Supdt of police in charge of cyber cell took the complaint from me but refuse to give me any receipt. Instead she advised me to lodge a complaint against the Banker as they are responsible for safe custody for the money kept there(I started getting the feel of the civil environment post retirement). I lodged a complaint against the banker and got a receipt.
Nothing happened in the next 6 months. I asked the local manager who said that the case was being dealt by the zonal office.But despite repeated on line mail to the banks nothing was given to me in writing or online.I met the supdt of police once again. Now she directed me to lodge the complaint along with a copy of the complaint against the bank to cyber cell cyberabad( Ranga Reddy Distt) as my residential address fall under their jurisdiction. Cyber cell(RR Dist) is at Goccibally appx 40 Km one way . Made three trips to find the right person but failed. My case was not admitted. I was adviced to report the case at Neredmet Police Station near my residence as by then a cyber sub-cell had been opened under SHO Neredmet.To cut the story short I was frustrated as SHO Neredmet asked me to keep the written complaint along with a delay report and assured me that he would certainly call me as per my tern as he needed more info from me.I stopped going to the SHO.
That was the time I decided to explore complaining to the banking ombudsman and I did complaint online. Within a month my case was heard. The zonal Br Rep from the bank submitted their reply wherein all the IPs of the hackers as well as the accts of the beneficiaries were found recorded. The zonal IT experts argued that they have a foolproof system. Credentials i.e password etc and unless compromised by the acct holder himself such hacking was not possible.As per banking norm those are valid transactions hence banker is not responsible.Why did they block my acct if those were valid transactions and why the acct of the beneficiaries were not blocked simultaneously-the arguments put forwarded by me in person before the banking ombudsman fell in the deaf ears.The case was ruled in favour of the bank stating that the credentials had been compromised by the acct holder and those were valid internet transactions.The Zonal rep however assured that all efforts are being made to recover the money by talking to the beneficiaries.
But nothing has happened thus far.
That was the time
