State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M.Laxma Reddy S/O Late M.Chandra Reddy vs The Manager, Hsbc Ltd., And Another on 11 March, 2013
BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD F.A.No.738 OF 2011 AGAINST C.C.NO.764 OF 2010 DISTRICT FORUM-III HYDERABAD Between: M.Laxma Reddy S/o late M.Chandra Reddy aged about 61 years, Occ: Business Flat No.504, H.No.8-3-236/1, Murali Krishna Enclave Yousufguda, Main Road, Hyderabad-045 Appellant/complainant A N D 1. The Manager, HSBC Ltd., (Card Products Division) 52/60, M.G.Road, P.B.No.128 Mumbai 2. The Manager, HSBC Ltd., (Card Products Division) Besides Jaya Gardens, Raj Bhavan Road Somajiguda, Hyderabad-082 Respondents/opposite parties Counsel for the Appellant M/s T.Srinivasa Rao Counsel for the Respondent M/s K.Rajani QUORUM: SRI R.LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HONBLE MEMBER
SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HONBLE MEMBER AND SRI S.BHUJANGA RAO, HONBLE MEMBER MONDAY THE ELEVANTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Honble Member) ***
1. The complainant is the appellant. Feeling dissatisfied by the award for compensation of `10,000/- and costs of `4,000/-, the complainant has filed appeal contending that the District Forum has not awarded appropriate amount as compensation and it has failed to see that the respondent-bank had charged finance charges @110% and that the appellant is an income tax assesse and that the District Forum ought to have granted an amount of `20,00,000/- towards compensation.
2. The appellant availed credit card facility with credit card bearing number 4384 5999 97104590 , from the respondent-bank. The credit card facility has added advantage of insurance coverage from TATA AIG Insurance Company.
The appellant obtained insurance policy bearing number TATA Q AIG for the period from 20.07.2006 to 19.07.2006.
The appellant was given option to cancel the insurance policy within the period of two months and on cancellation of the insurance policy, the insurance company would not collect the premium from him. Having come to know about the financial crisis the partner of the TATA AIG was facing at the relevant time, the appellant opted for cancellation of the insurance policy.
3. After the insurance policy was cancelled, the respondent-bank charged premium of `329/- twice from the appellant and finance charges of `734.12 on the amount of the premium. On the advice of the respondent-bank, the appellant destroyed the credit card and the respondent-bank demanded the appellant to pay outstanding balance of `11,048.38 and if he fails to pay the amount, the respondent-bank threatened him that his name would be sent as defaulter to CIBIL. The respondent-bank demanded the appellant to pay a sum of `27,340.44.
4. On correspondence made by the appellant, the respondent-bank had sent e-mail on 5.12.2009 informing him that they have zeroed the credit card outstanding dues and tendered regrets for the inconvenience caused and assured and furnished statement of account for the period from 26.11.2009 to 25.12.2009 showing balance as nil. The appellant is an income tax assesse and the respondent-bank threatened him that his name would be kept in black list as financial offender because of which he suffered mental tension and his credit worthiness in the public has diminished.
5. The respondent-bank resisted the claim on the premise that the premium of `329/- collected twice was refunded to the appellant and the same is reflected in the statement of account issued for the period from 26.11.2006 to 23.12.2006 and 25.12.2007 to 24.03.2007. The respondent-bank has not levied finance charges due to non-payment of premium of `329/-.Finance charges were levied for non-payment of outstanding balance as shown in the statement of account for the period from 26.09.2006 to 25.10.2006; 26.11.2006 to 23.12.2006 and 25.02.2007 to 24.03.3007.
6. As per the terms and conditions of the credit card scheme, the fuel charges would be levied initially and the same would be given set off in the bill for the subsequent month. The appellant has to pay the bill in full pending the set off and later the payment towards fuel surcharge would be given set off charges in the next month. The appellant is in the habit of paying the amount by deducting the amount of surcharge bypassing the terms and conditions of the credit card agreement. Since the appellant was paying lesser amount than the outstanding balance, the amount accumulated and financial charges and late payment charges were imposed on the outstanding balance.
7. The account of the appellant was zeroed after examination of payment track record of the appellant and the same is reflected in the credit card statement for the period from 26.11.2009 to 25.12.2009. The appellants grievance was attended in the month of December,2009. Reversal of premium was carried out in the month of February,2007 and the complaint is barred by limitation. For the same cause of action the appellant filed complaint, CC No.107 of 2008 and the complaint was dismissed by the District Forum on 17.07.2008 and the appeal filed by the appellant, F.A.No. 2 of 2000 was withdrawn on 28.06.20010. All the cards will be terminated on the basis of written request of the card holder and termination will be effective from the date of payment of outstanding amount due. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
8. The appellant has filed his affidavit and the documents, ExA1 to A33 and on behalf of the respondents, its Legal Officer filed his affidavit and the filed Ex.B1.
9. The District Forum allowed the complaint on the premise that the respondent-bank had sent statement demanding payment of premium of `329/- even after sending the statement with zero outstanding balance and after the credit card was destroyed.
10. The counsel for the appellant filed written arguments.
11. The point for consideration is whether the appellant is entitled to enhancement of compensation?
12. There is no dispute of the fact that the appellant was the credit card holder of the respondent-bank with his credit card bearing number 4384 5999 9710 4590. The issuance of the insurance policy by TATA AIG insurance company and the cancellation of the insurance policy by the appellant on 1.08.2006 is not disputed. The appellant contends that after cancellation of the insurance policy the respondent-bank demanded him for the premium of `329/-twice through the statement of account and finance charges on the premium amount whereas the respondent-bank would contend that the outstanding balance was zeroed in the credit card statement of the appellant as also in the month of Februay,2007 the statement of account was issued by making correction and not showing the premium as due from the appellant. It is contended that the finance charges were levied on the outstanding balance due which accumulated because of the appellant not making payment of the credit card account in full and no finance charges were levied on the premium shown in the statement of account for the period 26.09.2006 to 25.10.2006, 26.11.2006 to 23.12.2006 and 25.02.2007 to 24.03.2007.
13. The respondents addressed letter dated 12.01.2008 informing the appellant that outstanding balance to his credit card account is `11,048.38 and advised him to make payment of the amount as his credit card history would be retained at Credit Information Bureau of India Limited and on 17.04.2008 the respondent-bank informed the appellant that it would send his record to CIBIL Cancellation of the insurance policy by the appellant and refund of premium is stated in email dated 16.11.2009 as follows:
Referring to your query with regards to the Tata AIG policy debited from your card account, we apologize for the delay in responding to your query. This policy was opened on 18.07.2006 with a free look period of 60 days. The relevant documents were sent to your mailing address vide the Airway Bill number 32263034145 received on 27 July 2006 by Lakshma. The first cancellation request was on 01 August 2009.
We have already refunded INR 329 on 10 March 2007. The remaining refunds of insurance premiums will be credited to your card account in another three working days.
14. The appellants credit card account was invalidated with effect from 29.02.2008 on account of his failure to pay the amount due . The respondent-bank had drawn the appellants attention to the fact that on account of his part payment of the outstanding due, the amount got accumulated. In Email dated 24.12.2009 the terms and conditions mentioned in Credit Card service Guide are referred to as under:
Due to receipt of part-payments/delayed payments towards the card outstanding from the month of December 2006, the card account was levied with legitimate charges.
We draw your attention to the Credit Card Services Guide that explicitly states that if you wish to have the extended credit facility and pay HSC an amount less than the statement closing balance, the entire outstanding from the date of transaction will attract a finance charge. All new transactions will also attract a finance charge from the date of transaction at the prevailing rate once the account uses the extended credit facility. This charge will be debited on the last day of the billing cycle and will be applied on daily basis. The relevant late payment fee will also be levied on the card account in case of non-receipt of payment within the due date.
15. The appellant has stated that after his outstanding balance was zeroed, he has been receiving statement showing outstanding due as `329/-. He has stated that:
At last I received a statement for the period of 26th November 2009 to 25th December 2009 for cancellation of Rs.27,370.44 and net outstanding balance was zero and asked apology. Even after sending the zeroisation statement,t he opposite parties did not stand by their letter dated 5.12.2009 and sending inflated statement that I was due of Rs.329/-. Still every month I am getting the statement of total borrowings and out standing balance statement of rS.329/- even after destroying the credit card in to pieces.
16. Referring to the closing balance in the statement of account for the period from 26.09.2006 to 25.10.2006 and the amount paid by the appellant, the legal officer of the respondent-bank has stated that:
From a perusal of credit card statement 26.09.2006 to 25.10.2006 which is filed by the complainant himself as additional documents and in which the complainant has clearly in his own handwriting has clearly written the amount he will be paying towards the purchases made. It is submitted that an amount of Rs.1,738/- was charged in the above statement for the fuel purchase made at Jubilee Hills filling station on 26.09.2006 and in his own handwriting the complainant has written that he will be paying only Rs.1,696.40 paise only. Thus creating confusion in the calculations. The closing balance in the statement for the period 26.09.2006 to 25.10.2006 is Rs.10,469.48/- but the amount paid by the complainant is Rs.9,691.48/- and thus Rs.778/- becomes an outstanding amount. It is submitted that this outstanding amount is carried forward in the next bill and as such the same amount becomes outstanding and late payment and fianc charges are charged on the same.
17. After the issue was closed, the appellant requested through email dated 6.12.2009 that he was satisfied by the reply given by the respondent-bank and he sent another email on 7.12.2009 requesting the respondent-bank to send statement by mail, revive his credit card account and to take steps for deletion of his name from the block list maintained by CIBIL.
In the email dated 7.12.2009 his request for various provisions runs as under:
I am (sic had ) requested you to please kindly made arrangements to send the Next bill statement to my mail, and also I want to know how could I get the credit card again from you, what is about my present card validity. I already destroy the card long back, if at all you revive the card account and send the new card in the place of destroy card, I am ready to take and use, if it is not possible I am not interested to made fresh application for getting the new card, as you are well aware that I am a prompt payer of credit card bills. I request you to please clarify me that whether y details are in block list of CIBIL.
18. On the same day i.e, 7.12.2009 the respondent bank issued reply informing the appellant that it had zeroed the dues on 4.12.2009; there was no outstanding dues to his credit card account; the credit card cannot be revived nor reissued and as per guidelines of the RBI, banks are required to share customer data, positive and negative with CIBIL and banks are not authorized to delete or remove a customers record from the records of CIBIL.
19. After receiving the reply from the respondent-bank , the appellant filed complaint C.C.No.107 of 2008 and against dismissal of the complaint an appeal in F.A.No.2 of 2010 which was withdrawn and subsequently the complaint in CC No.764 of 2010 was filed wherein the impugned order was passed which is challenged by way of filing appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation from `10,000/-
awarded by the District Forum to `20,0000/-.
20. The appellant has not opted for cancellation of the insurance policy within the free look period as a result of which there was some delay in refunding the amount collected towards premium. The appellant has not disputed that he used to pay outstanding dues on his credit card account deducting fuel surcharge resulting in accumulation of the amount to the credit card account. Such being the case, the appellant attempted to gain advantage of the entry made in the year 2006 in the statement of account which he was well aware of in the year, 2006 and yet got it rectified in the year,2009. The attitude of the appellant seeking for revival of the credit card account and reissuing of the credit card after the outstanding amount was zeroed would be sufficient to hold that the appellant filed complaint to get the credit card reissued which according to the respondent-bank cannot be issued as per its policy. In the circumstances, we do not find any substance in the contention of the appellant for enhancement of compensation.
21. In the result, the appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the District Forum. The parties shall bear their own costs.
MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER Dt.11.03.2013 కె.ఎం.కె.*