Noida: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed RBL Bank to pay Rs 25,000 as compensation to a customer it repeatedly called and harassed over an amount he never withdrew from his credit card, along with Rs 5,000 as litigation costs, within 30 days.Commission president Anil Kumar Pundir and member Anju Sharma on Sept 7 ruled that the disputed withdrawal occurred due to a flaw in the bank’s system, and the funds were credited to the complainant’s credit card account 101 days later.“Therefore, the bank is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the bank charges, delayed payment, and interest incurred by the plaintiff. The bank cannot compel the complainant to pay this amount. The complainant suffered mental anguish and distress as a result of this entire transaction. The defendant is mentally harassing the complainant by making phone calls. This constitutes unfair trade practices and deficiency in service,” the commission held.KM Pandey, a resident of Sector 82, filed a complaint on Nov 3, 2023, alleging that the manager and employees of the bank’s P7 branch had been harassing him over a false withdrawal from his credit card. Around 11am on Sept 7, 2019, he got a call from the bank informing him that Rs 10,000 had been withdrawn from his credit card and an attempt was being made to withdraw more. The bank informed him that the money was withdrawn from an ATM in Hathras, and that he should file an FIR at the relevant police station.Pandey told the court that he swiped his card at a Noida ATM as per the bank’s suggestions and filed an FIR at Phase 2 police station. He then began receiving frequent calls from bank staff. The bank allegedly told Pandey that the principal amount, along with interest, would be returned within three to seven days, but finally the amount was credited to the card after 101 days, but the bank charges and interest were not paid.“The bank is responsible for this incident, and the entire payment should have been credited. The defendant’s actions constitute fraud, unfair trade practices, and deficiency in service,” he said.The bank submitted a written statement denying the allegations, arguing that the card’s cash limit at the time of the withdrawals in question was Rs 35,000, while the disputed withdrawal was for Rs 13,000.“During the investigation, it was discovered that a balance inquiry was conducted prior to the disputed withdrawal. Following the disputed withdrawal, three other unsuccessful withdrawals of Rs 3,000, Rs 2,000, and Rs 1,000 were attempted. However, by then, the plaintiff’s credit card had been blocked. Consequently, the transaction was unsuccessful. After a detailed investigation of the withdrawal, the bank credited Rs 13,000 to the complainant’s credit card account on Dec 16, 2019. The complainant has no just cause for filing the present complaint. There has been no deficiency in service by the opposite party,” the bank said.Having heard both sides, the commission noted that the bank charges, delayed payment interest and charges were not refunded, nor was the deduction stopped.“The statement makes it clear that the withdrawal was made in False Bank Mode. This could be due to a mechanical malfunction in the EDC (Electronic Data Capture) machine. If the EDC reveals a flaw in the bank’s system, the bank is responsible for the disputed withdrawal, as the complainant’s credit card was in possession of the complainant at the time of the entire transaction. The disputed withdrawal occurred due to a flaw in the bank’s system, and the funds were credited to the complainant’s credit card account 101 days later. Therefore, the bank is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the bank charges, delayed payment, and interest incurred by the plaintiff. The bank cannot compel the complainant to pay this amount,” the commission said.
