The Times of India 9 Feb 2008 P 10 Delhi
Had Put Lawyer In Negative List
Faulting the ICICI Bank for denying a credit card to a practising advocate in the Capital on the ground that the profession fell in the ‘negative profile’ the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, has slapped a fine of Rs 10 lakh on the bank. The commission in a recent order slammed, what it termed ‘‘cavalier conduct and unpardonable negligence’’ on behalf of the bank and said this merited a ‘‘punitive damage of Rs 10 lakh... for not extending financial facility or even credit card on the premise that ‘Designation’ of an advocate has a negative profile.’’ The commission awarded the complainant Nivedita Sharma, a compensation of Rs 50,000 for the mental torture she had to face. According to the complainant, she was offered a credit card by the customer care executive of the ICICI bank and once she agreed to take the card, she was made to fill an application form and provide adequate papers including income tax returns which made her eligible for the credit facility. However, her application was rejected and returned with a note stating, ‘‘Designation — negative profile.’’ Pulling up the bank, the commission, in its order hit out at this practice and said that the complainant was asked to apply but when the column regarding her profession caught the eye of the bank official, he ‘‘rejected it with one stroke of a pen, ‘‘Designation — negative profile’’ throwing the RBI guidelines and other relevant, rational criterion to the wind without batting an eye-lid and little realizing the irreparable damage it would inflict upon the complainant and the practitioners of legal profession by demeaning it.’’ The bank contended that it was not their policy to refuse credit cards to lawyers and denial was case specific. It maintained that there were conditions which must be fulfilled by the applicant and that the legal fraternity has never been denied any facility. ‘‘There is no negative marking at least for lawyers,’’ the bank said. The commission however, took into consideration the word, ‘Designation’ used in the note by the bank. ‘‘The word ‘designation’ has mainly two components. First, it flows from the profession of a person like advocates, engineers.Other source of ‘designation’ is an office held by a person either in private organization or in the government organization. No profession except impermissible by law is a negative profile,’’ the commission said, adding it amounted to ‘corporate authoritarianism.’
Had Put Lawyer In Negative List
Faulting the ICICI Bank for denying a credit card to a practising advocate in the Capital on the ground that the profession fell in the ‘negative profile’ the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, has slapped a fine of Rs 10 lakh on the bank. The commission in a recent order slammed, what it termed ‘‘cavalier conduct and unpardonable negligence’’ on behalf of the bank and said this merited a ‘‘punitive damage of Rs 10 lakh... for not extending financial facility or even credit card on the premise that ‘Designation’ of an advocate has a negative profile.’’ The commission awarded the complainant Nivedita Sharma, a compensation of Rs 50,000 for the mental torture she had to face. According to the complainant, she was offered a credit card by the customer care executive of the ICICI bank and once she agreed to take the card, she was made to fill an application form and provide adequate papers including income tax returns which made her eligible for the credit facility. However, her application was rejected and returned with a note stating, ‘‘Designation — negative profile.’’ Pulling up the bank, the commission, in its order hit out at this practice and said that the complainant was asked to apply but when the column regarding her profession caught the eye of the bank official, he ‘‘rejected it with one stroke of a pen, ‘‘Designation — negative profile’’ throwing the RBI guidelines and other relevant, rational criterion to the wind without batting an eye-lid and little realizing the irreparable damage it would inflict upon the complainant and the practitioners of legal profession by demeaning it.’’ The bank contended that it was not their policy to refuse credit cards to lawyers and denial was case specific. It maintained that there were conditions which must be fulfilled by the applicant and that the legal fraternity has never been denied any facility. ‘‘There is no negative marking at least for lawyers,’’ the bank said. The commission however, took into consideration the word, ‘Designation’ used in the note by the bank. ‘‘The word ‘designation’ has mainly two components. First, it flows from the profession of a person like advocates, engineers.Other source of ‘designation’ is an office held by a person either in private organization or in the government organization. No profession except impermissible by law is a negative profile,’’ the commission said, adding it amounted to ‘corporate authoritarianism.’
Times View
We wholeheartedly support consumer rights and commend the commission for the enthusiasm displayed by it for an important cause. However, we believe that banks must have the right to decide whom they want to issue credit cards to, provided it is purely a business decision based on the applicant’s risk profile. After all, if any credit card user defaults, it is the issuing bank that will end up losing money. If a bank is not convinced about an applicant’s creditworthiness, it should not be forced to issue a card to that person.
With Thanks from the Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd.
©All rights reserved with the Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd.
For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in
No comments:
Post a Comment