Withdrawal symptoms

Pushpa Girimaji

Last fortnight, when I checked my bank account, I was shocked to find a debit of Rs 20,000, as ‘ATM withdrawal’. This was a new account for which I had not got the ATM card at all. However, the bank is refusing to refund the money and is insisting that it had sent the card and the pin separately to me and that I have withdrawn the amount. How do I prove the correct position? 

First of all, lodge a complaint with the police about the illegal withdrawal of money from your account. Next, write a formal letter to the bank, pointing to the illegal and unauthorised debit and clarifying that you have not received the ATM card or the PIN and so the question of using that card does not arise and the bank must therefore refund the Rs 20,000 debited from your account. You should also ask the bank to investigate into this illegal withdrawal and let you know how it happened and what action would be taken to prevent recurrence.

The bank should also give you details of the ATM transaction and the copy of the CCTV footage of the ATM at that time. That will show who has used the ATM and reveal the identity of the imposter.

The bank may have sent the card to you, but it has to prove that you have received it by showing your signature or the signature of someone authorised by you to receive it, on the courier receipt. And it has to prove that you have withdrawn the money from the ATM — the bank does not have any proof on either of these points. This is obviously a case of fraud/ negligence by the courier company for which the bank has to take responsibility, as far as you are concerned. 

If the bank is not willing to do that and refund your money with interest, I will suggest that you lodge a complaint with the banking ombudsman.

Is there any decided case of the banking ombudsman in this regard?

I recall a case almost identical to yours, wherein in similar circumstances, Rs 25,000 was withdrawn from the account of the consumer using an ATM card and pin sent to him.

In response to his complaint to the Ombudsman, the bank submitted ‘proof of delivery’ which showed that the card was delivered to a person by name Narendra and the PIN, to Sumita. Both the receipts bore the rubber stamp of the company where the complainant worked. The subsequent use of the card at the ATM proved that the card had been used using the PIN and if there is any misuse, the bank cannot be held accountable as it had delivered them both to the complainant, the bank argued. 

The Ombudsman disagreed and pointed out that while mailing the card and the pin, the bank had to ensure that it was delivered either to the customer personally or to someone authorised by him to receive it. In this case, the bank had delivered them to persons not authorised by the customer and therefore it had to take responsibility for the misuse of the card. 

The Ombudsman, therefore, directed the bank to pay Rs 25,000 to the complainant, along with interest that would accrue to a savings bank account. The bank was also asked to pay Rs 1,000 towards the expenses incurred by the consumer in following up the case with the bank and later the Ombudsman. The bank was free to pursue legal remedy to recover the amount from the courier, the Ombudsman said. 

In fact the Ombudsman in this case has set clear guidelines to the banks on the delivery of such cards and pins. The bank has to ensure that the cards are not delivered to unauthorised persons, but to the consumer himself or herself, the Ombudsman has said. In case for some reason, this is not possible, then it has to be delivered to someone duly authorised by the consumer and not to anyone else. And while doing so, the identity of the duly authorised person has to be checked before delivery, the Ombudsman said (The Banking Ombudsman Scheme, Annual report 2007-2008. Reserve Bank of India).You can find this case on the website of the Reserve Bank.