Fraudulent transfer of funds through Net banking

The complaint was with regard to unauthorised transfers from the account of the complainant through net banking even though she had never applied for net banking facility.

The complainant alleged that with the connivance of her ex-husband, who was also bank's Deputy Manager, the bank staff had transferred funds from her savings bank accounts through net banking and other instruments with forged signatures.

The bank had converted her account as joint with her ex-husband and allowed various debits in the account without her knowledge. She also alleged that she was also not allowed to operate the account. The bank representative submitted that the account opening form was not traceable in the branch.

The banking ombudsman observed that the bank had converted the savings bank account (with single operation) as joint with her ex-husband without her consent.

It irregularly withheld transactions in the savings bank account on the basis of a request made by her ex-husband.

All the transactions were made by her ex-husband as the joint accountholder without any mandate of the only accountholder.

As crucial records of the bank were missing, mala fide intention on the part of the complainant's ex-husband or some other officials appeared to have been established resulting in deficiency in services of the bank.

The bank was, therefore, directed to pay the complainant the amount so appropriated immediately with up-to-date interest at the fixed deposit rate from the date of debit to the date of payment, restore the account as a single operated account in the name of the complainant, cancel the Net banking facility and allow operations to the complainant on her accounts.

Delay in commencement of family pension: The complainant approached the ombudsman complaining that her family pension which was supposed to commence from October 2009 was not credited even after a lapse of six months.

In response to the complaint, the bank replied stating that the pension along with arrears had been paid to the complainant, but did not comment on the issue of compensation for the delay in payment.

Therefore, the bank was directed to pay compensation for the period of delay at Bank Rate plus 2 per cent.

(Source: Annual Report of the Banking Ombudsman Scheme.)

(This is seventh in the series on redressal of customer grievances by the Banking Ombudsman being carried in these columns.)

COMMENT NOW