Daijiworld Media Network - Bengaluru (SP)
Bengaluru, Jun 8: In a case relating to failure of the ATM to spit out cash drawn by the customer, the Consumers Forum in the city has dismissed the claim of the customer concerned for the cash that was not disbursed. It held that the woman customer was not eligible for money as she had violated the ATM card issuing bankers terms and conditions on maintaining secrecy, and giving the card to her husband and revealing the PIN number to him.
Vandana from Marathahalli in the city, who holds a saving bank account in State Bank of India, being unable to go out on her own as she was recovering after child birth, had handed over her ATM card to her husband and asked him to draw Rs 25,000 from her account. Her husband, Rajesh Kumar, went to State Bank's Marathahalli ATM on November 14, 2013 and tried to withdraw money. Although the money was debited and the machine gave out a transaction slip thereof, cash was not dispensed. When the call centre of the bank was contacted, the couple reportedly was assured that the amount would be credited the account within a day. As the call centre had said that complaint could be lodged if the money was not credited within a day, the branch where the account is maintained was approached and a complaint about the transaction was made but nothing happened thereafter.
Under Right to Information Act, Vandana thereafter sought audit report of the ATM centre conducted the next day. But she was given to understand that audit was not done that day as the ATM had become out of order. She however came to know that during the audit on November 16, excess cash of Rs 25,000 was found. She sought to check CCTV footage of the transaction, and the footage made clear that the machine had failed to deliver cash. As the bank refused to reimburse money to her, Vandana filed complaint with the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum (Consumers Forum) on October 21, 2014.
Vandana, on the basis of CCTV footage, argued that she had not received the money, but the bank succeeded in proving with the help of log records that the said transaction was successful. The audit report dated November 27 that year had stated that the ATM had excess cash of Rs 59,500. But the bank said that out of this, Rs 36,000 was credited to accounts of customers and the balance was placed into excess cash account. The bank argued that Vandana was not eligible to claim the money as she was guilty of giving ATM card and PIN number to another person, although they were not transferable. As she had violated terms of ATM card use, she was not eligible for the refund, the bank argued.
The Consumers Forum accepted the arguments of the bank. It held that taking into account technical details of the ATM and violation of rules pertaining to use of ATM card, Vandana's petition had been dismissed.