Citi fined Rs 1L for blocked card bills

NEW DELHI: Even after a client got her credit card blocked, her bank continued to raise astronomical bills with a late payment fee. Coming to the rescue of Dr Nidhi Bhatnagar, a resident of East of Kailash, the National Consumer Commission agreed with the decision of the district forum and has asked CitiBank to reverse the bills amounting to Rs 34,700 raised against a credit card which was blocked after it got stolen.The bank has also been asked to deposit Rs 1 lakh in the state consumer welfare fund as punitive damages.
The complainant lost her credit card on July 11, 2003 at 7.30pm and filed an FIR with Vikaspuri police station the same day. However, the card was misused by someone and the bank realised its mistake only by 9pm. It made a call from Chennai on July 11 itself to make inquiries about the alleged transaction from the complainant. According to the complainant, however, the bank took three days to block the card even after it was intimated. In fact, the bank raised a bill of Rs 34,700 on July 25, 2003 in respect of the use of card and continued to raise bills with enhanced penalties and monthly charges.
The district forum imposed a punitive cost of Rs 1 lakh on the bank and directed it to deposit the same in favour of the State Consumer Welfare Fund (Legal Aid) within 30 days. Besides, the bank was also asked to pay a compensation of Rs 30,000 to the complainant and withdraw the charges of Rs 34,700.
While this order was not challenged by the bank, the complainant wanted an enhancement of the quantum of punitive damages and filed an appeal with the state commission, which dismissed the appeal. The complainant further filed a revised petition with the National Consumer Commission and pleaded that the punitive damages imposed were not commensurate to the net worth of CitiGroup and were highly disproportionate and inadequate.
However, the National Commission noted that the punitive damages of Rs 1 lakh levied on the bank were gracefully accepted and no appeal was filed to challenge the same. According to presiding member, Justice R K Batta, National Consumer Commission, "The order of the district forum cannot be called arbitrary, capricious or perverse. And in view of the facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the forum below and dismiss the revised petition.''