::
Case Review: Banking
Summary of some of the decisions made by the Mediators on some of the complaints received by FMB.
This summary is for information only and should not be used for other purpose. [Previous]………[Next]
LOSS OF RM10,000/- AND BANK CHARGE OF RM100/- FOR STOP PAYMENT OF CHEQUE (Case reference no : 6(2)-140)
Mr. Z is a licensed moneylender who had on 03/02/05 granted a loan of RM10,000/- to one Mr. U. The loan was repayable on 02/03/05 with interest at 18% per annum.
On 02/03/05 at about 10.00 a.m. Mr. U paid a sum of RM10,000/- in cash into Mr. Z's account at Bank G. The name of the accountholder was wrongly written. The teller had observed the difference in the name and brought to Mr. U's attention the difference, requesting him to amend and initial the deposit slip accordingly. Mr. U complied but as he was uncertain of the name, he requested the teller to hold on to enable him to confirm shortly.
In the interim, Mr. Z checked his current account via the internet and confirmed the available balance was RM11,000/-. He then issued a cheque of RM10,000/- to be paid into his personal current account maintained at another bank. He subsequently checked his current account at 3-4 p.m. the same day and found that the sum of RM10,000/- had been reversed from his account. He called the bank's hotline, and was advised to stop payment of the cheque to prevent any consequential "black listing" due to the dishonour of the cheque.
At the Bank, Mr. U returned at about 1.45 p.m. requesting a refund of RM10,000./-. Despite the officer's initial refusal, he was persuaded to carry out the reversal 4 hours after the deposit. Mr. Z claim that the money paid into the account is his and the bank has no cogent reason to reverse out the money without prior consultation with him.
An inquiry was held.
By reason of the bank's reversal of RM10,000/- Mr. Z lost the money. The claim by Mr. Z is clearly a claim for compensation of RM10,000/-. The claim for compensation is outside the jurisdiction of the Mediator.
It is noted that Bank G had acted erroneously albeit in good faith. Any "error correction" or reversal ought to be done immediately and not a few hours later. There is a confirmation from the representative of the bank that no two customers of the bank can have the same account number. Since Mr. U had made no error as to the account number and he had initialed on the name, the duty of the bank comes to an end. To allow a customer to withdraw a deposit made into a third party account is totally untenable. This is not a situation that entitles the bank to do an error correction.
The Bank had reversed all charges levied on the stop payment and dishonoured cheque. The Bank's conduct has not in any way extinguished Mr. Z's claim against Mr. U. It is still available to complainant to pursue legal action against the borrower. The claim for compensation was disallowed.
[Previous]………[Next]
|
