CAVEAT VENDOR : Taken for a ride by an immigration service

BL 28 July 2014

 With passports confiscated by an immigration agency, the Pandeys were rescued by the Indian High Commission

Feel defrauded or shortchanged by one of those ubiquitous immigration agencies that have sprung up everywhere? If yes, don’t just fret and fume. Consider approaching a consumer court. Here’s a recent case where Reena and Rahul Pandey received compensation.

Starting from the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chandigarh, which passed an order in October 2013, the case went up to the State Commission and thereafter the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which ruled on the matter in April 2014.

Facts of the case

Reena and her husband Rahul Pandey approached Ganga Immigration & Education Services (Ganga Immigration) for getting a Malaysian work permit.

They were also assured of a job with a salary of 1,200-1,500 Malaysian ringgit, and were asked to pay ₹1.5 lakh each. This amount included the cost of a two-year permit along with food, accommodation, insurance and air fare.

The two also entered into an agreement (October 18, 2012) according to which they would be refunded the processing fee if the work provided was not to their satisfaction.

When Rahul and Reena went to make the payment, they were told they would have to go on a tourist visa which would later be converted into a work visa.

So, they paid ₹90,000 — together — with the rest to be given when their visas were converted. This was in addition to an earlier payment of ₹50,000.

Once they reached Malaysia, they were asked to pay for their accommodation by the Ganga International employee who was accompanying them on the trip.

Not only that, they were also asked to share a room with two other men. The next day, they were put on a night shift with a courier company with jobs far different from what was promised. Their troubles did not end there. Once they let known their intention of returning to India, they were asked to vacate the room at night.

Thereafter, they had to make their own arrangements for food and stay. The agent who had earlier taken their passports (to get work permits) refused to return them.

Left with no choice, the Pandeys approached the Indian High Commission which issued them an emergency certificate for their return to India.

Once back home, they approached the District Forum in Chandigarh.

Court to the rescue

The Court held that Ganga Immigration had made false promises to the Pandeys as a result of which they had lost their jobs in India and were also forced to sell a few of their assets to arrange for money to go abroad. It also found the agreement entered into between the two parties to be very vaguely worded.

Finding Ganga International guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the Court ordered it to pay ₹1,80,000 — the money paid to it by the Pandeys plus what was spent by them in Malaysia. It also ordered ₹61,000 to be paid for the mental agony caused and litigation expenses.

Ganga International then appealed against the decision with the State Commission, which dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the District Forum.

Undeterred, the company then approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which dismissed the petition too.

It both upheld the decisions of the earlier two forums and ordered Ganga International to pay an additional ₹100,000. Of this, ₹25,000 each was to go to Reena and Rahul and the rest to the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the National Commission

How to settle your credit scores

BL 28 july 14

Correct them online or by way of a written request with supporting documents

A credit score, whether from CIBIL or Experian, can have quite a say in whether you succeed in your loan or credit card applications, and in the interest rate you may get. But errors can crop up in your credit report due to no fault of yours, wholly messing up your finances.

So if you want to apply for a loan, it’s best to get your first credit score before making the application, just to be sure there are no surprises in store.

Identifying and rectifying any mistake in the score can then be done quickly.

The mistakes made

Two main factors account for credit score mistakes. First, it can be wrong entries at the time of making inputs, such as an extra zero added accidentally to a personal loan of ₹100,000.

And second, credit information companies rely on lending institutions sending data every month.

A delay or neglect in this updating can lead to payments not being credited to you when you apply for the score. Says Harshala Chandorkar, Senior VP, Consumer Relations, CIBIL, if you access your report within 45 days of making a payment, it may not be updated.

It’s a red flag when the date reported (date on which data is submitted by that lender) on your account is older than two months and your payment is not reflected.

A CIBIL TransUnion score, for example, is split into personal details and loan account details.

Both can have mistakes. Personal detail errors can be a mis-spelt name, incorrect date of birth, gender, address or telephone number. Identification details provided, such as PAN, voter ID or passport, could also be wrong. An incorrect PAN can have far-reaching implications, as that is linked to any financial transaction you make.

Loan account mistakes can similarly be disastrous. Your loan status may be wrong — stating overdue when you have made all payments or latest payment not updated.

Loan accounts you closed can be classified as written off or defaulted, especially if the lending institution hasn’t been updating details on time.

This can send credit scores crashing. The same loan details can accidentally show up more than once, raising the total credit, known as duplication errors.

Or your details can be mixed up with someone else’s, leaving you with loans you’ve never taken, or several requests for credit which you haven’t made, called ownership errors. In the most extreme situation, if your details are stolen and misused, that can reflect in your credit score details.

Correcting the mistakes

If you find mistakes in your credit score, report it immediately to the credit information company. It cannot make corrections on its own; it takes it up with the institution in question and, once confirmed, rectifications are done.

Reporting CIBIL score mistakes can be done online through their Dispute Resolution. Fill up the form available through their website www.cibil.com.

Give your personal details as well as a detailed explanation of the mistake.

If you are uncomfortable working online, send a written request to their Mumbai address. Always mention your CIBIL control number, available in the top right-hand corner of your report.

Rectifying Experian score mistakes can similarly be done by sending written requests. They require supporting documents too, such as identity and address proof, and sending them to their Mumbai office.

Barring complications, disputes are settled within a month’s time. Personal details may be quickly settled since it involves looking through identification proofs.

Loan account mistakes can take some time as a result of back and forth communication between the lending institution and the credit information company.

Recourse

Should the mistake you point out be disputed by the institution, the credit information company will let you know.

Theoretically, you can re-apply for correction, though it is rather pointless. Take it up with the bank. Protect your own interests. Chandorkar suggests maintaining proofs, such as loan closure letter, payment confirmation letters or emails, especially if you’ve settled previously written off or overdue accounts.

She also emphasises the need to keep your lender up to date with your personal details so that necessary changes and communication can be made.

Credit information companies too fall under the purview of the Reserve Bank. You can approach the banking ombudsman if you are still dissatisfied.

If all else fails, the consumer court is your last resort

Can Subrata Roy get an office: SC to jailers

TNN | Jul 26, 2014, 12.10AM 

The Supreme Court on Friday asked Tihar Jail authorities in Delhi whether they could make available office space with Wi-Fi and internet facilities to help detained Sahara group chairman Subrata Roy finalize negotiations for sale of three hotels in London and New York. Roy and Sahara group had identified a guest house within the Tihar Jail complex but solicitor general Ranjit Kumar informed the court that it was close to the staff quarters and had not been designated as a prison.

"Communication facilities can be set up at the guest house, which could also be designated as a jail by the lieutenant governor for a specified period of the day during which Roy and Sahara group's identified personnel could use it for negotiations for the sale of assets," he said.

Appearing for Roy, senior advocate K T S Tulsi said important prospective buyers from abroad were in Delhi and the Sahara chief would like to participate in the final phase of negotiations to get the best price for the assets so as to enable him to raise the money needed for getting out of jail on interim bail. A bench of Justices T S Thakur, A R Dave and A K Sikri asked the SG to explore the possibility of providing Roy office facility in Tihar, where he has been lodged since March 4. The court had told him that he could come out on interim bail if he deposited Rs 5,000 crore in cash and Rs 5,000 crore in bank guarantee with market regulator Sebi.

Collegium system a failure: Law panel Chief

 TNN 26 July 14

NEW DELHI: Days after Press Council of India chairman Justice Markandey Katju attacked the Supreme Court collegium for appointment of judges, law commission chairman Justice A P Shah on Friday said its conduct has been opaque and that appointments to higher judiciary lacked transparency. 

In an interview to a TV channel, Justice Shah said: "Justice Katju's revelations cannot be undermined, but I have reservations over the manner in which it has been done and about its timing." The collegium system is so opaque that even if someone wants to speak out, he cannot do it having come through the same system, he said. 

"The collegium system has completely failed, judges are appointed on unknown criteria," Justice Shah said calling the apex court system of appointing judges as a cabal or a club lacking transparency. "It has failed as favourites get appointed and the rest are left out," said the former chief justice of Delhi High Court. 

Justice Shah's attack comes soon after some other retired senior judges supported Justice Katju's claims that a Madras High Court additional judge had been given an extension despite an IB report containing allegations of corruption against him. Former SC judge Ruma Pal, who was part of the three-member collegium that had initially refused extension to the Madras High Court additional judge, had supported Katju's claims. 

Later, Goa human rights commission chairman and former chief justice of Patna High Court Justice P K Misra also supported Justice Katju on the expose. 

Justice Shah pointed out how the collegium had gone ahead to appoint a judge at the age of 60 years when the criteria laid down clearly says any appointment to higher judiciary has to be below the age of 55. 

"I remember once lists were forwarded by the Punjab and Haryana High Court and Madras High Court. The apex court collegium completely scrapped the two lists without assigning any reason," Justice Shah recounted. 

Justice Shah's assertion strengthens the government's move to bring in the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill replacing the collegium. It has sought opinion from all parties and is likely to bring the bill in Parliament in the winter session. 

The law panel chief supported the government's bill but said the composition of the commission should be part of the Constitution amendment bill. "Unless it is backed by Constitutional provision, it will not be effective," he said. 

He said the present JAC bill framed by the UPA is inadequate. The entire composition of the JAC should be part of the Constitutional amendment bill. He also clarified that the JAC should not be reduced to just a recommendatory commission but its recommendations should be made binding on the executive. In case there are some issues, there should be a provision of an Ombudsman, like in the UK, which should look into point of conflict, he said.

Post a comment

Statute amendment likely to change how judges are appointed

TNN July 26,2014

With the collegium system of judges' appointment under fire, the government proposes to end Supreme Court's monopoly by amending Articles 124(2) and 217(1) of the Constitution to broad-base the process for selection of judges to the SC and high courts. 

The Centre is of the view that a law enacted to annul the judge-appointing-judge system, devised by the SC through two judgments in 1993 and 1998, will run the risk of getting struck down by the apex court. 

It feels that since there is an ambiguity in the constitutional provisions about the process and mechanism for appointment of judges to the SC and HCs and the present practice, it would be better to adopt the constitutional amendment route to specify the procedure for selection and appointment of judges to constitutional courts. 

Article 124(2) says, "Every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the judges of the Supreme Court and the high courts in the states as the President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until he attains the age of 65 years." 

It also provides that "in the case of appointment of a judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of India shall always be consulted". For appointment of a high court judge, Article 217(1) mandates the President to consult the CJI, governor of the state and chief justice of the HC. 

These two articles provide that the executive, through the President, would have primacy in appointment of judges. This is how it was till 1993, when a constitution bench of the Supreme Court held that the Chief Justice of India would have primacy in appointment of judges.

Madras Lower court lawyers need not wear gowns

Manish Raj,TNN | Jul 26, 2014, 02.23 AM IST

CHENNAI: Here's some good news for lawyers. The Bar Council of India has said that lawyers practising in subordinate courts need not wear the long black gown or coat while arguing their cases.

This relief, which would give lawyers respite from the sweltering heat, conveyed to the Tamil Nadu Federation of Women Lawyers (TNFWL), in response to a representation seeking relaxation of dress code for advocates during summer. The Bar Council of India letter dated July 16, however, said advocates practising in high courts and the Supreme Court cannot avail themselves of the dress rule relaxation.

K Santhakumari, president of Tamil Nadu Federation of Women's Lawyers, wrote a letter to the BCI on June 2, seeking exemption for advocates from wearing gowns during the summer, keeping in mind the heat.

"On an average the temperature touches 40 degree Celcius from April to June. As such the lawyers in Tamil Nadu are finding it extremely difficult to wear the coat and gown during summer." Also, labour, criminal and family courts did not have summer vacation. Despite finding it difficult to wear coats and gown in the searing heat, the lawyers had to follow the dress code prescribed by the bar council, Santhakumari said.

She also referred to the exemption given to advocates in Delhi and Punjab from wearing gowns during summer months (from April to June). A similar directive could be issued for Tamil Nadu as well. "This will not only ease the difficulty but also increase the efficiency of the Bar," she said.



(K Santhakumari, president of Tamil Nadu Federation of Women's Lawyers)

Replying to it, the council said that as per Rule III of the Rules of the Bar Council of India "wearing of advocate's gown shall be optional except when appearing in the Supreme Court or in High courts."

Further, as per Rule IV, "except in Supreme Court and high courts during summer, wearing of black coat is not mandatory."

It then directed the secretary of bar council of Tamil Nadu to circulate the rules among various Bar associations in the state to "remove the confusion or doubts."

SBH Bank to pay Rs 30,000 for wrongly debiting money from saving account

Tuesday, 8 July 2014 - 2:59pm IST | Agency: PTI

State Bank of Hyderabad has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay Rs 30,000 to a man, who could not withdraw money from the ATM but cash was wrongly debited from his account.

The East Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by N A Zaidi, said it was the bank's duty to see that the CCTVs in ATMs were placed in such a manner that they could record the identity of the person operating the machine and the amount delivered to him.

The forum asked the bank to pay Rs 30,000, including compensation for causing harassment, to East Delhi resident Arun Sharma after noting that Rs 20,000, which was debited from his account through the bank's ATM, was never withdrawn by him.

"The entire material on record clearly shows that the transaction in question (Rs 20,000) was not carried out by the complainant and the amount which has been debited from the account of the complainant was never withdrawn by him.

"It is the duty of the Bank to keep their ATMs free from any kind of fault, the CCTV cameras should be fixed in such a manner that they could record the identity of the person operating machine and recording the amount delivered by the machine," the forum, also comprising its member Poonam Malhotra, said.
It also said that since these facilities were not in place at the bank's ATM, advantage can always be taken by an "unscrupulous" person of such defects in the machine as it has been taken in this case.
It said the ATM record showed that Rs 20,000 transaction took place at 7.30 AM on October 28, 2010 but as per the complainant, the CCTV footage which was played in front of the branch manager of the bank showed that Sharma had visited the ATM at 7 AM but the machine had not responded.

Sharma, who was having a saving account with the bank's Vikas Marg branch in Laxmi Nagar, had told the forum that on October 28, 2010, he had tried to withdraw money from the ATM at 7 AM but the machine did not respond as it was having some technical problem. However, at 7:30 AM, the amount was debited from his account.

Sharma said he had given a written complaint to branch's deputy manager informing him that he has not withdrawn this amount on October 28, 2010, and it should be enquired and his money be reverted to his account.

He said the bank, however, failed to make any investigation and gave flimsy grounds regarding the amount withdrawn and showed their inability to do anything on the complaint.

The bank, however, claimed in its written statement filed before the forum that Sharma was a "dishonest" man who had successfully taken the money from the ATM.

The forum, in its order, said the bank failed to place on record the CD of CCTV footage of 7 AM to 7:33 of that day.

"The withholding of CCTV footage from this Forum of the relevant time further fortifies the case of the complainant that he has not done the transaction in question.

"There is no report filed by the OP regarding the perfection of the ATM machine and its efficient working in rebuttal of the case of the complainant that it was suffering from technical glitch," the forum said.