Aniket
TF Prestige
In my view, some of your contention as well as interpretation, quoted & highlighted by me in red colour are totally wrong.Update: Prospective reply to RBI. Please read and comment.
@its_karan
Request from RBI - send your comments, if any, on the reply received from the regulated entity (bank) (attached) or facts (including documentary evidence) if any
Incorrect Claims by PNB Bank:
(Source - attached document (page 3) titled "Altered Cheque presented in branch as per customer information" sent as internal email within PNB Bank.)
PNB Bank Claim 1:
“These details were clear and no alteration from naked eye were found on the cheque.”
Fact:
This claim is incorrect. The cheque has visible signs of alteration visible under the naked eye. Images of cheque attached here - Pen marks are visible under the text “Five Thousand only”.
Thus, this altered cheque should have been discarded.
[Image of Cheque here]
PNB Bank Claim 2:
“Anwar gave pen to MR XXX XXX to write cheque.” Anwar is the name of the scammer who collected the cheque from me.
Fact:
This claim is incorrect. I used my own pen. I filled the cheque myself. My original handwriting is still visible on the cheque as shown in the cheque image attached.
Improper Cheque Handling Process at PNB
(Proof: CC TV footage video)
Violation of the following RBI Guidelines done by PNB Bank-
- UV-light check of the cheque was not done by PNB Bank.
- White-light check was also not done.
- ID verification of the bearer was not done by PNB.
- Standard precautions were not followed:
- No previous transaction pattern of Cheque with my account. Withdrawal of this amount has never been done in my account.
- This scammer beneficiary named ”XXXX XXX” is not added anywhere in my account
- No history of such an amount withdrawn by Cash-over-Counter in my account.
- Guideline: Banks are advised that payments for Rs.50,000/- and above should be made through banking channels and not in cash.
RBI Circular: Para 2 of DBOD.No.BP.BC.114/C.469(8.1)-91 dated April 19, 1991
Title: Misuse of banking channels for violation of fiscal laws and evasion of taxes - issued and payments of demand drafts for Rs.50000/- and above
- Guideline: in case of transactions carried out by a non-account based customer, that is a walk-in customer, where the amount of transaction is equal to or exceeds rupees fifty thousand, whether conducted as a single transaction or several transactions that appear to be connected, the customer’s identity and address should be verified.
RBI Circular: Para 3 (ii) of the circular DBOD.AML,BS.No.68/14.01.001/2009-10 dated January 12, 2010.
Requests to RBI
- Conduct thorough analysis of cheque to detect alteration.
- By taking possession of Cheque
- OR by instructing the PNB Bank to conduct a forensic/ UV light analysis of the cheque.
- Issue a full reimbursement to me for amount Rs 75,000. And a further mental harassment compensation of Rs 1,00,000 or deemed appropriate by RBI.
Where it's mentioned that UV-light check of the cheque must be done for the cheque amounting ₹75,000
by PNB or any other Bank?
2 lac is threshold which can be increased or decreased subject to board of that respective bank.
White-light check was also not done.
ID verification of the bearer was not done by PNB. Why this needs to be checked? Based on what you're making such allegations like it's mandatory to be checked, without which, cheque clearance is wrongful act?
Banks are never advised that payments for Rs.50,000/- and above should be made through banking channels and not in cash. It's only applicable on getting travellers cheques, demand drafts, or making mail or telegraphic transfers.
This Guideline: in case of transactions carried out by a non-account based customer, that is a walk-in customer, where the amount of transaction is equal to or exceeds rupees fifty thousand, whether conducted as a single transaction or several transactions that appear to be connected, the customer’s identity and address should be verified, is mentioned in 3.2.1 b(vi) of Circular – Know Your Customer (KYC) norms / Anti-Money Laundering (AML) standards/Combating Financing of Terrorism (CFT)/Obligation of banks and financial institutions under PMLA, 2002 instead of Para 3 (ii) of the circular DBOD.AML,BS.No.68/14.01.001/2009-10 dated January 12, 2010.
By taking help of the guidelines in the wrong manner, you can't defend making your position greater than that of PNB, in the eye of RBI's BO.
Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
Last edited: