However, recently when one of the customers of SBI Cards from Chennai, (a respectable employee of a MNC software company) who had lost money on a fraudulent credit card transaction, requested them to redress his grievance under the provisions of this circular, SBI Card replied to them that they are not aware of the existence of such a circular.
In an email reply from email@example.com dated 1st September 2017, signed by one Jaspreet Kaur, SBI Card replied
“…we are not in receipt of any communication from RBI regarding limited liability clause. “
The Bank has provided the IP addresses from which the fraudulent transactions have been made which indicate transactions somewhere in Jharkhand while the customer is in Chennai.
This indicates that SBI card authentication system has not implemented “Adaptive Authentication” to identify an unusual transaction, as is required under various cyber Security guidelines issued by RBI from time to time.
Obviously, if Jaspreet Kaur does not know even the important Limited Liability circular, we may presume that she must be not only ignorant but incapable of understanding what is “Adaptive Authentication”.
Employing such inefficient persons with an authority to reply under an e-mail “Ceo@sbicard.com” indicates the complete lack of competence of SBI Cards to handle the responsibility of credit cards.
We also are surprised that this fraudulent transaction being a credit card transaction in which a payment has been made to a merchant, a “Charge Back” option has not been exercised by SBI Cards.
The concerned merchant is the beneficiary of a fraudulent transaction and therefore is part of a “Money Laundering” exercise. Hence SBI Card should not have hesitated to allow a charge back immediately.
SBI Cards should make a public statement if the Card holder who is also a customer of the Bank is not as much important as the Merchant who may also be a customer of either SBI itself or some other Bank.
If SBI/SBICards was aware of the Limited liability circular, they should have introduced a grievance redressal mechanism as well as indicated a policy for determination of the liabilities under various conditions. No such policy has so far been published by SBI even after two months since the circular was issued.
The casual handling of the complaint by Ms Jaspreet Kaur indicates the possibility of her being an accomplice in the fraud.
I wish Police in Chennai register a case against SBI Card as an organization and Ms Jaspreet Kaur as an individual who by her “negligence” and “an attempt to shield a fraudster” become an accomplice to the fraudulent transaction.
I also do not think that Ms Jaspreet kaur could be the CEO of SBI Card. If she is not the designated CEO of SBI Cards, her using the e-mail CEO@SBIcards.com is an attempt to cheat the customer with misrepresentation and possible unauthorized use of a senior executive’s e-mail ID which are offences under Section 66C and 66D of ITA 2008. These are cognizable offences and Chennai police should make use of this provision in pursuing the complaint.
I call upon the Chairman of SBI to also initiate an internal enquiry on the complaint and ensure that customer complaints are handled with more responsibility.
I also request RBI to also pull up SBI for not ensuring that its executives are not properly informed about the RBI Circular and if no satisfactory explanation is available, suspend the Credit Card license of SBI Cards.
I am looking forward to immediate response from some responsible person in SBI and request him to redress the grievance of this customer. (Ref: Interaction ID : 123634897427)
It is a general observation that a large number of frauds happen in the credit card system of SBI Cards, much more than in other Banks. The reason is apparent that the SBI cards is being managed by incompetent persons who may be hand in glove with the fraudsters. There is a need for an in depth enquiry by CBI on the functioning of SBI Cards so that customers may not be subject to a “SBI Risk”.