Consumer court denies relief to victim of credit card fraud | mumbai | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Jun 28, 2017-Wednesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Consumer court denies relief to victim of credit card fraud

The state consumer commission on Wednesday rejected a complaint filed by a Pune resident seeking a refund after someone used his credit card to make a transaction he didn’t know about, Kanchan Chaudhari reports.

mumbai Updated: Apr 20, 2013 02:00 IST
Kanchan Chaudhari

The state consumer commission on Wednesday rejected a complaint filed by a Pune resident seeking a refund after someone used his credit card to make a transaction he didn’t know about.

The court granted no relief to the complainant Balkatta Hegde saying the transaction was made by someone who knew the secret password for the credit card, so the bank should not have to take responsibility for the fraud.

“We do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the opponent [ the bank],” the bench of presiding member SR Khanzode and member Dhanraj Khamatkar said.

According to the complaint, ICICI Bank had intimated Hegde through an SMS about a debit entry of Rs 34,529 towards a transaction made via his credit card on October 14, 2009. Air tickets had been purchased and the amount was paid to Ezeego One Travel & Tours.

In 2010, Hegde moved the Pune district consumer forum and sought cancellation of the debit entry and a refund of the amount claiming it was a case of fraud. He said that he informed the bank immediately after realising that he had been duped, and at least two days before the concerned flight was scheduled, but the bank had taken no action.

The bank contested the complaint saying the transaction had been made using the credit card and its secret password, which is supposed to be known only to the customer. Besides, credit card transactions are 3D secure (extensible markup language-based protocol designed to be an additional security layer for online credit and debit card transactions) authenticated transactions for which the bank cannot raise any dispute with the merchant.

The district consumer forum accepted the bank’s version and rejected Hegde’s complaint, compelling him to challenge the order in an appeal. On Wednesday, the state consumer commission rejected his appeal saying he should have approached the cybercrime cell of the police and filed an FIR as soon as the incident had taken place.