E-Paper
Chandigarh: Finance firm fined ₹30k for hiking loan interest without intimation
The complainants Ravi Kumar and Sonia had applied for a personal loan of ₹6.08 lakhs from Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited through their office in Sector 35. The loan was approved on December 8, 2016, on a fixed rate of interest of 9.45% per annum. However, on December 1, 2018, the opposite parties changed the rate of interest to 12.8% per annum.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-1 has directed a finance firm to pay ₹20,000 compensation for causing mental harassment and ₹10,000 as cost of litigation to a resident of Sector 29 whose rate of interest on a loan he had taken was increased without his consent.
The complainants Ravi Kumar and Sonia had applied for a personal loan of ₹6.08 lakhs from Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited through their office in Sector 35. The loan was approved on December 8, 2016, on a fixed rate of interest of 9.45% per annum. However, on December 1, 2018, the opposite parties changed the rate of interest to 12.8% per annum.
Ravi Kumar, in his complaint, alleged that the firm changed the rate of interest without his consent. Earlier, at the discussed rate of interest, he would have paid ₹11.4 lakh with interest but now he would have to pay over ₹20 lakh for the same amount. The complainant alleged that he had visited the firm’s office numerous times to inquire under which guidelines the change had been made but received no response after which he sent legal notice to the firm.
The opposite parties which include the branch head and relationship manager at the firm’s Sector 35 branch and the branch manager of Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited at Connaught Place in New Delhi didn’t turn up despite service of notices and the commission proceeded ex-parte.
The commission in its hearing observed that the complainant had regularly paid all the installments and had closed the loan on March 26 2019.
“It was the arrogant attitude of the opposite parties to increase the rate of interest and change the EMI schedule of the loan which is unjustifiable and objectionable as well,” it observed.
“The complainant was forced to pre-close the loan account with the opposite parties. Thus, the act of the opposite parties caused harassment and mental trauma to the complainant and he had to immediately arrange money to settle the loan liability with the firm in advance with the fear of being unnecessarily burdened with illegal demand,” the commission added.
Along with the compensation, the opposite parties have also been directed to refund the excess amounts charged as increased rate of interest from the complainant. They have also been directed to issue certified breakups of the amount received from the complainant at the time of closing the loan.
