You must Sign In to post a response.
- Category: Miscellaneous
- #579191I do agree that banks have their set rules and regulation while sanctioning loans and even while closing the same but if the Manager is good and being human he can consider anything out of rule. But normally the Managers are in routine transfer and if the old manager is not in seat, we may face problems again as the new manager would insists all papers as per rules. My wife gave me cheque for withdrawl and I submitted the same at the counter. Her signature had little variation and the payment was denied and the manager asked me to bring wife and do the real signature in front of him. But when I brought her to the bank next day, the cashier was smiling and telling me what is the necessity of bringing her when he already known her personally because she is the teacher of the school which is adjacent to this bank. So what I mean to say that bankers play game according to their acquaintance and not the rules.
I consider myself as the learner everyday
- #579193It is a common practice. It is necessary to produce the originals, whether it is gold loan, or taking admission in to school or colleges, to check the authentication. As they have target pressure so while sanctioning they became loose to check all documents ( in a secured loan), where as they become strict while closing and returning the gold to you. Yes some time if the manager is known to you or close with you might not such situation happens, but as a customer it is our duty to carry all valid and original documents.
- #579195For loans, original documents are required to be inspected. This is a standard procedure. The bank officer who granted loan to you previous year did not follow the procedure. This time he is going by the book.
“Whenever I feel the need to exercise, I lie down until it goes away.” - Paul Terry
- #579196There are two separate things - the bank and the official concerned. Bank's rules are generally well defined and t is an established practice to verify the original documents. Sometimes, the official concerned adopts a relaxed approach in certain cases, particularly when the customer is known to him and at his own level takes certain action even on the basis of the duplicate copy.
In the case cited by the author the official should not have approved his loan in the beginning without verification of the original documents.
Let us encourage each other in sharing knowledge.
- #579226It is not mischief of the banker, but it is your misunderstanding. Guidelines and rules may change from time to time. One cannot quote that 'last year you had done this, so do it now.." Moreover, here, the banker has to be doubly sure that he gives the item to the real person. Such things are for our own safety also.
The best way is to comply and co-operate.
Let us keep faith on ourselves and work sincerely, not leave everything to fate.
- #579277The bank is right and you are wrong.
The bank manager has done a favour and helped you in an emergency by approving your loan with the duplicate copies as they could get a customer to conduct their business. While taking back the pledged ornaments, the bank is ensuring that the item is returned to the right person. We cannot call it as a mischief by the banker.
The bank is right and you are wrong.
No life without Sun ¤
- #579280(#579277) Mr. Sun,
I never said against the bankers. How could you tell me as I am wrong? Instead the bankers are wrong due to not asking the originals during submission of gold and passing the loan amount without proper verification. However, I know the process and though submitted originals during the clearance. Your verdict 'The bank is right and you are wrong' is not appropriate in this concert. I'm not here to listen anyone's comment Mr. Sun.
I'm just giving one example here to proof how some bankers perform while opening and closing loans.
'Every bad situation will have something positive. Even a dead clock shows correct time twice a day.'
- #579282Bank is a financial institution and we are bound to follow the stipulated rules. But to keep the customer and personal relation the Manager has done a human consideration which may comes under his purview. He should be thanked for his timely help. Bank should also appreciate the Manager for strengthening the customer relation. Understanding the fact we should obey the banking instructions to keep a better banking relation in our democratic country.
- #579286Mr. Naresh,
Considering your emergency the banker helped you out of the way with trust as they had a customer to earn interest for their money. While returning the item, the banker should ensure that nothing went wrong with the business. So I said the bank is right and you are wrong. Since you have used the word 'Mischief', I had to say this. It is not a mischief at all, but a favour while approving, and strictness while returning.
No life without Sun ¤
- #579287I do not see any mischief in the incident narrated above. It is mandatory for banks to inspect original documents at the time of certain financial transactions.
The bank might have made an error in sanctioning a loan against gold without verifying the original identification documents. The bank official may have had a target to meet, and hence disregarded the verification step. He, I think did you a favour, by granting you the loan when you needed money urgently. Had he insisted on seeing the original documents you would have probably cribbed and objected about the stringent rules and the inconvenience caused to you.
This is not 'mischief' – this time around the employee just followed laid down procedures and directives (which he ignored on the previous occasion). Let us not forget that these rules are in place to safeguard our interest.
I do not understand the need for you to have asked the official to "manage with the duplicate copies" when you were in possession of the originals. Why would you want to put him to the test?
A fool will always try to make sense of his nonsense!