Skip to main content

RBI issues fresh norms to curb customer discrimination

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has come down heavily on banks for charging different interest rates to customers with similar profiles, saying such discrimination cannot be accepted.

To study credit pricing, RBI had formed a working group headed by Anand Sinha, former deputy governor of the central bank. The panel’s report, made public on Thursday, has suggested stringent norms to make loan pricing more transparent. “The working group recommends the spread charged to an existing customer cannot be increased except on account of deterioration in the customer’s credit risk profile,” RBI said.

Often, banks offer lower interest rates, especially on home loans, to new customers, while old customers continue to pay high rates.

The committee has said while banks raise interest rates across the board immediately after a rate rise, they tend to resist a cut in interest if the monetary policy is accommodative.

Acknowledging factors such as competition and customer relationship are taken into account while deciding the spread, banks have been asked to adopt a board-approved policy delineating these components.

“The board of a bank should ensure any price differentiation is consistent with the bank’s credit pricing policy, factoring risk-adjusted return on capital,” the panel said. Also, banks should be able to demonstrate to RBI the rationale of the pricing policy, it added.

The group also recommended banks’ internal policies must specify the rationale for, and range of, the spread in the case of a borrower, and the delegation of powers, in case of loan-pricing.

PRESCRIPTION FOR BETTER CUSTOMER SERVICE – RBI WORKING GROUP’S RECOMMENDATIONS

* For calculating base rate, the marginal cost of funds be factored if average maturity of deposit is lower
*Go by board-approved policy to decide spread
*Spread can only be increased if credit risk profile of customer deteriorates
*Floating rate loan covenant to have interest-rate reset periodicity and resets allowed on those dates only
*Sunset clause for benchmark prime lending rate, no extra spread/fees when customer shifts to base rate
*IBA to develop new benchmark for floating loans
*Publish interest rates, fees and charges on websites
*Provide annual percentage rate (APR) representing the total cost of credit on an annualised basis
*Uniform terminology to be used by all banks
*Standardised loan format for retail customers covering terms and conditions
*Benefit of interest reduction while pre-payments to be given on the day the money is received by bank and not to wait for the next EMI cycle date

To correct the downward rigidity on base rate, a benchmark reference rate for all loans, the committee suggested banks consider a marginal cost of funds while computing the base rate, especially if a lender’s average maturity of deposit was on the lower side.

“This may result in more transparency in pricing, reduced customer complaints, better transmission of changes in the policy rate and improved asset liability management at banks,” RBI said.

The committee recommended the floating rate loan covenant have interest rate reset periodicity and the resets be done on those dates alone, irrespective of the changes to the base rate within the reset period.

However, State Bank of India, India’s largest lender, has said any change in base rate has to be passed on to customers.

Asking banks to refrain from charging customers higher spreads and processing fee when they shifted their loans from the erstwhile benchmark prime lending rate (BPLR) to base rate, the committee recommended a sunset clause on BPLR-linked loans.

Highlighting the need to evolve a separate benchmark for floating loans, especially housing loans, the Indian Banks’ Association has been mandated to evolve a base rate, IBA base rate, which all banks could follow to fix interest rates.

IBA has also been asked to prepare a standard terminology to be used by all banks to help customers compare loan rates and charges across banks. IBA has also been asked to evolve a set of guidelines for easier and quicker transfer of loans, particularly mortgage/housing loans.

The panel has recommended penalties for banks that do not cooperate with borrowers who want to transfer loans.

The working group also recommended banks provide a range of annual percentage rate (APR), representing the total cost of credit on a loan on an annualised basis.

This will allow customers to compare the costs associated with borrowing across products and/or lenders.

In the case of retail loans, the committee emphasised on customers having a choice of “with exit” and “sans exit” options at the time of signing the contract.

“The exit option can be priced differentially, but reasonably. It should be easily exercisable by the customer, with the minimum notice period and without impediments. This will address the issues of borrowers being locked into contracts, serve as a consumer protection measure and help enhance competition,” it said.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/finance/rbi-issues-fresh-norms-to-curb-customer-discrimination-114041001184_1.html

Comments

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...