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

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...