| Watchdog turns down bank customer |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Mark |
| Monday, 16 May 2011 09:39 |
|
The National Consumer Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to rule on a dispute over a home loan interest rate, the tribunal said on Friday. “The National Consumer Tribunal has turned down a request by a Standard Bank customer for the tribunal to consider whether the bank has engaged in prohibited conduct,” it said in a statement. Nisar Tiseker, a customer of Standard Bank, and his wife, were granted a home loan by the bank in 2003 at the interest rate of prime less 2.15 percent. In 2004 Tiseker's wife was employed by Standard Bank and granted a preferential staff interest rate of prime less 2.5 percent. The couple were granted a further loan in 2006 with the proviso that should the wife leave the bank, they would no longer qualify for the staff category of interest rate, the tribunal said. Tiseker's wife left Standard Bank in January 2009. The bank said the prime interest rate would now apply to their loan. “Tiseker's view was that the interest rate should revert back to that which prevailed before the time of his wife's employment with the bank, i.e. prime less 2.15 percent.” Tiseker asked the tribunal for an order to reinstate the home loan rate of prime less 2.15 percent, backdated to February 2009, as well as the reimbursement of losses. However, the tribunal ruled last week it did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter, and refused Tiseker leave to refer the matter to it. “...the tribunal said it had to be satisfied that the bank's conduct in altering the interest rate constituted prohibited conduct in terms of the National Credit Act.” If the bank's actions were to be declared “prohibited conduct”, it had to have altered the interest rate “to penalise the applicant because he was exercising his rights in terms of the act”. The tribunal said Tiseker's version showed the bank altered the interest rates because his wife was no longer employed by the bank. The Tribunal said it was “not empowered to decide whether the applicant was entitled to the interest rate he enjoyed before his wife was employed by the bank, or whether the bank was entitled to charge the interest rate which applied to the non-staff category of consumers”. Standard Bank's actions, therefore, did not constitute prohibited conduct in terms of the National Credit Act. The tribunal was established in terms of the act and can adjudicate on allegations of prohibited practices made in terms of the act. |
| Last Updated on Monday, 16 May 2011 09:48 |