How safe is your bank locker?
Sample this: A major fire broke out at the Punjab
National Bank headquarters in New Delhi recently, trapping hundreds of
people inside and triggering panic across the capital. In another case, in a
daring robbery at a Central
Bank of India branch in UP some time ago, at least 45 lockers are claimed to
have been emptied out.
In another daylight bank heist in February this year, second in a row in Chennai, armed men made away with Rs 14 lakh from the Keelkattalai branch of Indian Overseas Bank, triggering panic among customers and forcing many of them to clear out their lockers and close their accounts. These are not lone incidents, but just the tips of an iceberg!
So if you thought that a bank locker is the safest place to keep your cash and valuables in, think again. Worse, if any of your valuables is lost or stolen in such incidents, banks are not bound to entertain your claims.
"The relationship of the bank and the locker holder is that of a lessor and lessee, or in simple words that of an owner and a tenant. The ambience, location and the logistics of the locker are known to the locker holder and he takes the locker despite the deficiencies, if any. Thus, the bank is not responsible for any loss for whatsoever reason of valuables from the locker," says S. Aftab, GM, Corporate Communication, Support Services & Branch Expansion Departments of Union Bank of India.
In fact, in such cases, the principle of Force Majeure works which states that "Banks shall not be liable if any transaction does not fructify or may not be completed or for any failure on part of the banks to perform any of their obligations contemplated if the performance is prevented, hindered or delayed by a Force Majeure event, and in such cases, its obligations shall be suspended for so long as the Force Majeure."
A 'force majeure' event means any event due to any cause beyond the reasonable control of the banks, including without limitations unavailability of any communication systems, breach, or virus in the processes or payment or delivery mechanism, sabotage, fire, flood, explosion, natural disasters or other 'acts of God', war, damage to the bank's facilities or of its correspondent bank(s), civil commotion, strikes or industrial action of any kind, riots, insurrection, war, acts of government, computer hacking, unauthorized access to computer data and storage devices, computer crashes, malfunctioning in the computer terminal or the systems getting affected by any malicious, destructive or corruptive code or program, mechanical or technical errors/ failures or power shut down, faults or failures in telecommunication etc., which prevents it from performing its obligations within the specified service delivery parameters.
In view of these norms, banks have consistently fended off all claims in case of locker burglary on the grounds that the relationship between a bank and the person hiring the locker is that of a landlord and his tenant. Therefore, they are not responsible for its contents.
In another daylight bank heist in February this year, second in a row in Chennai, armed men made away with Rs 14 lakh from the Keelkattalai branch of Indian Overseas Bank, triggering panic among customers and forcing many of them to clear out their lockers and close their accounts. These are not lone incidents, but just the tips of an iceberg!
So if you thought that a bank locker is the safest place to keep your cash and valuables in, think again. Worse, if any of your valuables is lost or stolen in such incidents, banks are not bound to entertain your claims.
"The relationship of the bank and the locker holder is that of a lessor and lessee, or in simple words that of an owner and a tenant. The ambience, location and the logistics of the locker are known to the locker holder and he takes the locker despite the deficiencies, if any. Thus, the bank is not responsible for any loss for whatsoever reason of valuables from the locker," says S. Aftab, GM, Corporate Communication, Support Services & Branch Expansion Departments of Union Bank of India.
In fact, in such cases, the principle of Force Majeure works which states that "Banks shall not be liable if any transaction does not fructify or may not be completed or for any failure on part of the banks to perform any of their obligations contemplated if the performance is prevented, hindered or delayed by a Force Majeure event, and in such cases, its obligations shall be suspended for so long as the Force Majeure."
A 'force majeure' event means any event due to any cause beyond the reasonable control of the banks, including without limitations unavailability of any communication systems, breach, or virus in the processes or payment or delivery mechanism, sabotage, fire, flood, explosion, natural disasters or other 'acts of God', war, damage to the bank's facilities or of its correspondent bank(s), civil commotion, strikes or industrial action of any kind, riots, insurrection, war, acts of government, computer hacking, unauthorized access to computer data and storage devices, computer crashes, malfunctioning in the computer terminal or the systems getting affected by any malicious, destructive or corruptive code or program, mechanical or technical errors/ failures or power shut down, faults or failures in telecommunication etc., which prevents it from performing its obligations within the specified service delivery parameters.
In view of these norms, banks have consistently fended off all claims in case of locker burglary on the grounds that the relationship between a bank and the person hiring the locker is that of a landlord and his tenant. Therefore, they are not responsible for its contents.
Source:-The Economic Times
No comments:
Post a Comment