Banks’ lending decisions

Published February 20, 2022

IN a wider context, a Senate panel’s clearance of a bill seeking to amend the law governing banking companies reflects the general frustration at the way banks and other financial institutions discriminate against loan-seekers on the basis of their jobs or professions while making credit decisions. The proposed bill recommends imprisonment and fines for bank executives denying any borrower, including politicians, a banking service on the basis of their social or economic class. The panel has rightly pointed out that the refusal of credit and other banking services for any reason other than the creditworthiness of borrowers or other criteria prescribed by the State Bank amounts to a violation of the fundamental, constitutional rights of citizens.

But the proposed bill will not right the wrongs being done by the banks. Rather, the suggested punishments for bank executives will put needless pressure on them and hurt the quality of their credit decisions. In 2008, a Delhi court had slammed Indian banks for denying clean loans and credit cards to professionals such as lawyers and journalists on the basis of what in banking jargon is known as ‘negative profile’, even if they were of sound financial standing and fulfilled other criteria. The judge had called it an “act of corporate authoritarianism”, rejecting the defence plea that banks had the discretion to choose their customers. But no one in India felt the need to bring new laws or punish bank executives. The court had directed bankers to follow the central bank’s guidelines in this regard, and consider the “financial standing and creditworthiness” of the loan-seekers while making lending decisions. The same principle should be applied here as well, with the State Bank issuing instructions to banks to give their customers the reasons for the rejection of their applications in writing. Banks that are found to be violating the criteria laid down by the central bank or discriminating out of social or economic reasons should be penalised to ensure that everyone gets a fair deal.

Published in Dawn, February 20th, 2022

Opinion

Editorial

Amendment furore
Updated 15 Sep, 2024

Amendment furore

Few seem to know what is in its legislative package, and it seems like a thoroughly undemocratic exercise overall.
‘Mini’ budget chatter
15 Sep, 2024

‘Mini’ budget chatter

RUMOURS are a dime a dozen in a volatile, uncertain economy. No wonder the rumour mills continue to generate reports...
Child beggary
15 Sep, 2024

Child beggary

CHILD begging, the ugliest form of child labour, is a curse on society. Ravaged by disease, crime, exploitation and...
IMF hopes
Updated 14 Sep, 2024

IMF hopes

Constant borrowing is not the solution to the nation’s deep-seated economic woes and structural issues.
Media unity
14 Sep, 2024

Media unity

IN recent years, media owners and senior decision-makers in newsrooms across the country have found themselves in...
Grim example
Updated 14 Sep, 2024

Grim example

The state, as well as the ulema, must reiterate the fact that no one can be allowed to play executioner in blasphemy cases.