File police complaint against debt collector and bank officers for criminal intimidation under section 506 of IPC

2) mention that you have been harassed and threatened by debt collector and inspite of repeated complaints bank did not take any action

Measure available to you is to file police complain against threat. You are defaulter in repayment so remedies are very limited.

ask them for settlement,

Firstly, there has been a law with regards to the bank for their debt collection.

Secondly, if someone stops paying the payments then they may only file a suit for recovery of the same, but they can’t threaten anyone.

Thirdly, in fact, after the number of incidents with people being beaten and threaten, some judgments came from the Supreme Court as if the banks would do like that then their licences may be cancelled.

Fourthly, you please file a police complain against hose who have been threatening you.

Please consult a Civil Lawyer of your area as per the latest SC Ruling they suppose not to do such things with the customers.

Consider settling the bank's dues by requesting for a 'One Time Settlement' offer

request to waive all interest and penalty

pay the principal or substantial portion of it and buy peace for yourself

1. File a police complaint against the branch manager and goons under Section 506 IPC for criminal intimidation.

2,. The bank can at the most file a civil suit for recovery of money against the debtor but cannot resort to these tactics which have been denounced by the Supreme Court.

1) You can make complaints in consumer forum. And ask leverage from bank to pay your credit card amount.

2) tell in details how you are facing problems in the life and send notice via lawyer.

1. Avoid taking their calls while in office.

2. Since the bank is creditor it can call you seeking repayment and there is no illegality in it. There is no crime either if they call you in your office number seeking repayment.

3. If they threaten you or visit your office to intimidate or defame you in public then you can take legal action against them. Otherwise no case will lie against them.

4. Since you are defaulter you are legally obliged to repay your debt. Unemployment for some time is no excuse at all.

5. So I would advise you to talk to the ban and settle the amount. Otherwise they will chase you and you will remain liable for repayment.

They can't resort to these types of unruly practices endeavor to recover the debt from you.

Any recovery from you has to strictly adhere to the stipulations contained in the agreement you signed with them at the time of availing the credit card facility. At anytime they harass you again, you may send them a Legal Notice. You also have the option of approaching the Police and lodging a crminal complaint at anytime this behavior is repeated.

It is useless to sue the bank instead talk to them for settlement and nigotiate the amount to settle. No interest and penalties should be considered in settlement only the pure outstanding after the nigotiate amount to be paid.

You first lodge a criminal complaint against the recovery agent for his unlawful and illegal activities.

You may also inform your office to not to entertain such mischievous calls and may ask them to give a warning to the agent for his acts which are illegal.

You issue a legal notice to the bank about this and may instruct them to proceed legally by following due process of law in this regard instead of adopting such cheap tactics.

1. SBI breached the contract by discussing your outstanding details with the HR / Manager.

2. I suggest you to file complaint with police on the same.

3. You may also issue legal notice to bank asking for at least 6 months time to pay back the debt.

Dear Sir,

You can take civil and criminal action as Supreme Court says as follows:

==========================================================================================

ICCI Bank Limited vs. Prakash Kaur case,

The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement reiterated its earlier stand that banks cannot deploy musclemen for recovery of loans from defaulters thus forcing them to end their lives.

"We deem it appropriate to remind the banks and other financial institutions that we live in a civilised country and are governed by the rule of law," a bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Dalveer Bhandari said.

The court while dismissing the ICICI Bank's plea refused to delete the Delhi High Court's remarks that held the bank and its musclemen responsible for abetting a youth to commit suicide by humiliating him and taking away his motorcycle financed by the largest private sector bank.

It also asked the ICICI Bank to to pay Rs 25,000 as cost of this litigation to the respondents within three weeks and directed the Delhi Police to conclude the investigation against the bank expeditiously within three months, keeping in view the gravity of the allegations.

The court also directed the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police to submit the investigation report in the Delhi High Court.

According to the court, complaints received by Reserve Bank regarding violation of the above guidelines and adoption of abusive practices followed by banks recovery agents would be viewed seriously.

Reiterating the RBI Guidelines on Engagement of Recovery Agents, the court said, "The Reserve Bank may consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period. In case of persistent breach of above guidelines, Reserve Bank may consider extending the period of ban or the area of ban."

"RBI had expressed its concern about the number of litigations filed against the banks in the recent past for engaging recovery agents who have purportedly violated the law," Justice Bhandari, writing the verdict for the bench, stated.

RBI in a letter accompanying its April 24, 2008 Guidelines had stated that it might consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period.

ICICI Bank had moved the apex court seeking deletion of some paragraphs in the High Court order which had said that "...the proximate cause of death of the deceased that led him to commit suicide was on account of humiliation caused by the Bank people from where loan was taken by him."

"The modus-operandi employed by the banks like ICICI for realisation of their loan amount and for recovering the possession of the vehicle against which loans are given is extra legal and by no stretch of imagination they can be permitted to employ musclemen and goons for recovery of their dues even from a defaulting party," the High Court had observed.

The High Court order had come on a petition filed by Shanti Devi Sharma, the deceased's mother, seeking a probe against the ICICI bank and its staff for the unlawful action, which led to the suicide of her 34-year old son Himanshu Dev Sharma.

Sharma had committed suicide in October 2005 by hanging himself at his house after he was allegedly intimidated and humiliated in front of his neighbours and family by recovery agents employed by the bank for recovering the loan amount taken for his motorcycle.

The ICICI Bank had contended that it was within its rights to recover loans and had followed the required procedure for recovering dues.