Credit card controversial arbitrary award
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 25 December 2017
This query is : Resolved
IN 2008, Barclays has Sent to me Voluntarily an Credit Card With Limit of Rs.80.000.00, I was using the Card Sparingly and in 2010 due to my Health problem, my Business had come an standstill, I approached the CCare of Barclays through Email sent for Amicable Amount Settlement, nothing heard from them, on 22nd June 2017,
An Lawyer notice sent to me, it says the Barclays credit card account was sold to Phoenix, and asking me to pay an Exorbitant Amount of Rs.104000.00, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this notice,and it is mentioned that an Sole Arbitrator Communication Address, I replied on 18th June 2017 denying all his contention in notice,
From 2011 to 2017, nothing heard from Barclays, it does no sent me any communication that it had sold the CCard a/c sold to Phoenix,
Simultaneously in 2nd week Feb 2017, an person from Kotak bank had come to my office and showed me an statement as Rs.52,000.00 as Dues to be paid, I told him that from 2011 to 2017 nothing heard from the Barclay, in spite of sending many emails to their CCare for Amicable Settlement for amount of Rs.20,000.00 in 5 to 8 Emi's, It is a surprise that you had come now saying that the Dues is Rs.52.000.00, and I showed him all email sent to the Barclays,
He informed that He will take up this case to his higher ups and the final decision amount will be intimated to me as early as possible,nothing heard from him till Aug 2017,
On 10th Aug 2017, an Email was sent to me from the Kotak man informing that Amicable Amount Settled for Rs.22000.00 Payable in 9 Emi's, on 25th of every month,
Further on 14th Aug 2017, an notice from Sole Arbitrator sent to me to appear in his office on 30th Aug 2017, at 5.00 PM for the Arbitration, I met him at 6.00 PM on 30.8.2017, in his residence in that complex, since the office as address mentioned was in terrace and it was closed,I handed over an Reply informing all the facts happened as mentioned above along with all copies plus Email copy of Amicable settled amount of Rs.22.000/-as sent to me,
He called an Kotak bank person, put him on his mobile and directed to speak to him, he said he will look into it and will be informed to me at the earliest,he had sent me his email Id to my mobile,
On 31st Aug 2017, I sent an mail to the kotak bank person, with all the copies which was handed over to Sole Arbitrator,plus the Email copy of his own banks amicably settled amount, he sent me an acknowledgement for my mail and he did not mentioned anything about the amicable settlement mail,
Lastly to my surprise an Arbitrator Award of dated 28th No 2017 ( received on 14.12.2017) for demanding to pay the Exorbitant Amount of Rs.104000/- within 3 months of this Award,
I could not understand how this type of controversial Arbitrary Award was sent to me, firstly No relies to my many mails sent to CCare of Barclays from 2011 to 2017,
Secondly nothing informed to me about barclays sold the CCard account to Phoenix,
Thirdly, I Assume that there is no communication in between two groups of Kotak Bank,
Finally without giving any sufficient time for for my defense to him, he sent the Controversial Arbitrary Award to me,
Kindly inform me what must be my next course of Action to this case,
Regards,
K.Shanmuga Moorthy,
Email.ID:k.shanmugamoorthy@gmail.com
An Law Abiding Person of India.
Kumar Doab
(Expert) 25 December 2017
AQ......................so NO reply...............
Kumar Doab
(Expert) 25 December 2017
Pls post with your ID...............
P. Venu
(Expert) 26 December 2017
How come the arbitrator was appointed? Please examine.
Even otherwise, recovery of debt in the nature of credit card dues, if any, is hit by limitation.
So also, the Arbitrator, even if the award is lawful and valid, has no authority to enforce the same. The award needs to be got executed through the District Court.
Sankaranarayanan
(Expert) 26 December 2017
The Indian Act permits approach to the court only at the award stage (and not during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings). Hence, Section 13(5) and 16(6) of the 1996 Act furnish two additional grounds for challenge of an arbitral award (over and above the ones stipulated in s 34 of the 1996 Act referred to below). Section 34 of the 1996 Act contains the main grounds for setting aside the award. It is based on Art 34 of the Model Law and, like Art 34, states that the grounds contained therein are the ‘only’ grounds on which an award may be set aside.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 27 December 2017
1. Anonymous author, no reply
2. Too long story, no time and reply.
