[Resolved] CIBIL — credit card | |
Pls give me the status of my cibil report my birth date is 6th jan 1983 Was this information helpful? | |
Aug 14, 2020 Complaint marked as Resolved | |
 23 Comments | |
Comments
Pls give me the status of cibil my birth date is 01st feb 1981
Reply
DEAR SIR
I HAVE APPLIED FOR LOAN (LOAN AGAINST PROPERTY), IT HAS BEEN REGECTED DUE TO CIBILE REPORT, IT SEAMS I HAVE NOT CLOSED SOME OF MY LOANS ASWELLS AS CREDIT CARDS, HENCE I REQUEST YOU U TO GIVE MY FULL DETAILS SO THAT I WILL REMOVE MY NAME FROM DEFAULTS
MY NAME: S SUBRAMANESWARA RAO
D O B: 06/11/1952
ADDRESS: SASI FLATS NO 41 KRUNJI STREET AMBAL NAGAR PORUR CHENNAI 600116
LAND LINE:[protected]
CELL:[protected]
I HAVE APPLIED FOR LOAN (LOAN AGAINST PROPERTY), IT HAS BEEN REGECTED DUE TO CIBILE REPORT, IT SEAMS I HAVE NOT CLOSED SOME OF MY LOANS ASWELLS AS CREDIT CARDS, HENCE I REQUEST YOU U TO GIVE MY FULL DETAILS SO THAT I WILL REMOVE MY NAME FROM DEFAULTS
MY NAME: S SUBRAMANESWARA RAO
D O B: 06/11/1952
ADDRESS: SASI FLATS NO 41 KRUNJI STREET AMBAL NAGAR PORUR CHENNAI 600116
LAND LINE:[protected]
CELL:[protected]
This chain mail (one version is at the foot of this message) has been doing
the rounds for some time now, but is based on a complete misunderstanding of
the statutory provisions.
Neither the Consitution of India nor the Representation of the People Act,
1950 contain any provision to suggest that failure or refusal to vote can
have any bearing on the outcome of an election at which other people have
duly voted for the candidate of their choice. The provision in question,
"49-O", is actually a mere Rule which has been enacted in order to deal with
a peculiarity of the electronic voting system which India pioneered.
"The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961" have been framed under the
Representation of the People Act, 1961, and make detailed provisions for
everything from filing of nomination papers to casting of votes, counting of
votes, and the like. Separate provisions are made for direct elections such
as to Parliament and State Assemblies, and for indirect voting such as in
electoral colleges. Part IV of the Rules covers "Voting in Parliamentary
and Assembly Constituencies", while Part V covers "Counting of Votes in
Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies". Part IV has two Chapters, with
Chapter I (Rules 28 to 48) applying to "Voting by Ballot", and Chapter II
(Rules 49-A to 49-X), which was added in 1992 to deal with the new
phenomenon of electronic voting, applying to "Voting by Electronic Voting
Machines".
Rule 49-O, which is part of Chapter II, has been introduced in order to
account for all electors who have attended and signed into the polling
station. In the case of voting by ballot, the actual number of ballot
papers issued are required to be tallied with the votes cast in order to
avoid any malpractice, and this account includes ballot papers which have
been properly marked, ballot papers which have been accidentally
torn/defaced, ballot papers which are seized from electors who refuse or
fail to put them into the ballot boxes, and so on. Since ballot papers are
physically verifiable and can be counted (whether from the ballot boxes or
from sealed envelopes containing defaced/torn/misused ballot papers), there
was no need prior to 1992 to have any special Rule to obtain the signature
of an elector who attended the polling process but refused or failed to cast
her/his vote.
However, when voting is done by electronic voting machines, there is no
physical manifestation of the vote. Hence, all accounting has to be done by
verification of the registers which are signed by the electors before going
behind the screen and punching a button on the voting machine. There being
no such thing as a blank or defaced or torn ballot, it became necessary to
provide that if an elector, after coming to the polling station and signing
in, refuses or declines to cast her/his vote, then a remark has to be made
in the register and the signature/thumb impression of the elector has to be
obtained against such remark. This remark/entry is then relied upon while
counting votes under Rule 66-A, which is a special Rule for counting of
votes cast in electronic voting machines, since the machine only records the
votes actually cast, and has no means of knowing how many people signed in
but failed/refused to cast their votes.
Rule 66-A read with Form 17-C make it clear that the purpose of Rule 49-O is
only to ensure that electors who fail to vote ater signing into the pollking
station have done so of their own accord and not due to any force or
coercion. Form 17-A is the form in which the polling booth register is to
be maintained, which is signed by all electors when they enter the polling
booth and are identified against the list of valid voters at that booth.
Form 17-C records the final count of votes as per Rule 66-A, and this has to
be signed by the election agents of all the candidates as it reflects the
final result of the tally. Column 6 of Form 17-C requires that the number of
electors who actually cast their votes as per the voting machine, be added
to the number of those who declined/refused to vote, i.e. those in respect
of whom a remark is entered against their names in the voting register (Form
17-A) under Rule 49-O, and that the total of these two figures should tally
with the total who signed the voter's register. In case of any discrepancy
in this total, the polling agents have to explain the discrepancy in Form
17-C. This is nothing but an accounting procedure devised in order to
ensure that there is neither any bogus voting, nor any force used to prevent
valid electors from casting their votes.
Importantly, there is nothing whatsoever in the Act or Rules to suggest that
if electors either individually or collectively decline to cast their votes
and get this fact recorded under Rule 49-O, then this would have any effect
whatsoever on the election. Elections are won (or lost) on the basis of
votes cast in favour of different candidates, and not on abstentions.
The Greek definition of "" remains as valid as ever, and Rule 49-O has
done nothing to elevate a person who refuses to vote out of that category.
Cheers.
Chander Uday Singh.
> From: XYZ
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:01 AM
> To: Delhi Users; Mumbai Users; Chennai Users; Bangalore Users
> Subject: FW: "I VOTE NOBODY".
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: ABCD
> Subject: "I VOTE NOBODY"...
>
> Dear All,
>
> Did you know that there is a system in our constitution, as per
> the 1969 act, in section "49-O" that a person can go to the
> polling booth, confirm his identity, get his finger marked and
> convey the presiding election officer that he doesn't want to vote
> anyone!
> Yes such a feature is available, but obviously these seemingly
> notorious leaders have never disclosed it.
> This is called "49-O". Why should you go and say "I VOTE
> NOBODY"... because, in a ward, if a candidate wins, say by 123
> votes, and that Particular ward has received "49-O" votes more
> than 123, then that polling will be cancelled and will have to be
> re-polled. Not only that, but the candidature of the contestants
> will be removed and they cannot contest the re-polling, since
> people had already expressed their decision on them. This would
> bring fear into parties and hence look for genuine candidates for
> their parties for election. This would change the way; of our
> whole political system... it is seemingly surprising why the
> election commission has not revealed such a feature to the public...
>
> Please spread this news to as many as you know...
> Seems to be a wonderful weapon against corrupt parties in India ...
> show your power, expressing your desire not to
> Vote for anybody, is even more powerful than voting... so don't miss
> your chance.
>
from: Manubhai V Mehta
Email id :[protected]@hotmail.com
[protected][protected][protected][protected]
Citizens Take Charge is a registered trademark.
For problems or questions regarding this Web site contact dhruva.[protected]@gmail.com.
Last updated: 03/13/09.
the rounds for some time now, but is based on a complete misunderstanding of
the statutory provisions.
Neither the Consitution of India nor the Representation of the People Act,
1950 contain any provision to suggest that failure or refusal to vote can
have any bearing on the outcome of an election at which other people have
duly voted for the candidate of their choice. The provision in question,
"49-O", is actually a mere Rule which has been enacted in order to deal with
a peculiarity of the electronic voting system which India pioneered.
"The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961" have been framed under the
Representation of the People Act, 1961, and make detailed provisions for
everything from filing of nomination papers to casting of votes, counting of
votes, and the like. Separate provisions are made for direct elections such
as to Parliament and State Assemblies, and for indirect voting such as in
electoral colleges. Part IV of the Rules covers "Voting in Parliamentary
and Assembly Constituencies", while Part V covers "Counting of Votes in
Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies". Part IV has two Chapters, with
Chapter I (Rules 28 to 48) applying to "Voting by Ballot", and Chapter II
(Rules 49-A to 49-X), which was added in 1992 to deal with the new
phenomenon of electronic voting, applying to "Voting by Electronic Voting
Machines".
Rule 49-O, which is part of Chapter II, has been introduced in order to
account for all electors who have attended and signed into the polling
station. In the case of voting by ballot, the actual number of ballot
papers issued are required to be tallied with the votes cast in order to
avoid any malpractice, and this account includes ballot papers which have
been properly marked, ballot papers which have been accidentally
torn/defaced, ballot papers which are seized from electors who refuse or
fail to put them into the ballot boxes, and so on. Since ballot papers are
physically verifiable and can be counted (whether from the ballot boxes or
from sealed envelopes containing defaced/torn/misused ballot papers), there
was no need prior to 1992 to have any special Rule to obtain the signature
of an elector who attended the polling process but refused or failed to cast
her/his vote.
However, when voting is done by electronic voting machines, there is no
physical manifestation of the vote. Hence, all accounting has to be done by
verification of the registers which are signed by the electors before going
behind the screen and punching a button on the voting machine. There being
no such thing as a blank or defaced or torn ballot, it became necessary to
provide that if an elector, after coming to the polling station and signing
in, refuses or declines to cast her/his vote, then a remark has to be made
in the register and the signature/thumb impression of the elector has to be
obtained against such remark. This remark/entry is then relied upon while
counting votes under Rule 66-A, which is a special Rule for counting of
votes cast in electronic voting machines, since the machine only records the
votes actually cast, and has no means of knowing how many people signed in
but failed/refused to cast their votes.
Rule 66-A read with Form 17-C make it clear that the purpose of Rule 49-O is
only to ensure that electors who fail to vote ater signing into the pollking
station have done so of their own accord and not due to any force or
coercion. Form 17-A is the form in which the polling booth register is to
be maintained, which is signed by all electors when they enter the polling
booth and are identified against the list of valid voters at that booth.
Form 17-C records the final count of votes as per Rule 66-A, and this has to
be signed by the election agents of all the candidates as it reflects the
final result of the tally. Column 6 of Form 17-C requires that the number of
electors who actually cast their votes as per the voting machine, be added
to the number of those who declined/refused to vote, i.e. those in respect
of whom a remark is entered against their names in the voting register (Form
17-A) under Rule 49-O, and that the total of these two figures should tally
with the total who signed the voter's register. In case of any discrepancy
in this total, the polling agents have to explain the discrepancy in Form
17-C. This is nothing but an accounting procedure devised in order to
ensure that there is neither any bogus voting, nor any force used to prevent
valid electors from casting their votes.
Importantly, there is nothing whatsoever in the Act or Rules to suggest that
if electors either individually or collectively decline to cast their votes
and get this fact recorded under Rule 49-O, then this would have any effect
whatsoever on the election. Elections are won (or lost) on the basis of
votes cast in favour of different candidates, and not on abstentions.
The Greek definition of "" remains as valid as ever, and Rule 49-O has
done nothing to elevate a person who refuses to vote out of that category.
Cheers.
Chander Uday Singh.
> From: XYZ
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:01 AM
> To: Delhi Users; Mumbai Users; Chennai Users; Bangalore Users
> Subject: FW: "I VOTE NOBODY".
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: ABCD
> Subject: "I VOTE NOBODY"...
>
> Dear All,
>
> Did you know that there is a system in our constitution, as per
> the 1969 act, in section "49-O" that a person can go to the
> polling booth, confirm his identity, get his finger marked and
> convey the presiding election officer that he doesn't want to vote
> anyone!
> Yes such a feature is available, but obviously these seemingly
> notorious leaders have never disclosed it.
> This is called "49-O". Why should you go and say "I VOTE
> NOBODY"... because, in a ward, if a candidate wins, say by 123
> votes, and that Particular ward has received "49-O" votes more
> than 123, then that polling will be cancelled and will have to be
> re-polled. Not only that, but the candidature of the contestants
> will be removed and they cannot contest the re-polling, since
> people had already expressed their decision on them. This would
> bring fear into parties and hence look for genuine candidates for
> their parties for election. This would change the way; of our
> whole political system... it is seemingly surprising why the
> election commission has not revealed such a feature to the public...
>
> Please spread this news to as many as you know...
> Seems to be a wonderful weapon against corrupt parties in India ...
> show your power, expressing your desire not to
> Vote for anybody, is even more powerful than voting... so don't miss
> your chance.
>
from: Manubhai V Mehta
Email id :[protected]@hotmail.com
[protected][protected][protected][protected]
Citizens Take Charge is a registered trademark.
For problems or questions regarding this Web site contact dhruva.[protected]@gmail.com.
Last updated: 03/13/09.
Dear Sirs,
I have been a victim of CIBIL and banker highhandedness but decided not to take this lying down. here is what i did to improve my cibil records. the CIBIL is not a public enterprise yet behaves as one. some one needs to bring them down and file a PIL against them
As a background I had a dispute of a transaction with a bank credit card. this continued for 8 years and they finally closed the account since they were unable to answer my letters (they had not delivered the credit card to me and yet charged me for using it). upon closing the account, they malafiedly updated my cibil records to show this as written off overdue amount.
All my loan and new card applications started to be declined and then I realized what had happened. I could not afford these credit issues so I decided to settle with the credit card bank (despite them having closed the account) and under protest so as to clear my name in CIBIL. I asked them for a settlement proposal. they asked me to pay 30k towards the alleged 1.5 lacs (including interest that had accrued).
1. After I settled my dues with the credit card company, I pursed them for two months both on the phone, email and written letters every few days to update my CIBIL records. They finally stopped answering my calls and still did neither zeroize the account nro udpated CIBIL. infact I restarted receving credit card statements again with interest and service charged accruing once again
2. I lodged an FIR agains the bank and the guy who had proposed the settlement stating cheating fraud etc. and not delivering what they promised in their own proposal despite my depositing the cash.
3. I lodged a complaint with RBI
4. I lodged a complaint with RBI ombudsman - www.bankingombudsman.rbi.org.in and followed up repeatedly for about 2 months . finally this settlement made around nov 08 showed strains and BO rbi invited me for a meeting with the bankers in March 2009 after 3-5 months of this issue.
5. the bankers stated in the meeting that typically they mention Written OFF as the cibil status on all settled accounts, the RBI OB almost slammed the banker and said this was wrong and they need to mention that the account has been settled and also remove my name from all defaulter lists such as MCNF . they are also to provide a zeroized statement withen 1 month of the meeting
beware that the peons at the RBI BO are in deep pockets with teh bankers and they will dissuade you from attending the meeting stating that your cibil report is as it should be after settlement "written off". donot accept that and meet the secretary and the cheif of BO and state your issue.
you WILL be avenged as BO might levy penalties as well against the bankers
TAGS: HSBC, credit card, CIBIL, RBI banking ombudsman, defaulter, written off, settlement
I have been a victim of CIBIL and banker highhandedness but decided not to take this lying down. here is what i did to improve my cibil records. the CIBIL is not a public enterprise yet behaves as one. some one needs to bring them down and file a PIL against them
As a background I had a dispute of a transaction with a bank credit card. this continued for 8 years and they finally closed the account since they were unable to answer my letters (they had not delivered the credit card to me and yet charged me for using it). upon closing the account, they malafiedly updated my cibil records to show this as written off overdue amount.
All my loan and new card applications started to be declined and then I realized what had happened. I could not afford these credit issues so I decided to settle with the credit card bank (despite them having closed the account) and under protest so as to clear my name in CIBIL. I asked them for a settlement proposal. they asked me to pay 30k towards the alleged 1.5 lacs (including interest that had accrued).
1. After I settled my dues with the credit card company, I pursed them for two months both on the phone, email and written letters every few days to update my CIBIL records. They finally stopped answering my calls and still did neither zeroize the account nro udpated CIBIL. infact I restarted receving credit card statements again with interest and service charged accruing once again
2. I lodged an FIR agains the bank and the guy who had proposed the settlement stating cheating fraud etc. and not delivering what they promised in their own proposal despite my depositing the cash.
3. I lodged a complaint with RBI
4. I lodged a complaint with RBI ombudsman - www.bankingombudsman.rbi.org.in and followed up repeatedly for about 2 months . finally this settlement made around nov 08 showed strains and BO rbi invited me for a meeting with the bankers in March 2009 after 3-5 months of this issue.
5. the bankers stated in the meeting that typically they mention Written OFF as the cibil status on all settled accounts, the RBI OB almost slammed the banker and said this was wrong and they need to mention that the account has been settled and also remove my name from all defaulter lists such as MCNF . they are also to provide a zeroized statement withen 1 month of the meeting
beware that the peons at the RBI BO are in deep pockets with teh bankers and they will dissuade you from attending the meeting stating that your cibil report is as it should be after settlement "written off". donot accept that and meet the secretary and the cheif of BO and state your issue.
you WILL be avenged as BO might levy penalties as well against the bankers
TAGS: HSBC, credit card, CIBIL, RBI banking ombudsman, defaulter, written off, settlement
Customer satisfaction rating Customer satisfaction rating is a complex algorithm that helps our users determine how good
a company is at responding and resolving complaints by granting from 1 to 5 stars for each
complaint and then ultimately combining them all for an overall score.
Read more
Read more
54%
Complaints
1314
Pending
0
Resolved
686
![Credit Information Bureau India [CIBIL] Phone](/img/bn/phone.svg "Credit Information Bureau India [CIBIL] Phone"){kind=small}
+91 22 6140 4300 [Helpline]
+91 22 6638 4600 [Corp Office]
![Credit Information Bureau India [CIBIL] Website](/img/bn/www.svg "Credit Information Bureau India [CIBIL] Website"){kind=small}
![Credit Information Bureau India [CIBIL] Address](/img/bn/location.svg "Credit Information Bureau India [CIBIL] Address"){kind=small}
Hoechst House, 6th Floor, 193 Backbay Reclamation, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India - 400021