THURSDAY-6TH DECEMBER 2007-LETTER ON SAFE DEPOSIT MISLEADING:TRADER

Letter on safe deposit box misleading:Trader
SANDAKAN:
A businessman has claimed the content of the letter which a commercial bank is requiring its customers to execute for termination of the agreement for hire of safe deposit box (SDB) is misleading. Au Hin Loon, the owner of a computer servicing centre, yesterday said the bank wrote two letters addressed to him and his wife dated July 2, 2007 and August 10, 2007 stating that they were no longer providing the SDB facility and requested them to take out their items from the safe deposit box. “Both of us went to the bank on August 17, 2007. We were surprised that we were asked to sign a letter indicating we were the ones who requested for the termination,” he said. “We think it is unfair and not proper, thus, we refused to sign it. One of their staff informed us that they will continue with the closure of the facility because they have the approval from Bank Negara Malaysia,” Au said. While the couple understand that banks could close or open any departments or branches due to their rationalization exercise, they regretted that the customers or the public have become the victims of the process, particularly those staying outside the city.
“Banks are making profits and they should be providing more services to the public. “We wrote to Bank Negara over the matter on October 16, 2007 and received a copy of the letter from them which was addressed to the bank dated November 1, 2007, giving it two weeks to reply to issues brought up by us, Au said. “On December 4, 2007, we went to the bank after failing to obtain a reply from them and since the tenure of our SDB is expiring on December 12, 2007, we also wanted to pay the annual renewal fee but a staff refused to accept our payment. “This staff even told us based on the SDB agreement signed between both parties, the bank has the right to force open our SDB if we did not immediately remove the contents,”Au said. “We are deeply disturbed and dissatisfied with their intended action and it seems that they do not respect consumers’ rights,” he added. Au said he had also forwarded the complaint to the Consumer Association for Sabah and Labuan, Sandakan Chinese Chamber of Commerce and the Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry on December 4, 2007. “I only received their reply this morning and they are saying the document which we were asked to sign is a standard letter of termination before allowing customers to close their SDB in line with the closure of the facility by the bank,” he said. “They were clarifying that the letter was intended to formalize the closure of the SDB by the hirer and they have removed all items from the SDB, that the keys of the SDB have been returned and that they have received the key deposit refund from the bank,” he said. Au pointed out his argument was that it was the bank which wanted the customers to close the SDB and not the latter wanting to terminate the facility. There is a difference between the two. Many customers had signed the letter without reading through the content.