301
AUGUST
2004
BANKING
Minimising Incidence of Frauds
Observing that there were administrative lapses in the processing
of applications and in monitoring of accounts in a large number of cases reported
as frauds, the Advisory Board on Bank, Commercial and Financial Frauds has offered
an illustrative list of deficiencies noticed at the sanctioning/monitoring stage
and suggestions to improve the system. The list of deficiencies noticed and
the suggestions for minimising the incidence of frauds in the advances portfolio
are:
Deficiencies
At the sanction stage
(i) Credit proposals were not appraised with due diligence.
High projections of the borrowing company were not critically analysed. In some
cases, credit limits were sanctioned on the basis of appraisal made by the Merchant
Banking Division for the purpose of public issue and no separate assessment
for credit risk was done.
(ii) Term loans were sanctioned without insisting on the project report, cost
of project and means of finance.
(iii) Additional loans were sanctioned at the time of mid-term
review of projects, without proper appreciation of the market conditions and
the factors which led to time and cost overruns.
(iv) Irregularities based on stock verification reports, audit
reports, etc., pointed out by lower level functionaries were overlooked.
(v) Officials in controlling offices/branches did not give full
facts about borrowers and projects to the sanctioning authorities.
(vi) Despite being aware of the unsatisfactory position of borrowal accounts,
facilities were sanctioned overlooking the deficiencies.
(vii) The fact that at the time of take over of accounts the
borrowing company had irregular accounts with the previous bank/s, was overlooked.
(viii) Adhoc limits were sanctioned frequently even when the
company had regular limits and its accounts were running irregularly.
(ix) The terms and conditions prescribed at the time of sanction
of loan facilities were subsequently relaxed while disbursing funds without
any justification for such relaxation.
(x) In some cases, the sanctioning authorities acted on extraneous influences,
rather than deciding on the merits of the case.
At the monitoring stage
(i) Terms and conditions for sanction of loans and advances
laid down by the central office were blatantly violated by branch officials.
(ii) Companies’ financial standing and end-use of funds by borrowers were not
properly monitored.
(iii) Chartered accountants’/valuers’ certificates were unduly
relied upon without co-relating them with other relevant procedures.
(iv) Banks failed to detect disappearance of stocks given as
security resulting in misappropriation of funds/sale of stock and realisation
of receivables without their knowledge.
(v) Banks failed to ensure adequacy of the security offered
by borrowers, and also failed to verify whether the same asset was mortgaged
to another bank/FI.
(vi) After the funds were lent, accounts were not reviewed periodically.
(vii) Proper assessment of the financial standing of the projects
was not carried out when the accounts were taken over from another bank.
(viii) Excess drawings in the borrowal accounts permitted by
the branch/regional office level functionaries, were ratified by the head office
in a routine manner without examining the need for such permissions.
(ix) Limits sanctioned were allowed to be interchanged indiscriminately without
proper authority.
(x) As regards term loans for financing projects, important
terms and conditions of the sanction stipulated by the board of directors, such
as, induction of technical directors, constitution of audit committees and independent
project monitoring committees were not taken seriously.
Suggestions
(i) Lending banks should obtain a certificate from the borrowers
on a quarterly basis furnishing details of accounts opened with other banks.
(ii) Banks may consider setting up of independent cells for
valuation, to be manned by technical personnel with the right expertise.
(iii) Immediate action should be taken where the malafides/
gross negligence by dealing officials are noticed. Wherever there is a prima-facie
case against the dealing officials, appropriate action in terms of the Central
Vigilance Cell (CVC) guidelines for their inclusion in the list of officers
with doubtful integrity should be initiated in consultation with the Central
Bureau of Investigation.
(iv) Banks should evolve a process of check listing to enable
them to take note of any deficiency while releasing funds to the borrowers or
monitoring their end-use.
(v) Banks should build up a cadre of officials with proper
educational background and training to take care of at least large projects.
(vi) In the case of project finance, disbursements should be
made only after the promoter/borrower brings in his stipulated contribution.
Opening of Current Accounts
The Reserve Bank has clarified to scheduled commercial banks
(SCBs) that where due diligence is carried out on the request of a prospective
customer who is a corporate or large borrower enjoying credit facilities from
more than one bank, banks should inform the consortium leader, if under consortium,
and the concerned banks, if under multiple banking arrangement.
In case no response is received from the existing bankers after
a minimum waiting period of a fortnight, banks may open current accounts of
prospective customers. If a response is received within a fortnight, banks may
assess the situation with reference to the information provided on the prospective
customer. In such a case, banks are not required to solicit a formal no objection.
RTGS Services for Bank Customers
The Reserve Bank has announced that its Real Time Gross Settlement
(RTGS) System has now been enabled for ‘Straight Through Processing’ at the
participant’s, that is, the bank’s end for putting through customer transactions.
Straight through processing of customer transactions allows banks, on receipt
of the credit advice, to directly credit the customer’s account without any
manual intervention. This would facilitate introduction of T+1 settlement in
respect of the stock exchanges. Thirty-two out of the 72 banks, that are participants
in RTGS system, offer customer related RTGS fund transfer services through 840
branches in 134 major centres across the country, accounting for bulk of the
banking business in the country.
The Reserve Bank has also stated that the receiving bank is
under an obligation to credit the beneficiary customer’s account within two
hours of receiving the credit notification at its payment systems gateway. The
list of bank branches, offering RTGS services to their customers is available
on the Reserve Bank’s website (www.rbi.org.in) under the RTGS link for the benefit
of bank customers.
It may be recalled that the RTGS went live on March 26, 2004.
Initially, it was open to the settlement of inter-bank transactions. From April
29, 2004, the RTGS has been open also for the settlement of customer transactions.
RTGS is a ‘Systemically Important Payment System’ and covers the banking and
financial sector in the country. It is a secure electronic fund transfer system,
providing real-time on-line settlement for inter-bank transactions and customer-based
inter-bank transactions of any amount across the country. All the scheduled
banks in the country can be RTGS participants and provide this electronic fund
transfer facility to their customers. Currently, there are 72 banks participating
in the RTGS System for inter-bank settlement, accounting for more than 90 per
cent of the total value of inter-bank settlement in Mumbai.
POLICY
Ceiling for Lok Adalat Cases Raised
The monetary ceiling of the cases to be referred to Lok Adalats,
organised by Civil Courts has been enhanced from Rs. 5 lakh to Rs.20 lakh with
immediate effect. Banks are advised to get in touch with state/district/taluka
level legal services authorities for organising Lok Adalats. The convener banks
of state level bankers’ committee (SLBC) and lead banks of districts have been
advised to give necessary publicity to the scheme through various modes under
their areas of operation.
Inclusion of Self Help Groups under PMRY
To make the Prime Minister’s Rozgar Yojana (PMRY) more effective, self help
groups (SHGs) have been included for assistance under the scheme. The scheme
has been modified as below -
- Educated unemployed youth who volunteer to form SHG to set up self-employed
ventures (common economic activity) should satisfy the eligibility criteria
laid down under the scheme.
- A SHG may consist of 5 – 20 educated unemployed youth.
- There would be no upper ceiling on the loan.
- The loan may be provided as per individual eligibility taking into account
the requirement of the project.
- A SHG may undertake common economic activity without onward lending of the
loan to its members.
- Subsidy may be provided to the SHG as per the individual member’s eligibility
taking into account relaxations provided in North Eastern States, Uttaranchal,
Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir.
- Required margin money contribution should be brought in by the SHG collectively
(subsidy and margin should be equal to 20 percent of the project cost).
- The exemption limit for obtaining collateral security would be Rs. 5 lakh
per borrowal account for projects under the industry sector. Exemption from
collateral would be limited to an amount of Rs.1.00 lakh per member of SHG
for projects under the service and business sectors. In deserving cases, banks
may consider enhancement in limit of exemption of collateral
- Implementing agencies may consider imparting pre-disbursal training to all
the members/majority of the members in the group.
Additional Provisioning for NPAs
All regional rural banks (RRBs) have been advised that from
March 31, 2005, graded higher provisioning according to the age of non-performing
assets (NPAs) in ‘doubtful for more than three years’ category would be introduced.
Consequently, the increase in provisioning requirement on the secured portion
would be applied in a phased manner over a three year period in respect of the
existing NPAs classified as ‘doubtful for more than three years’ as on March
31, 2004.
RRBs have been further advised that in respect of all advances
classified as ‘doubtful for more than three years’ on or after April 1, 2004,
the provisioning requirement would be 100 per cent. Accordingly, from March
31, 2005, the provisioning norm for advances identified as ‘doubtful for more
than three years’ would be as indicated below:
Unsecured portion
The portion of the advance, which is not covered by the realisable
value of tangible security to which the bank has a valid recourse and the realisable
value is estimated on a realistic basis, provision would be to the extent of
100 per cent as earlier.
Secured portion
|
Advances which have
remained in doubtful
category for more than
three years |
Provision requirement
on secured portion |
|
(i) |
outstanding stock of
NPAs
as on March 31, 2004 |
(i) |
60 per cent as on
March 31, 2005
75 per cent as on
March 31, 2006
100 per cent as on
March 31, 2007 |
|
(ii) |
advances classified as
‘doubtful for more than three years’ on or after April 1, 2004 |
(ii) |
100 per cent |
UCBs
UCB Directors not to stand as Surety/Guarantors
The Reserve Bank has clarified that directors of primary urban
co-operative banks (UCBs) and their relatives cannot stand as surety/guarantor
to the loans and advances (both secured and unsecured) sanctioned by the UCBs.
Opening of Current Accounts
Keeping in view the importance of credit discipline for reduction
in NPA level, UCBs have been advised that at the time of opening of current
accounts, they should -
- Insist on a declaration from the account-holder stating that he is not
enjoying any credit facility with any other commercial bank. Alternatively,
UCBs may obtain a declaration from the account holder giving particulars of
credit facilities enjoyed by him with any other commercial bank(s).
- Ascertain whether he/she is a member of any other cooperative society/bank,
if so, the full details, such as, the name of the society/bank, number of
shares held, details of credit facilities, such as, nature, quantum, outstanding,
due dates etc., should be obtained.
In case the account holder is already enjoying any credit facility
from any other commercial/co-operative bank, the bank opening the current account
should duly inform the concerned lending bank(s) and also specifically insist
on obtaining a no-objection certificate from them. If a facility has been availed
from a cooperative bank/society, it is essential for the bank to comply with
the requirements of the Co-operative Societies Act/ Rules of the state concerned
regarding membership and borrowings.
UCBs have been further advised that non-adherence to this procedure
would be perceived as abetting the siphoning of funds and such violations which
are either reported to the Reserve Bank or noticed during its inspection would
render the concerned banks liable for penalty under the Banking Regulation Act,
1949 (As Applicable to Co-operative Societies).
It had been brought to the notice of the Reserve Bank that
some borrowers open current accounts with banks other than the lending bank,
with a view to overcoming credit discipline that is imposed on them by the lending
bank. They usually resort to this practice when their loan accounts turn irregular
and they have no intention of depositing receipts into the loan accounts for
regularising them.
90-Day Norm for Gold/Small Loans
With a view to strengthening the financial health of UCBs and
achieving regulatory convergence of the prudential norms applicable to various
players in the financial sector, it has been decided that the 90-day loan impairment
norm would also be applicable to gold loans and small loans upto Rs 1 lakh from
the year ending March 31, 2005. In other words, from the year ending March 31,
2005, UCBs would be required to classify an asset as non-performing if interest
and/or installment of principal remain overdue for a period of more than 90
days, without any exception.
Earlier, both gold loans and small loans upto Rs 1 lakh were
exempted from the 90-day norm for loan impairment and were governed by the 180-day
norm for classification as NPA .
Temporary Overdraft/Cheque Purchase Facilities
The Reserve Bank has reiterated to UCBs that they should not
sanction temporary overdraft/cheque purchase facilities, which are unsecured
in nature, to borrowers beyond the limits prescribed in it’s circular of April
2003
Capital Investment Subsidy Scheme
The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD)
is implementing a credit linked Capital Investment Subsidy Scheme for construction/
renovation/expansion of rural godowns. Under the scheme NABARD would release
back-ended subsidy for all projects financed by institutions eligible for availing
refinance from NABARD. UCBs have been advised to retain the subsidy admissible
to promoters under the scheme in the ';Subsidy Reserve Fund Account';
(borrower- wise) in their books till the loan component (net of subsidy) is
fully repaid.
It is also advised that the balance lying to the credit of
the Subsidy Reserve Fund Account would not form part of demand and time liabilities
(DTL) for the purpose of statutory liquidity ratio (SLR)/cash reserve ratio
(CRR) under Section 24 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (As Applicable to
Co-operative Societies)/Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934.
INFORMATION
Proposed Board for Payment and Settlement Systems
The Reserve Bank is in the process of constituting a Board for Payment and
Settlement Systems. The Board will be a Committee of the Reserve Bank’s Central
Board. Draft regulations have been forwarded to the Government. The salient
features of the draft Regulations of the Board for Payment and Settlement Systems
are :
- Supervision and regulation of the payment and settlement systems.
- Laying down policies relating to the regulation and supervision of the payment
and settlement systems.
- Laying down of the standards for both existing and future payment and settlement
systems.
- Authorisation of the payment and settlement systems.
- Determination of the criteria for membership of payment and settlement systems,
- Administration of rules and guidelines framed under any statute for the
operators of the payment and settlement systems.
- Taking steps deemed necessary for the effective regulation and supervision
of the payment and settlement systems,
- Creating necessary administrative structure for ensuring effective regulation
and supervision of the payment and settlement systems.
- Other functions and exercise other powers as may be notified by the Central
Board of the Reserve Bank from time to time.
Source: Parliament Questions
|
NPAs and Recoveries* of Public Sector Banks
|
|
(Rupees in Crore)
|
|
Name of the Bank |
NPAs |
Recoveries |
| |
(31.3.2004) |
(31.3.2002) |
(31.3.2003) |
(31.3.2004) |
|
State Bank of India |
11,837 |
3,415 |
4,559 |
6,668 |
| State Bank of
Bikaner and Jaipur
|
484 |
228 |
218 |
172 |
| State Bank of
Hyderabad
|
691 |
273 |
415 |
425 |
| State Bank of
Indore
|
266 |
123 |
166 |
142 |
| State Bank of
Mysore
|
515 |
143 |
170 |
242 |
| State Bank of
Patiala
|
504 |
157 |
239 |
260 |
| State Bank of
Saurashtra
|
200 |
98 |
233 |
176 |
| State Bank of
Travancore
|
662 |
309 |
235 |
225 |
|
Total |
15,159 |
4,746 |
6,236 |
8,312 |
|
Allahabad Bank |
1,418 |
280 |
350 |
571 |
|
Andhra Bank |
615 |
168 |
155 |
180 |
|
Bank of Baroda |
3,799 |
836 |
731 |
1,039 |
|
Bank of India |
3,451 |
941 |
1,067 |
1,144 |
|
Bank of Maharashtra |
954 |
186 |
212 |
216 |
|
Canara Bank |
3,115 |
596 |
782 |
865 |
|
Central Bank of India |
3,092 |
543 |
635 |
831 |
|
Corporation Bank |
722 |
85 |
143 |
107 |
|
Dena Bank |
1,484 |
259 |
549 |
673 |
|
Indian Bank |
1,166 |
1,035 |
561 |
1,039 |
|
Indian Overseas Bank |
1,547 |
356 |
360 |
526 |
| Oriental Bank of
Commerce
|
1,214 |
388 |
235 |
436 |
|
Punjab National Bank |
4,670 |
531 |
500 |
706 |
|
Punjab & Sind Bank |
1,204 |
91 |
181 |
160 |
|
Syndicate Bank |
1,586 |
179 |
171 |
266 |
|
Union Bank of India |
2,347 |
357 |
339 |
716 |
|
Uco Bank |
1,450 |
564 |
373 |
357 |
|
United Bank of India |
764 |
263 |
294 |
340 |
|
Vijaya Bank |
390 |
177 |
182 |
246 |
|
Total |
34,990 |
7,835 |
7,823 |
10,418 |
|
Grand Total |
50,149 |
12,581 |
14,059 |
18,730 |
|
* including
write-offs
Source : Parliament Questions
|
Edited and published by Alpana Killawala for the Reserve Bank of India,
Press Relations Division, Central Office, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Mumbai-400
001 and printed by her at Alco Corporation, A-2, 72, Shah & Nahar
Ind. Estate, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai - 400 013. Readers desirous of subscribing
may remit the subscription, by way of cheque/DD payable at Mumbai to the Director,
DRRP (Sales Section), DEAP, Reserve Bank of India, Amar Building, Sir P. M.
Road, P. B. No. 1036, Mumbai - 400 001. Also available on Internet at www.cir.rbi.org.in