HDFC Bank’s invite-only program that unethically assumes you are already in and are willing to pay for it

If you are impacted by this disingenuous act by HDFC, please write to foundation@moneylife.in – hope this can help Sucheta Dalal and MoneyLife to pursue this via RBI and get HDFC Bank to not only stop this devious tactic, but also apologize to customers publicly.

HDFC’s response to me on this issue is appended in the end. In essence, the bank tells me that they have been fair and transparent in communicating these charges. Then, I wonder why there are so many people (click on the images to see full sized picture) who seem completely surprised by these charges and needed me to tell them they are being charged?

tweets04  tweets03  tweets02  tweets01

Another post on HDFC”s unethical move, by another customer:
400 crores scam by HDFC Bank.You could be a victim too, even with other banks. Read how.

[UPDATES as on February 10th and February 20th, 2017 – at the end of this post.]

ORIGINAL POST

My first salary was credited to a HDFC bank account. In New Delhi. I have since had HDFC accounts—salary, personal, home loan, car loan, you name it—for over 2 decades.

Now, I’m not adding these details to sentimentalize this post. (Oh well, that first salary part is a bit maudlin, I accept!). The point is, there’s way too much banking between me and HDFC that I can’t wash them off if the need arises and move to another bank, without a lot of wasted time and effort. So, why am I even considering that?

Let me explain what the problem is, first.

I received a mail from HDFC Bank on January 30th. The subject said,
“Dear Karthik Srinivasan, Welcome to HDFC Bank Preferred Banking Programme!”

I get at least 2-3 emails from HDFC every week. All of them ensure that they call me a ‘preferred’ banking customer. This has been going on for over 2-3 years, if I recall right. Now, I have no idea what this ‘preferred’ banking entails. I’m totally open to the possibility that I was shown a laundry list of fine print when this account was opened and I may have signed it too.

Anyway, I opened the mail curiously, to know why I’m being welcomed into something that I’m adequately a part of. This was the entirety of that mail.

hdfc mail 2

Crux: an invite-only program where a virtual relationship manager has been assigned to me.

My first thought: Oh great! The once-every-2-years that I actually call someone from HDFC bank can be slightly easier now!

Then, I notice this.

A nominal Programme Management fee of Rs. 100, per quarter is applicable per customer ID, on the Virtual Relationship Management Programme for Savings and Current Account holder, effective Jan’16 post 1 year of completion into the programme.

Service tax applicable.

If you wish to opt out of the Virtual Relationship Management Programme,
Click here

What?

Let me deconstruct that.

I was enrolled into this ‘program’ in January 2016. After a year of being in the program that I did not ask to be enrolled into and have no recollection of being in (I did check my emails from 2015, in December, and 2016, in January and February, as also emails from HDFC when I had opened this account), I will, from now on, be charged Rs.100 per quarter to be in this program.

And, service tax extra.

What cheesed me off is not the nominal amount. It was,

If you wish to opt out of the Virtual Relationship Management Programme,
Click here

This is an opt-out program.

So, I clicked on the link and performed the 2 actions needed to unenroll myself out of this invite-only program that presumes I’m already in.

hd1

hd2

In simple terms it means, HDFC depends on a customer’s action to not charge him/her. The usual, sane and honest method is, ‘HDFC depends on a customer’s action to charge him/her’. It means HDFC seeks consent to charge a customer. What they are doing is seeking consent to not charge a customer.

In other words, HDFC depends on the customer to,
1. open the mail,
2. read through the contents,
3. notice a way to opt-out,
4. click the opt-out link,
5. choose ‘No’ as confirmation and
6. submit the form
… to not charge him/her.

If the customer doesn’t perform even one of the above 6 tasks, he/she will be charged.

To make it even more explicit, figuratively, HDFC presented me with the following:
I, Karthik Srinivasan, agree to pay Rs.100 (plus service tax) per quarter towards the Virtual Relationship Management Programme. Unless I click on the button below to indicate my preference not to be part of this program, I’d be charged for this service.

This is clearly unethical and disingenuous.

It particularly hits home for me because I was in Flipkart, handling their corporate communications when they faced a similar issue. Back in 2012, when Flipkart launched the ‘save credit card’ feature (where customers have an option of saving their credit card details for easy payment in the future) after getting a PCI-DSS certification, they rolled out the feature where the check-box for saving the card is checked, by default. This is a classic opt-out tactic that is known to increase sign-ups/uptake of whatever program you are running.

It means, customers, who are previously unaware that Flipkart had a ‘save-card’ feature now need to take note of this feature and uncheck that box to opt out of this feature. In other words, Flipkart had pre-decided that customers want to be a part of it. And unless a customer explicitly asks not be part of it (by unchecking the box), they will continue to be part of this.

After this service was launched, there was a lot of hue and cry about Flipkart’s unethical practice in rolling out this feature. What was truly admirable, back then, was the fact that Flipkart not only acknowledged this error in judgement and set right the process (to opt-in; that is, give customers an unchecked box and let them exercise the option to be a part of this program, or not), but they also blogged about both the error and the reason why they changed it.

Here is the blog, from 2012.

HDFC is treading a far more dangerous ground. Flipkart did not charge money from people who forgot to opt out. They merely saved some data without explicit consent. HDFC, in this case, is going to take money from people who may have either ignored the mail, or forgotten to see the message about opting out in the mail. I’m fairly sure there are RBI guidelines that determine that any charge levied on the customer should be done after seeking explicit permission to do so. That is, after explaining to the customer that they are going to be charged for specific services. And not merely inform a customer that they’d be charged from now on for a service and only if they choose not to be part of it, will they be left alone without a charge.

The irony is that this HDFC mail starts by calling it an ‘invite-only’ service. The crucial point is that my option to decline the invite hinges on my opening and reading this email fully, and taking appropriate action.

I emailed HDFC Bank asking them why this is an opt-out and not an opt-in. I tweeted to them too. I got the following response after 2 days.

hdfc-response

They have merely reiterated the status quo to me – that this is what it is, but hey, we did give you an option to get out of this scheme and about being charged. Tough luck if you didn’t read the mail.

You could ask me a question based on ‘caveat emptor’ (buyer beware), which says, ‘that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made’. The argument could be, I, as a customer, should be vigilant and alert enough to go through all communication from my bank and take note of the charges proposed to be levied on me and communicate my intent to agree or disagree appropriately. This is a fair argument, but let me present how it may look like, in the real world.

You enter your favorite, and usual, cloth store. You try out 3-4 clothes and decide that you don’t like the fit and decide to try another store. As you walk out, the sales guy calls you back and says that you need to buy them. You ask him why. He says that the price tags in each of the clothing pieces you tried have a fine print that if you try them, you’d need to buy them too. That your trial amounts to a legal contract between the seller and buyer. This is opt-out. If it was opt-in, before you enter the trial room, a store person would have told you the rules and sought your consent.

If you have got this email, or recall being in something called ‘Virtual Relationship Management Programme’, please do check your email and take action based on your interest and intent.

So, considering all this, and the effort it’d take for me to close *all* my HDFC accounts and move to another bank, I’m not going that route. Instead, I’m going to try another route – to try and make HDFC own responsibility for this lapse in ethics and apologize, not just to me, but in public, to all their customers.

I’m going to share this blog every single day for the rest of the year – one day in the morning and the next, in the evening (and so on) on Twitter. And once every week on Facebook and LinkedIn for the rest of the year. I’ll tag relevant people to each tweet/post as necessary to ensure that it is read and understood by as many people as possible.

I’m very curious to see if my bank has an ethical stand on this issue at all.

UPDATE: February 10, 2017

I received a couple of calls from HDFC on February 3, 2017. They tried to convince me with the content of the tweets (above) and after my telling them repeatedly and firmly (and politely) that I’m not convinced and that they are merely repeating the same thing again without addressing what I’m alleging, they sought 2 days’ time to revert. There was no response after 2 days, so I continued my daily updates on Twitter.

Then, on February 9, 2017, I received the following email.

hdfc-letter

My issue remains the same, while I fully appreciate all the efforts from HDFC in improving the benefit for customers.

  1. Regarding testing the service for 1 year – I have no recollection of any communication from HDFC about launching VRM for me. I keep getting a call from ICICI or HDFC that says, ‘Sir, we have appointed a dedicated service manager for you and he’d like to come and meet you’. I say that I’m not interested, every single time.
  2. The opt-out experience is the fundamental crux of my blog post above. I have explained in detail how disingenuous it is. If it complies with regulatory requirements (I HIGHLY doubt it would, particularly when customers are charged), it still doesn’t mean it is ethical. HDFC is looking at compliance, I’m talking about ethics. Vastly different topics.
  3. I have never, ever received communication on charges for VRM. Most comments in this blog post, and on Twitter, point to many people not having any awareness about this charge.
  4. The laundry list of ‘key benefits’ for a ‘nominal’ Rs.100! Wow! Where did this list suddenly materialize from? You see the original opt-out mail from HDFC, above? Doesn’t that portray that the Rs.100 charge is *just* for VRM? But now, miraculously, there are many more benefits for Rs.100. I’m sorry, but the point is still the same – please explain these to your customers, and let them agree to pay the charge per quarter consciously. Do not just take the money off their accounts just because you believe that the ‘nominal’ fee’s benefits far outweigh the charge. Let people, who actually own the money, decide that.

UPDATE: February 20, 2017

This does not look like a ‘Preferred Customer’ problem alone. Here are 2 examples.

1. Here is Rashmi R Padhy talking about the same opt-out problem with regard to a Classic Banking Program.

rashmi

2. Here is another customer of HDFC mentioning that the opt-out link did not work for him!

nemo

Comments

comments

Article written by

  • Karthick

    Wow. I digged thru my mail and I have a similar one from HDFC. Rs. 100 per quarter. I’m contacting HDFC immediately. Attaching this post!

  • Karthick

    My mail doesn’t have that opt out button/link. So I have to get in touch with HDFC customer care to opt out.

  • TLNOIW

    Terrible. But it seems a standard practice with many financial services outfits. Recently I got a message from CitrusPay thanking me for “signing up” with them. I was puzzled at first – then I realized that CitrusPay has an opt-out, rather than opt-in whenever you pay a merchant using CitrusPay. Why isn’t there a clear law that safeguards consumer interest in these things? Will a Change.org petition work? There is little or no activism here…

    • TLNOIW

      To be clear, the merchant uses CitrusPay gateway – it wasn’t my choice to use CitrusPay.

    • Ramu Sudarsan

      Ramu S ·
      HDFC BANK fined 3 lakhs for such unsolited promotional e-mails.

      https://indiankanoon.org/doc/65160954/

  • Reshmi Iyer

    I don’t see the opt out option in the mailer. How do I go about canceling this service foisted upon me?

    • In that case, you’d need to contact the bank, either via email or phone and ask them,
      1. How they charged you without your permission (ask them to show proof that they intimated these charges and you consented, knowing what you get, for the fee)?
      2. Ask them to opt out and reverse the charges.

      Quite a few people have done this, since they didn’t get the ‘otp out’ link in the email.

  • Ravi Raman

    Corporate hunger!!

  • Raminder Hora

    This guy Karthik Shrinivasan is customer who any bank would avoid dealing with. First of all, you are defaming the bank for no reason. Thank your stars you are still a client, and HDFC is still in the market. You are not in courts thanks to that fact. Second of all, your long blog posts smells of ignorance on your part and not the bank. Please set your postal adress right and try to communicate with your bank often. People like you think they can just sit and the bank comes to you to change your diaper every now and then. Be thankful they save they money which otherwise you will spend drinking. P.S i do not bank with HDFC. I just find your post hilarious.

  • Pingback: How HDFC Bank may discretely swindle you for new ‘services’ and how you can avoid it()

  • Pingback: How HDFC Bank may discretely charge you for new ‘services’ and how you can avoid it()