Financial Supervisory Service Publishes Major Consumer Complaints Cases for Q2
Mr. A, who was using a negative balance loan from B Bank, fell behind on interest payments, triggering an obligation for early debt repayment. In response, B Bank offset the loan with the "Moim Account" that Mr. A had been using under his name. Although Mr. A claimed this action was unfair, the financial authorities sided with the bank. This was because it was confirmed that B Bank had already informed customers of such precautions through product brochures and other materials.
The Moim Account is an account under the name of the group leader, who holds all rights over the balance, including payment of group fees and account closure. The bank had already notified, through product brochures and other documents, that if there is a loss of benefit of term such as loan delinquency, deposits under the debtor's name can be offset against the loan principal and interest. Therefore, it was judged difficult to consider the bank's handling of the matter as unfair.
The Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) disclosed major complaints and dispute cases for the second quarter of this year on the 26th.
Mr. C recently received a discount on his car insurance premium based on a mileage special clause. However, he filed a complaint with the FSS claiming that the discount amount informed by the insurer was underestimated compared to the discount corresponding to the actual driving distance. The complaint was not accepted because the clause stipulates that the annual mileage is calculated based on a certain formula for annualization, not the actual driving distance. The FSS ruled in favor of the insurer, stating that the difference in discount amount arose because the mileage calculated by the formula in the policy differed from the actual mileage.
Mr. D did not claim insurance benefits for treatment of a burdened part for five years after applying for the insurance contract. However, the burden clause was not lifted even after that period, and Mr. D argued this was unfair, but his claim was rejected. A burden clause means subscribing to insurance with a condition that excludes coverage for certain parts if there is a history of treatment in those areas. The insurance policy stipulated that the burden clause would be lifted if there was no additional diagnosis or treatment for the relevant part within five years after the insurance application. Although no insurance claims were made, there was a history of treatment for that part, so lifting the burden clause was deemed appropriate.
An FSS official said, "As part of the business innovation roadmap, we disclose major complaints, dispute cases, and dispute judgment criteria quarterly," adding, "These are posted on the FSS website, and card news has also been produced to enhance financial consumers' understanding."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
