Moneylife » Personal Finance » Banking » Bank Federation appeals CKP Bank depositors not to withdraw funds
Bank Federation appeals CKP Bank depositors not to withdraw funds
- 10 comments
- + COMMENT
| 13/06/2012 05:32 PM |
The RBI action led to many depositors withdrawing their funds with about Rs100 crore being withdrawn since the administrator was appointed
Thane: Stepping in to support the CKP Cooperative Bank, Maharashtra Urban Co-op Banks Federation (MUCBF) has appealed to the bank's depositors not to withdraw their deposits, else a moratorium from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) was imminent, reports PTI.
Addressing the depositors of the troubled bank, Vidyadhar Anaskar, chairman of the Federation said that unlike some other banks, there has been no swindling of funds in this bank and the Reserve Bank recently appointed an administrator for some violation of norms by the previous Board of Directors. However, the RBI action led to many depositors withdrawing their funds with about Rs100 crore being withdrawn since the administrator was appointed.
Anaskar told depositors that the bank's position was sound. However, if the depositors continue to withdraw, the bank may face liquidity crunch and in that case, the RBI could impose moratorium and put a cap on further withdrawals. He also said that the Federation had never taken up the case of any co-op bank against which the RBI had taken action but in case of CKP Bank the issue was different and hence the Federation was supporting it. The bank itself had also come up with an advertisement recently saying that its position was sound and the depositors' money was secured.
The bank had deposits of Rs1,023 crore as of March 2012 and advances of Rs622 crore and net non performing assets of 5.65%.
More in Moneylife
Sensex Rally: Winners and Losers as the index challenges the high of 2010 +2229 views
TODAY'S TOP STORIES
VIDEOS
Keep your Money Safe: Avoid money traps and MLM
LATEST COMMENT
that's a really good and informative article. raj
MORE
Compensate bank customers if they fail to get desired service –Part II
|
|
|
- Phaneesh Murthy: Let off by Infosys, sacked by iGate over sexual harassment charges
- Is the interest in Gold ETFs waning?
- OMCs to stop LPG deliveries to houses with multiple-connections from 1st June
- BSE to shift 29 scrips to T group category for failure to comply with demat norms
- Sun TV Networks announces 11% jump in its net profit
- S&P cautions India of rating downgrade; retains negative outlook
- COMPAT orders cement cos to pay 10% of the Rs6,307 crore penalty
- ITC net profit up 19.4%, aided by non-cigarette and agri-business segments
- Vikram Pandit to buy stake in JM Financial, to head its proposed banking arm
- MMM India, another MLM taking people for “double-your-money” ride
- RBI tells HDFC Bank not to make up its own KYC verification rules
- Why I-T returns of Pawar, Jindal and Gandhi are exempted from RTI?
- The draconian LBT: Local Body Tax explained
- How much longer can the FM, RBI ignore HSBC in India?
- Aadhaar: Private ownership of UID data- Part I
- Aadhaar: Who owns the UID database? –Part II
- Did HSBC Bank resort to toxic churning and illegitimate transactions to earn commissions?
- PNB Metlife refunds Rs25,000 to the correct policyholder: another Moneylife victory
- The draconian LBT: Local Body Tax explained
- Goa’s Advocate General is the highest paid across the country, reveals RTI
- Mass mis-selling: 59,000 investors in Kolhapur are alleged to have lost money in LIC ULIPs
- Do FIIs buy high and sell low – I? Maximum buying at peak index levels
- Investors lost Rs1 lakh crore due to poor regulation. Will there be a CBI probe?
- Directors of public sector banks: The ground reality
- Do FIIs buy high and sell low–II? Momentum-chasing
- Do FIIs buy high and sell low–III? Panic-selling during declines
- Has Rakesh Maria tried to salvage his image through Ram Gopal Varma’s film on the 26/11 attack?
What's your say?
What you said
Thanks for casting your votes! View Previous Polls
Join 22, 000 Others
Membership Benefits
- Daily & Weekly newsletters
- Access to www.moneylife.in to comment, create alerts
- Your own profile in Moneylife.in
- All special mailers
- Basic membership to MSSN, our new initiative
- Free ebooks
- Invitation to events
- Invitation to round-table meets
- Access to Insurance helpline
- Access to counselling sessions
- Access to Reading room in Mumbai
Foundation Events
Comment
Ramesh S Arunachalam 1 year ago
Heard that Vakranjee has got the bid for Rajasthan and Delhi at 0.02% and if true, this is turning out to be a strange phenomenon. As a close friend remarked, this 0.02% makes Vakranjee own bid for Maharashtra at 0.48% a rather one. All the best to the BCs and good luck to the BC model
Mandy 11 months ago in reply to Ramesh S Arunachalam
Authorities concerned who are a part of this process should be concerned at this trend. There should be a level playing field for all players. Right now there seems to be none. Hope better sense prevails...
shivaji D 1 year ago
Good for you Ramesh Arunachalam... the very fact that you are back in action is sending shivers down the spines of microfinance sharks who are looting people under the guise of helping them.
Their usurious loans and dubious insurance were already killing people. Now they are gathering here to post nasty comments.
Buzz off you trolls... go find someplace else for your dubious comments and tricks.
Moneylife... you need to find a way to end motivated comments.
FI Patron 1 year ago
Very unfortunate to see such a article on FI. The efforts that has been put by various stakeholders like RBI, Bank and BC from the past 6 years have been brought to a not by this tendering process. The author should find out who is to blame for such a situation rather then targetting the Bank and the BC's.
Ramesh S Arunachalam 1 year ago in reply to FI Patron
Dear Sir
In the past, over the last year, I have been accused of being partial to banks and you say I am targeting banks. Please read my earlier articles on BCs given below
http://www.moneylife.in/article/the-need...
The fact of the matter is that banks were also hugely responsible for the Micro-finance crisis of 2010 and if only, they had proper internal audits of their own processes and portfolio (in Priority sector lending), ghost clients, multiple lending, overindebtedness, frauds and other such happenings would not have happened to the scale it happened. In fact, banks got the most out of micro-finance and MFIs got the bad name - in retrospect, banks were equally responsible as were the regulators.
That is why I feel that even as the BC model is starting out, banks and regulators must develop a rigorous system of internal audits and my next article focuses on that.
Thanks
Best regards
Ramesh
Ramesh S Arunachalam 1 year ago in reply to FI Patron
Dear Sir
I have written about what is happening in the BC space and the current low cost bids are certainly a cause for concern.
I have not targeted anyone in the article and all I would like to say is that given the present circumstances, the BC model cannot be implemented properly.
Thanks for your comments
Best regards
Ramesh
Sajid 1 year ago
May be true, but why blatant story lifting from ET? Firstly, with due respects to the author for the amount of experience in rural finance, what has been his contribution in improving the rural finance scenario. MFIs, though started on a good note, created a mess, BCs for the last 5-6 years are doing something that we as a nation couldn't achieve in 50-60 years. Over 100 million bank account holders! Yes, this alone is not enough, because transactions are key. That will happen in the next phase. RBI and Banks together are working towards it.
This article is not worthy of a person with such an experience. He should have taken a more positive view on how RBI and banks are working in getting banking services close to poor rural masses.
Ramesh S Arunachalam 1 year ago in reply to Sajid
Dear Sir
I agree that MFIs started on a good note and then messed up. Why? The drive for commercialisation and scale (in the absence of internal audits) is what resulted in the huge mess and crisis of 2010. That is why it is very critical to ensure quality servicing by BCs and have rigorous internal audits of BCs - otherwise, the same mess that happened with MFIs will happen in the BC space. That is why regulators need to be proactive now with regard to BCs as they are were laizze faire with MFIs and they are as much to blame for the MFI crisis as the MFIs and banks.
Hope this clarifies
Thanks
Ramesh S Arunachalam 1 year ago in reply to Sajid
Dear Sir
Thanks for your UNKIND comments and I don’t lift stories. And if you compare today’s ET story where I am one of the few people QUOTED extensively, you will know that our analysis and approach are different
I use published news items for authenticity and then provide my own analysis. I have done that here and kindly mind your language please. Thanks
I have used ET to quote the bid amounts AUTHENTICALLY and then proceeded to give my analysis extensively which is 99% of the article. In fact, todays’s ET story quotes me and you can also speak to M Rajshekar of ET with whom I have had a number of discussions
I am sorry but I cannot write anything positively about the BC model, when none exists. And I believe that the BC model is doomed to fail for the reasons mentioned in my article unless there are course corrections. Make no mistake about that
Best regards
Ramesh
Ramesh S Arunachalam 1 year ago in reply to Ramesh S Arunachalam
Please look at my earlier articles on BCs (one which was published about 10 days ago and others some time ago) and you can see my broader views on BCs
1) http://www.moneylife.in/article/the-need...
2) http://www.moneylife.in/article/bank-bus...