I had been trying to secure the documents of some transactions that took place between XYZ Bank and a borrower of which I was still deemed a guarantor even though I had resigned as a director three years prior to the transaction.
XYZ Bank refused to give me the documents and made me a bankrupt. Whilst I had to follow the usual 'legal avenues', I discovered that The Banking and Financial Institution Act 1989 (Bafia) does provide me an avenue to secure the documents.
On Jan 18, I wrote to Bank Negara which regulates the Bafia to seek their intervention to address my rights as a guarantor as stipulated under Bafia.
On April 23, Bank Negara replied:
' Kami mengambil maklum ulasan tuan mengenai hak tuan, selaku penjamin untuk mendapatkan dokumen berkenaan akaun pinjaman di XYZ Bank tanpa perlunya perintah mahkamah.
Untuk makluman tuan, seseorang penjamin boleh mendapatkan maklumat mengenai kedudukan pembayaran atau baki tertunggak akaun peminjam dengan institusi kewangan tersebut tertakluk kepada keizinan peminjam.
Dalam hal ini, kami difahamkan bahawa peminjam merupakan sebuah syarikat yang telahpun digulung
.'I find the statement misleading and wholly misconceived.
Bafia says under Part XIII: Information and Secrecy (99) - Other permitted disclosures:
1) The provision of section 97 shall not apply to the disclosure of any information or documents
a) which the customer, or his personal representative, has given permission in writing to disclose;
b) in a case where the customer is declared bankrupt, or, if the customer is a corporation, the corporation is being or has been wound up, in Malaysia or in any country, territory or place outside Malaysia .
I don't need to be a lawyer to understand the meaning of section 99. 1. b.
I believe Bank Negara understands it perfectly too. Therefore, the answer they have given me seems baseless, and an attempt at further delaying and denying my rights to the documents.
Can Bank Negara explain its inconsistencies?
I have also done my independent company search on the borrower and as of May 12, the records at the Registrar of Companies reveals that there has been no winding up proceedings against the borrower made either by XYZ Bank or other creditors.
So my question to Bank Negara is from which source did they get their information? XYZ Bank?
It amazes me that Bank Negara, supposedly the guardian of Bafia, does not understand the contents the Act.
Whilst the prime minister has recently identified and launched the five-year National Integrity Plan (NIP) aimed at promoting an accountable and corrupt-free society in our country, it is disheartening to see the process of law and justice being abused again and again.
And what makes it worse is that institutions which are supposed to be the guardians of justice, corporate governance and regulatory bodies are actually dancing to the tune of some of these big corporations.
Who is out there to fight for the rights of the common man?
Ironically, when I approached a well-known 'public complaints' bureau, they asked me if I had the financial strength to challenge the bank.
Does that mean that a poor man will just have to just roll over and die when faced with injustice?
