Mindset of Regulators

When we consider any regulator, be it SEBI (for small investors in stock markets), or TRAI (for DTH or Mobile phones), Insurance, etc, we realise that the group of persons acting as the Regulating body, sits and discusses the need for the regulation, and considering all the points, releases rules, regulations, guidelines, etc.

The sincerity of the persons in this group or their ability to take proper decisions, is never doubted. However, possibly due to the working background, the mindset gets incorrectly applied.

They all function for the benefit of a Common Citizen…. And Yet…
They all IGNORE the Common Citizen, who suffers the most.

Let me make my point clear.

For choosing TV channels, decision is in the hands of the common citizen. But if and when he/she opts for the choice, NO OBLIGATION FROM THE SERICE PROVIDERS TO THE CUSTOMER. WHY?

Should there not be a last date for the service provider also to comply the action of communicating back with the customer, confirming the selection and the price opted by him/her? If there is a misunderstanding from either side, the COMMON CITIZEN SUFFERS.

For transfer of shares, they MUST be dematerialized, as per SEBI rules, prior to the date decided. Great.

Hundreds of applications pending with various listed companies, not recorded in the grievance statements submitted by them, have no obligation at all. Some employee of the company expecting kickbacks for releasing shares delays the matter to ensure that shares land in IEPF. COMMON CITIZEN SUFFERS BY LOOSING SHARES &/OR DIVIDENDS. SEBI tells the Common Citizen to approach IEPF, as if SEBI itself has no obligation and does not care for a small investor, mostly a common citizen.

Insurance Policies to be linked to Aadhar. Only Common Citizen is responsible, and hence he/she suffers. Insurance companies have no obligation in helping the insurer in achieving the required goal. There is no last date for all the insurance companies to ensure that the linking is done. If there is a fault, it is of the common citizen who has to suffer… why?

Patients admitted to hospital for some disease suddenly develop hepatitis and are shifted to ICU. There are cases when patients have suffered “Post Operative Pancreatitis” where again the patient is shifted to ICU. However, there is NEVER any mention of this problem and ICU stay of the patient in the Discharge Card issued by the hospital. This is purposely holding the relevant information by the hospital. What does the Regulator does? Nothing. Common Citizen suffers.

In short, NEVER… repeat NEVER the problems are viewed from the eyes of a Common Citizen.

Because the members of the regulating committee are well above the level of a common citizen, and hence cannot really see the needs of the common citizen.

Moreover, while in Digital India, why should any company function in the same manner, as it did 4-5 DECADES ago? Why there is no punishment to such companies? Why proper email correspondence is not possible with SEBI, LIC of India, TRAI, IEPF, etc in EACH case of serious grievances, because there is no grievance Redressal system functioning for common citizens, though available only on paper, or if the person personally visits the required venue time and again.

Why there was no last date specified by the regulators for these organisations to fall in line, to follow the Digital India norms? Or is it that the regulators themselves find difficulties in communicating through electronic media, want to talk on phone or through personal meetings?

Therefore, even if the intentions are good, any and every regulator appears to fail in achieving proper targets. Crores of Claimed but Unpaid dividend collected in IEPF as Unclaimed Dividend is the proof of it. Absolutely no responsibility for SEBI to try and find, whether the dividends &/or shares were claimed, and the reason for which the company had denied to hand over, and opted for transferring to IEPF.

There are cases when SEBI declares some companies as defaulters. Great. Nothing is then done to find the wrong doings of that company which in reality should be corrected for each and every case related to small investor. But no responsibility of SEBI towards a common citizen who is a small investor also.

Worst is the case with Grievance Redressal machinery. Many times one sees advertisements on TV, but the most important thing in my opinion, the email for correspondence, is shown for a second or even less time period. Most of the advertisement is a show off to say, that something is being done. Common citizen knows, that in such a case, nothing is done and hence the advertisement.

This machinery of all these departments cannot handle problems on emails. Like most of the government departments, reading emails, understanding them, and giving appropriate answer is not covered under the ability required for the person to work in that department. They all prefer either to meet personally and talk, or to talk on phone, because all of it can be suitably refused at a later date. Reply on email is a written document making the person answering the query, responsible for the answer given. Most of government departments are neither used to this kind of functioning along with responsibility, nor wish to follow it.

That is the second hurdle.

I AM THANKFUL TO LOCAL CIRCLES, IT’S CREATORS, IT’S WHOLE TEAM AND THE CONCERNED GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS BACKING IT. BECAUSE, FOR THE FIRST TIME , A COMMON CITIZEN HAS SOME MEANS TO CONVEY VARIOUS PROBLEMS FACED, TO THE AUTHORIES BY POSTING THE MESSAGE IN THIS FORUM. THIS WAS NEVER EVER AVAIABLE EARLIER. THANKS AGAIN.

I WONDER, WHY SUCH FORUM IS NOT PROVIDED BY EACH OF THE REGULATORS?

JAI HIND ! more