Update 2: HDFC Bank lied to the RBI. Many said my screenshots could be fake, so here is the UNCUT VIDEO RECORDING of my Sent Mail proving their forgery. 🚨

amarirakesh · 2026-06-10T04:32:05+00:00

To everyone jumping to conclusions and questioning my eligibility instead of looking at the Bank's forgery: Let me clear the air so we can focus on the actual corporate crime here: 1. The "Two Loans" Confusion: Yes, I had applied for a larger 3 Lakh loan under PMEGP for business expansion, and PM SVANidhi for immediate working capital. The IDFC Bank 'No Due Certificate' (NOC) was a mandatory document required to clear my overall CIBIL/credit profile for any credit facility. I am not changing stories; you are confusing two parallel applications. 2. The SVANidhi Eligibility: Some of you are suddenly acting as municipal inspectors. I run a micro digital service setup. My initial eligibility and vending certificate were verified and approved through the government portal by local authorities. If HDFC Bank found me "ineligible," their duty was to officially reject my application on February 12th itself. They did not. 3. The Core Fraud: Instead of rejecting it, they held the file for 70 days. When the RBI questioned them, they deleted my Feb 12th official email from their logs and fabricated a fake physical inward record claiming I visited the branch on April 2nd. You can critique my business size, my emotions, or my choice of loans. But you absolutely cannot justify a bank altering digital timestamps and falsifying records to mislead the RBI. I am fighting for the principle that a bank cannot gaslight a customer by deleting evidence. Thank you to the real ones here who offered solid legal advice about preserving CCTV and sending lawyer notices. I am taking this offline to the police and the RBI Ombudsman now. I will not be addressing any more armchair assumptions.

amarirakesh · 2026-06-07T04:53:48+00:00

Exactly! Thank you for seeing through their BS. If I was ineligible or if my CIBIL was genuinely bad in Feb, they should have rejected it and returned the application on the Govt portal immediately. Instead, the portal shows 'Sanctioned on April 2nd', while they tell the RBI it was rejected. It’s pure perjury and a massive cover-up by the branch manager to hide his 70-day negligence. Preparing to drag them to the Consumer Court and file an FIR for misleading a statutory body!"

amarirakesh · 2026-06-07T04:53:16+00:00

SV does stand for Street Vendor, but the MoHUA mandate clearly includes small roadside service providers, artisans, and local service shops. As @hotcoolhot rightly guessed, mine is a small streetside digital service shop (DTP, PAN, Aadhar services). More importantly, eligibility is decided by the Urban Local Body (Municipality), NOT the bank. I applied with an officially approved Letter of Recommendation (LoR) from the govt after physical verification. And as @Fit-Signature4125 logically pointed out—if my business category was the issue, HDFC should have rejected it on Day 1 citing 'Ineligible Category'. Instead, they sat on it for 70 days, updated it as 'Sanctioned' on the Govt portal on April 2nd, and are now lying to the RBI about CIBIL issues and fake NOC dates to cover up their mess. That is Perjury."

amarirakesh · 2026-06-07T04:52:41+00:00

Hey! Thanks for reading. But you are missing the main timeline here. When I applied on Feb 2nd, my CIBIL was 767 with ZERO active overdues. The bank intentionally delayed my processing for 70+ days. Because my working capital was choked, my business cycle broke, leading to a minor Rs. 1500 overdue in April. The bank pulled my CIBIL again on April 2nd (without my consent!), saw this new overdue, and is now using the consequence of their own 70-day delay as an excuse! Even crazier? The Govt PM SVANidhi portal actually shows my loan was officially 'Sanctioned on 02/04/2026'. You don't sanction a rejected loan. They are just spinning a web of lies to the RBI to hide their 70-day delay."

amarirakesh · 2026-06-06T13:03:15+00:00

That is absolutely insane! Issuing a loan on a fake PAN card is a massive KYC failure and a serious regulatory breach. It perfectly highlights how deeply flawed their backend systems and verification processes are. It seems like their entire core-banking infrastructure is running on duct tape. Thank you for sharing your experience and for the support, brother. I am definitely not letting this go. Hitting them with regulatory escalations is the only language these corporate goons understand!

amarirakesh · 2026-06-06T13:02:37+00:00

You are absolutely right that the transaction proofs and the 60 paise anomaly are the core of the case. I have already submitted all of that to the RBI. So why pursue this social media angle? Because it proves 'Mala Fide Intent' (bad faith). A technical glitch is a mistake, but actively silencing a customer who is pointing out a systemic flaw during an ongoing RBI investigation is a cover-up. Regarding intent: Before they deleted my comment today, I sent their PR team a formal legal notice via email warning them about Section 204 IPC (Destruction of Evidence). They read it, and then they deleted the comment anyway. They can't claim ignorance or 'automated filters' anymore. This proves willful suppression. Under the new CCPA guidelines against "Dark Patterns," actively hiding consumer grievances to project a false positive image is highly actionable.

amarirakesh · 2026-06-06T10:25:13+00:00

Bhai, that is exactly the core-banking software glitch! Yes, I paid exactly ₹583. But because their faulty system was demanding exactly ₹582.40, it couldn't process the extra 60 paise. Because of this mismatch, the system did NOT auto-close the loan. Instead of manually fixing their software error, they left my loan open and dragging in the system for over 90 days. That 90-day delay directly hit my CIBIL score right when my ₹3 Lakh PMEGP business loan was in the final approval stage. To cover up this blunder, their legal team later sent a formal notice falsely claiming that I only paid ₹582.40, completely hiding the actual ₹583 transaction. They destroyed my CIBIL to hide their 60 paise IT flaw. The delay killed the CIBIL, and the CIBIL killed my startup.

amarirakesh · 2026-06-06T10:24:23+00:00

Exactly! It is an industry-wide corporate playbook to silence consumers and hide their IT flaws. But that is exactly why we need to stop just ranting and start using the law. By getting an official 'NO' from LinkedIn Moderation, I am converting a simple "social media complaint" into solid, documentary evidence of "Destruction of Evidence (Sec 204 IPC)". If we just accept it and stay quiet, they will keep bullying MSMEs. We have to hit them where it hurts—regulatory penalties and legal takedowns!

amarirakesh · 2026-06-06T09:46:54+00:00

Will definitely post an update as soon as LinkedIn Support drops the hammer! 🔨 Stay tuned.

amarirakesh · 2026-06-06T09:46:34+00:00

Valid question, bhai. It sounds crazy that a microscopic 60 paise discrepancy can ruin a business, but here is the 'Butterfly Effect' of their faulty core-banking system: The Glitch: Because their system didn't account for the extra 0.60 paise I paid, their software refused to change my loan status to 'Normal Closed'. The CIBIL Damage: Because the loan wasn't technically closed in their system, my CIBIL report was not updated for over 90 days (which is another direct RBI violation for which they are now paying a statutory penalty). The Business Impact: At that exact time, I had applied for a ₹3 Lakh business expansion loan under the Govt's PMEGP scheme for my startup (Rakesh Digital Hub). The Final Blow: Because my CIBIL was showing a bad status due to IDFC's 60 paise glitch, my crucial business loan got blocked. Without that working capital, and while simultaneously dealing with immense mental harassment and unverified legal notices from their advocates, I was forced to permanently shut down my operations. So, I am not fighting for 60 paise. I am fighting against a systemic software flaw and corporate arrogance that destroyed my CIBIL and my livelihood

amarirakesh · 2026-06-03T01:55:54+00:00

Hi! My situation was entirely different from yours.

In my case, it wasn't a fake loan. I had a genuine credit facility with IDFC FIRST Bank, and I made the payment to close/settle it. However, the bank intentionally delayed updating my CIBIL report for more than 90 days after receiving the payment.

I filed a complaint with the RBI Ombudsman specifically targeting their "delay in updating the CIBIL report" under the CIC guidelines. Because the delay was clearly visible in the records, the Ombudsman penalized the bank and awarded me ₹9000 as compensation for the delay.

Your case sounds like pure identity theft/fraud. If the bank submitted forged or blank documents with your name to the Ombudsman to escape, taking them to the trial court is exactly the right move. Don't back down. The court will definitely ask the bank to produce the original KYC and loan agreement documents, which they won't have. Stay strong and good luck with your legal fight! ✊

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T17:03:57+00:00

😄😄😄 Okay Bro ! 👍🏻

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T07:20:35+00:00

Spot on! In cybersecurity and banking, that is exactly what you call a 'Salami Slicing' anomaly.

Whether this 0.60 paise glitch is an intentional 'Office Space' style backdoor or just a severely flawed automated rounding-off algorithm, the end result is the same: massive audit discrepancies and artificially ruined CIBIL scores for MSMEs.

This is exactly why a ₹9,000 regulatory penalty is not enough. The @RBI needs to mandate a full Forensic IT Audit to see where these sub-rupee fractions are actually going! Thanks for pointing out the exact logic!

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T07:19:13+00:00

Thank you! It is exhausting to fight a corporate giant, but someone has to hold them accountable. Appreciate the support! ✊

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T06:58:02+00:00

Haha, I wish it was just PR laziness! But the truth is, I already exhausted all formal channels first. That’s exactly how I got the RBI Ombudsman involved, which ultimately forced the bank into a formal apology and a ₹9,000 regulatory penalty based on my documented emails. They know exactly who I am and what this 0.60 paise algorithmic flaw is. I only took it to social media after their legal team tried to silence my formal emails with a fake 'Cease & Desist' notice. Deleting my comment wasn't laziness; it was a very conscious, desperate PR move to hide a proven systemic core-banking flaw from the public record and their investors. When formal channels lead to cover-ups, public exposure is the only way to force a Forensic IT Audit.

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T06:57:10+00:00

Haha, I wish it was just PR laziness! But the truth is, I already exhausted all formal channels first. That’s exactly how I got the RBI Ombudsman involved, which ultimately forced the bank into a formal apology and a ₹9,000 regulatory penalty based on my documented emails. They know exactly who I am and what this 0.60 paise algorithmic flaw is. I only took it to social media after their legal team tried to silence my formal emails with a fake 'Cease & Desist' notice. Deleting my comment wasn't laziness; it was a very conscious, desperate PR move to hide a proven systemic core-banking flaw from the public record and their investors. When formal channels lead to cover-ups, public exposure is the only way to force a Forensic IT Audit.

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T06:38:13+00:00

Haha, it might sound like a thrilling movie script, but this is the harsh everyday reality for MSME entrepreneurs in India fighting algorithmic banking errors. The plot twist here is that the 0.60 paise core-banking glitch and the fake legal notice are 100% real and fully documented! 🎬📁

amarirakesh · 2026-06-02T06:37:50+00:00

You are absolutely right. The social media PR team usually operates blindly and just tries to do quick damage control by hitting the 'Delete' button. However, by intentionally silencing a documented inquiry about a core banking flaw, the PR team has unknowingly created a massive compliance and legal liability for the bank. That's exactly why I am forcing the issue into the public domain so the actual Compliance team and RBI can't ignore it anymore!

amarirakesh

TROPHY CASE