MP Apex Bank Exam study materials
MP Apex Bank Exam study resources

Vetting a Customer Notice Before It Goes on the Board

MP Apex Bank Exam · Put your knowledge to work in context.

All case studies

Vetting a Customer Notice Before It Goes on the Board

A DCCB branch in Bhopal must display a notice on revised timings and charges with effect from 1 August. The manager drafts it in a hurry and asks the probationary officer to vet it before it goes on the notice board and the bank's website. The draft reads: (1) "This is to inform all our valuable customers that the bank has been decided to change the working hours from next week." (2) "Cash transactions will not be entertained after 3:00 PM, however the cheque drop box will remain available." (3) "The revised charge of ₹50 per cheque book will be effecting from 1st of next month, as per our principal of transparency." (4) "Those customers who has not updated KYC should contact the branch otherwise they will be penalized." (5) "For further clarifications you may please be contact the undersigned during banking hours only." The notice is to be displayed on 25 July.

1. Identify each error in the draft, give the correction, and label the type of error.

Read the worked answer

Sentence 1

  • "has been decided" → "has decided": superfluous passive; the bank is the doer of the action.
  • "valuable customers" → "customers": formulaic flattery in a formal notice; it also wastes the first line of a short notice.
  • "from next week" → an exact date: vague time reference with legal effect.

Sentence 2

  • "will not be entertained" → "will not be accepted": wrong collocation - one entertains a request, not a cash transaction.
  • ", however" → a semicolon or a full stop before "however": comma splice / run-on.

Sentence 3

  • "will be effecting" → "will be effective": wrong verb form; "effect" as a verb means to bring about, not to come into force.
  • "principal of transparency" → "principle": word confusion (principal = main, or a sum of money; principle = a rule or value).
  • "1st of next month" → "1 August": a notice displayed on 25 July must name the date, not describe it.

Sentence 4

  • "who has not" → "who have not": subject–verb agreement with the plural "customers".
  • "otherwise they will be penalized" → ambiguous and inaccurate: name the consequence ("operations may be restricted") and the authority; as drafted, "they" has no clear antecedent and no penalty is actually prescribed for late KYC updation.

Sentence 5

  • "you may please be contact" → "you may contact": double passive/politeness marker, ungrammatical.
  • "during banking hours only" → state the hours: the whole point of the notice is that the hours have changed.

Also missing: the new timings themselves. The draft announces a change without telling anyone what the change is.

2. Rewrite the notice in not more than about 70 words, in a register suitable for display on a branch notice board.

Read the worked answer

NOTICE - Revised branch timings and charges, effective 1 August

Customers are informed that, from 1 August, cash transactions will be accepted up to 3:00 p.m. and the branch will function until 5:00 p.m. The cheque drop box will remain available throughout. A charge of ₹50 per cheque book will apply from that date. Customers who have not yet updated KYC are requested to visit the branch by 31 August to avoid restriction of operations. For clarifications, please contact the Branch Manager during banking hours.

Why this version works:

  • Every fact that affects a customer - date, timings, charge, deadline - is stated once, precisely.
  • The consequence for KYC is stated as a restriction, which is what actually happens, rather than as a threatened penalty.
  • The register is formal and neutral: no "valuable customer", no "please be contact", no rhetorical "transparency".
  • It is short enough to be read at a counter in fifteen seconds, which is the only test a notice board notice has to pass.

3. Which parts of the notice create compliance or legal risk for the branch, and why?

Read the worked answer

Risk 1 - the timing of the charge announcement. The notice is displayed on 25 July for a charge effective 1 August. Under the fair-practices framework that governs customer communication, changes in charges must be notified sufficiently in advance (the widely applied standard is one month) so that a customer can rearrange affairs. Seven days does not meet that standard, and a charge imposed without proper notice is recoverable from the branch's reputation and from the audit report. Fix the date, not the wording: either postpone the charge to 1 September or defer the notice.

Risk 2 - the "penalized" sentence. Three problems in one clause: it is ambiguous (who penalises, under what authority, how much), it is inaccurate (non-updation of KYC leads to restriction or freezing of operations under KYC norms, not to a "penalty"), and it converts a routine housekeeping request into a threatened sanction. A customer who is later charged a fee, or whose account is frozen without a stated deadline, will cite the notice as evidence that the bank acted outside its stated terms.

Risk 3 - vagueness where precision is required. "from next week" and "during banking hours only" are unenforceable and, in the case of the timings, self-defeating.

Practical rule for the probationary officer: a customer notice is not an internal circular. Every number, date and consequence in it can be quoted back at the bank, so each must be one the branch can actually stand behind on the day it takes effect.