I SYMPATHISE with the writer of the letter, 'Banks should scrutinise travel-insurance plans' (my paper, June 8).

I agree with him that banks should not fall back on exclusion clauses which exempt them from fulfilling their obligations to consumers.

In reality, however, banks in Singapore include such a clause in application forms for nearly all transactions.

An example is: 'The Bank shall not be liable for any errors, negligence, defaults, acts of omission, whether of itself or its employees?'.

Such a clause effectively clears them of virtually all liability. This is not fair to customers. Is such a clause valid under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act?

What protection and recourse do customers have against banks should a transaction go awry through the bank's fault?

I would appreciate it if the Association of Banks in Singapore, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Consumers Association of Singapore could look into the matter.

Mr Chin Kee Thou

For more my paper stories click here.