The recent annual report on the Ombudsman Scheme by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) notes that complaints under the Reserve Bank Integrated Ombudsman Scheme rose last year, even as complaints per lakh accounts declined. In a fast-expanding ecosystem, absolute complaints can rise even when complaint “intensity” falls.
Against this backdrop, the RBI Governor has announced a two-month long campaign from January 1, 2026, to dispose of complaints pending for over 30 days with Ombudsman offices. This should help expedite resolution.
Yet, for customers, large absolute numbers still mean friction at scale. The more enduring response must, therefore, come from regulated entities (REs) to prevent recurrence. This requires a shift in mindset at the frontline towards real customer centricity.
A test of customer centricity
First, rapid digitalisation has made banking faster and more convenient, but it has also widened the distance between the frontline and the customer. In the manual world, branch staff not only “owned” their customers, but also the outcomes.
Second, products have become complex. Features have become difficult to understand, exclusions harder to explain and the fine print easier to miss. Together, they widen the gap between the initial understanding and ultimate delivery.
Third, the gap in skills, combined with limited empowerment at the frontline, is turning simple service lapses into prolonged grievances. By the time an issue reaches an external forum, it becomes a story of delay, uncertainty, and what the customer perceives as indifference.
Trust is the first deposit a bank earns
Banking works because people choose to trust an institution with what matters most to them — their savings, their time, their private information, and often, their life plans. This trust is not sentimental. It is fundamental to intermediation; hence customer centricity cannot be a peripheral concern.
Trust, however, does not sustain itself on its own. It is renewed in small, everyday moments. It is evidenced from what follows the discovery of a failed transaction or the levy of an unexplained charge.
It is not about what went wrong or who is legally liable under the fine print. It is about what the customer feels – whether their bank owned up and stood by them in their moment of stress or wasted their time in arguing who is right.
Central bank: Last resort, not the first
The annual report carries another signal that REs should take seriously. About two-thirds of complaints reaching the RBI are “first resort” complaints, or where the RBI is “copied”. This means either the customer is unaware of the internal grievance redress system of the RE or does not believe in its efficacy.
This points to gaps in awareness, accessibility, and credibility. It is disappointing that some REs still do not offer a toll-free number, and some websites are hard to navigate to register a grievance. There is also a tendency to classify some complaints as “queries”, thereby diluting the attention they deserve.
Let empathy be the guiding force
Customer centricity also calls for empathy. This empathy cannot be left to individuals; it must be embedded in the processes.
The annual report shows that over half of the maintainable complaints are resolved by the RBI Ombudsmen through mutual settlement, conciliation, or mediation. This suggests that a proactive, empathetic approach could have resolved them at the RE level itself, without having to escalate.
Address the root cause, not the symptom
When similar complaints occur across branches or channels, it is rarely a “customer issue”. It signals a weakness in product design, process, or controls that has not been corrected at the source. The objective, therefore, is not merely to dispose of complaints, but to prevent the next thousand by fixing the root causes.
That effort must also include people, not just processes. High attrition in junior and customer-facing roles weakens ownership, disrupts continuity, and erodes institutional memory.
What is the way forward?
So where should improvement begin? It must start where friction starts — at the first point of contact. Traditional grievance systems are reactive. A customer-centric model shifts the emphasis to prevention and towards providing resolution at the first opportunity.
That, in turn, requires REs to make a deliberate choice to empower frontline teams. In practice, empowerment rests on three enablers: Information, authority and grooming.
Information means strong product knowledge backed by a single view of the customer across channels, so the frontline staff is not reduced to saying, “The system does not show it, I have to check.”
Authority means clear delegation, so that misapplied charges or simple service lapses can be resolved quickly without pushing customers up the escalation ladder.
Grooming is more than training. It is a culture that builds empathy and a sense of purpose. The system should also provide an assurance to staff that bona fide decisions in the customer’s interest within defined limits would be upheld.
Build internal safety valves
Not every dispute can be resolved at the first touchpoint by business functionaries. REs, therefore, need a credible, layered grievance redress architecture within the organisation.
This is where an effective Internal Ombudsman (IO) framework matters. Before a final “no” is communicated to the customer, an independent second look should test whether the decision is fair, consistent, and well-reasoned.
The RBI has sought to ensure the stature and independence of IOs; REs must ensure the framework works in practice by adequately empowering them.
The Reserve Bank Integrated Ombudsman Scheme is the final safety net: A cost-free, accessible forum for customers when internal redress fails.
Ultimately, the customer is the reason we exist, and trust is the real currency of banking. Let us protect it in the small moments, and the big moments will take care of themselves.
The author is Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India. The views are personal
