First Hand experience of taking a home loan

Now I know why most Indians can never own a home unless they have ready cash. Especially the self-employed people. Has anyone who is self-employed recently tried to get a home loan??

Unfortunately I did try last week! And believe me, to be a honest, tax paying citizen in India, is to viewed by our banking system as being a criminal.

Home loans which are secured by mortgage of property are so much secure than say a Car loan.But these require so much questioning and paper work that I have given ultimatum to the sales person from the biggest home lender in India: If he asks for any more documentation, then the deal is off - he'd better return all my documents and I will consider the matter as closed.

Now let me come down to the details that this person(to give him the benefit of doubt, his seniors and indeed the lending institutions are all party to it) required: I am a consultant so he required my Income Tax returns (ITR's) for the last three years, the TDS certificate, my bank statements,etc. which was all Ok.

But then came the googly: He asked for the balance sheets of the company/firms which have given you the consultancy fees. I almost choke :( WHATTTTTTTTT!!!!). Then comes another beauty: get me their ITR's, their bank statements, proof of their income, etc.

I am still wondering: is there something wrong with me or is it the banking system??? And all this for a loan for under Rs.10 lakh. This is when these very guys dole out billions of rupees to so called big businessmen and then after some years of default, sit down and work out a CDR package.

By Jove, it is a crime to be an ordinary, god fearing, tax-paying, law-abiding, citizen of India. Because if you are one, then believe me your chances of getting a loan are dismal.

I hope somebody sitting in a position of authority reads this and takes some corrective steps.

RIL vs RNRL

By deciding that the MOU is not binding and that it has to adhere to Government Pricing policy, the Supreme Court has neglected to go into the issue of the "Sanctity of the MOU".

The division of the Reliance empire was based on the terms of the MOU. If these terms of MOU have been upheld to be not binding but open to outside influences, then Anil Ambani has, in my opinion every right to challenge the demerger of the Reliance empire.

The fundamental issue in any business deal is that once the terms are agreed between the parties, then the parties have to honour their commitments. The commitments cannot be rescinded based on the fact that one of the parties now stands to lose. If this was the case then no commerce can ever take place. Where will be trust in future agreements?

The SC has erred here, in my opinion by not going into the terms of MOU. The MOU clearly states that RIL is supposed to supply to RNRL at a predetermined rate. If RIL has to take a loss on this account, so be it. This must have been factored in when the division of the assets took place. I am sure that the division of assets was not 50:50.

This day will go down in the Indian history, as a day which shows that you can wriggle out of your moral and financial obligations, by having the government on your side.