RBI GRADE ‘B’ OFFICER’S EXAM Held on : 06.02.2011 (Part-II)

Total Questions: 50

21. Read the following passage based on an Interview to answer the given questions based on it. Certain words are printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.

and in the process it could

The AP Bill has brought into sharp focus the need for customer protection in four critical areas. First is pricing. Second is lender's liability- whether the lender can give too much loan without assessing the customer's ability to pay. Third is the structure of loan repayment - whether you can ask money on a weekly basis from people who don't produce weekly incomes. Fourth is the practices that attend to how you deal with defaults.

 

But the Act should have looked at the positive benefits that institutions could bring in, and where they need to be regulated in the interests of the customers. It should have brought only those features in.

 

Say, you want the recovery practices to be consistent with what the customers can really manage. If the customer is aggrieved and complains that somebody is harassing him, then those complaints should be investigated by the District Rural Development Authority.

 

Instead what the Bill says is that MFIs cannot go to the customer's premises to ask for recovery and that all transactions will be done in the Panchayat office. With great difficulty, MFIs brought services to the door of people. It is such a relief for the customers not to be spending time out going to banks or Panchayat offices, which could be 10 km away in some cases. A facility which has brought some relief to people is being shut. Moreover, you are practically telling the MFI where it should do business and how it should do it.

 

Social responsibilities were inbuilt when the MFIs were first conceived. If MFIs go for profit with loose regulations, how are they different from moneylenders?

Even among moneylenders there are very good people who take care of the customer's circumstance, and there are really bad ones. A large number of the MFIs are good and there are some who are coercive because of the kind of prices and processes they have adopted. But Moneylenders never got this organised. They did not have such a large footprint. An MFI brought in organisation, it mobilized the equity, it brought in commercial funding. It invested in systems. It appointed a large number of people. But some of them exacted a much higher price than they should have. They wanted to break even very fast and greed did take over in some cases.

Are the for-profit MFIs the only ones harassing people for recoveries?

Some not-for-profit outfits have also adopted the same kind of recovery methods. That may be because you have to show that you are very efficient in your recovery methods and that your portfolio is of a very high quality if you want to get commercial funding from a bank.

In fact, among for-profits there are many who have sensible recovery practices. Some have fortnightly recovery, some have monthly recovery. So we have differing practices. We just describe a few dominant ones and assume every for-profit MFI operates like that.

How can you introduce regulations to ensure social upliftment in a sector that is moving towards for-profit models?

I am not really concerned whether someone wants to make a profit or not The bottom-line for me is customer protection. The first area is fair practices. Are you telling your customers how the loan is structured ? Are you being transparent about your performance? There should also be a lender's liability attached to what you do. Suppose you lend excessively to a customer without assessing their ability to service the loan, you have to take the hit.

 

Then there's the question of limiting returns. You can say that an MFI cannot have a return on assets more than X, a return on equity of more than Y. Then suppose there is a privately promoted MFI, there should be a regulation to ensure the MFI cannot access equity markets till a certain amount of time. MFIs went to markets perhaps because of the need to grow too big too fast. The government thought they were making profit off the poor, and that's an indirect reason why they decided to clamp down on MFIs. If you say an MFI won't go to capital market, then it will keep political compulsions under rein.

 

Choose the word which is most nearly the same in meaning as the word/group of words printed in bold.
Exacted

Correct Answer: (2) demanded
Solution:The meaning of the word Exact (Verb) as used in the passage is: to demand and get something from somebody; to make something bad happen to somebody.
Look at the sentence:
He was determined to exact a promise from her.

22. Read the following passage based on an Interview to answer the given questions based on it. Certain words are printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.

and in the process it could

The AP Bill has brought into sharp focus the need for customer protection in four critical areas. First is pricing. Second is lender's liability- whether the lender can give too much loan without assessing the customer's ability to pay. Third is the structure of loan repayment - whether you can ask money on a weekly basis from people who don't produce weekly incomes. Fourth is the practices that attend to how you deal with defaults.

 

But the Act should have looked at the positive benefits that institutions could bring in, and where they need to be regulated in the interests of the customers. It should have brought only those features in.

 

Say, you want the recovery practices to be consistent with what the customers can really manage. If the customer is aggrieved and complains that somebody is harassing him, then those complaints should be investigated by the District Rural Development Authority.

 

Instead what the Bill says is that MFIs cannot go to the customer's premises to ask for recovery and that all transactions will be done in the Panchayat office. With great difficulty, MFIs brought services to the door of people. It is such a relief for the customers not to be spending time out going to banks or Panchayat offices, which could be 10 km away in some cases. A facility which has brought some relief to people is being shut. Moreover, you are practically telling the MFI where it should do business and how it should do it.

 

Social responsibilities were inbuilt when the MFIs were first conceived. If MFIs go for profit with loose regulations, how are they different from moneylenders?

Even among moneylenders there are very good people who take care of the customer's circumstance, and there are really bad ones. A large number of the MFIs are good and there are some who are coercive because of the kind of prices and processes they have adopted. But Moneylenders never got this organised. They did not have such a large footprint. An MFI brought in organisation, it mobilized the equity, it brought in commercial funding. It invested in systems. It appointed a large number of people. But some of them exacted a much higher price than they should have. They wanted to break even very fast and greed did take over in some cases.

Are the for-profit MFIs the only ones harassing people for recoveries?

Some not-for-profit outfits have also adopted the same kind of recovery methods. That may be because you have to show that you are very efficient in your recovery methods and that your portfolio is of a very high quality if you want to get commercial funding from a bank.

In fact, among for-profits there are many who have sensible recovery practices. Some have fortnightly recovery, some have monthly recovery. So we have differing practices. We just describe a few dominant ones and assume every for-profit MFI operates like that.

How can you introduce regulations to ensure social upliftment in a sector that is moving towards for-profit models?

I am not really concerned whether someone wants to make a profit or not The bottom-line for me is customer protection. The first area is fair practices. Are you telling your customers how the loan is structured ? Are you being transparent about your performance? There should also be a lender's liability attached to what you do. Suppose you lend excessively to a customer without assessing their ability to service the loan, you have to take the hit.

 

Then there's the question of limiting returns. You can say that an MFI cannot have a return on assets more than X, a return on equity of more than Y. Then suppose there is a privately promoted MFI, there should be a regulation to ensure the MFI cannot access equity markets till a certain amount of time. MFIs went to markets perhaps because of the need to grow too big too fast. The government thought they were making profit off the poor, and that's an indirect reason why they decided to clamp down on MFIs. If you say an MFI won't go to capital market, then it will keep political compulsions under rein.

 

Choose the word which is most nearly the same in meaning as the word/group of words printed in bold.
Scuttle

Correct Answer: (4) destroy
Solution:The meaning of the word Scuttle (Verb) as used in the passage is: to deliberately cause something to fail; destroy; foil.
Look at the sentence:
Shareholders successfully scuttled the deal.

23. Read the following passage based on an Interview to answer the given questions based on it. Certain words are printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.

and in the process it could

The AP Bill has brought into sharp focus the need for customer protection in four critical areas. First is pricing. Second is lender's liability- whether the lender can give too much loan without assessing the customer's ability to pay. Third is the structure of loan repayment - whether you can ask money on a weekly basis from people who don't produce weekly incomes. Fourth is the practices that attend to how you deal with defaults.

 

But the Act should have looked at the positive benefits that institutions could bring in, and where they need to be regulated in the interests of the customers. It should have brought only those features in.

 

Say, you want the recovery practices to be consistent with what the customers can really manage. If the customer is aggrieved and complains that somebody is harassing him, then those complaints should be investigated by the District Rural Development Authority.

 

Instead what the Bill says is that MFIs cannot go to the customer's premises to ask for recovery and that all transactions will be done in the Panchayat office. With great difficulty, MFIs brought services to the door of people. It is such a relief for the customers not to be spending time out going to banks or Panchayat offices, which could be 10 km away in some cases. A facility which has brought some relief to people is being shut. Moreover, you are practically telling the MFI where it should do business and how it should do it.

 

Social responsibilities were inbuilt when the MFIs were first conceived. If MFIs go for profit with loose regulations, how are they different from moneylenders?

Even among moneylenders there are very good people who take care of the customer's circumstance, and there are really bad ones. A large number of the MFIs are good and there are some who are coercive because of the kind of prices and processes they have adopted. But Moneylenders never got this organised. They did not have such a large footprint. An MFI brought in organisation, it mobilized the equity, it brought in commercial funding. It invested in systems. It appointed a large number of people. But some of them exacted a much higher price than they should have. They wanted to break even very fast and greed did take over in some cases.

Are the for-profit MFIs the only ones harassing people for recoveries?

Some not-for-profit outfits have also adopted the same kind of recovery methods. That may be because you have to show that you are very efficient in your recovery methods and that your portfolio is of a very high quality if you want to get commercial funding from a bank.

In fact, among for-profits there are many who have sensible recovery practices. Some have fortnightly recovery, some have monthly recovery. So we have differing practices. We just describe a few dominant ones and assume every for-profit MFI operates like that.

How can you introduce regulations to ensure social upliftment in a sector that is moving towards for-profit models?

I am not really concerned whether someone wants to make a profit or not The bottom-line for me is customer protection. The first area is fair practices. Are you telling your customers how the loan is structured ? Are you being transparent about your performance? There should also be a lender's liability attached to what you do. Suppose you lend excessively to a customer without assessing their ability to service the loan, you have to take the hit.

 

Then there's the question of limiting returns. You can say that an MFI cannot have a return on assets more than X, a return on equity of more than Y. Then suppose there is a privately promoted MFI, there should be a regulation to ensure the MFI cannot access equity markets till a certain amount of time. MFIs went to markets perhaps because of the need to grow too big too fast. The government thought they were making profit off the poor, and that's an indirect reason why they decided to clamp down on MFIs. If you say an MFI won't go to capital market, then it will keep political compulsions under rein.

 

Choose the word which is most nearly the same in meaning as the word/group of words printed in bold.
Spurred

Correct Answer: (5) prompted
Solution:The meaning of the word Spur (Verb) as used in the passage is: to encourage somebody to do something; prompt.
Look at the sentence:
I was spurred into action by the letter.

24. Read the following passage based on an Interview to answer the given questions based on it. Certain words are printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.

and in the process it could

The AP Bill has brought into sharp focus the need for customer protection in four critical areas. First is pricing. Second is lender's liability- whether the lender can give too much loan without assessing the customer's ability to pay. Third is the structure of loan repayment - whether you can ask money on a weekly basis from people who don't produce weekly incomes. Fourth is the practices that attend to how you deal with defaults.

 

But the Act should have looked at the positive benefits that institutions could bring in, and where they need to be regulated in the interests of the customers. It should have brought only those features in.

 

Say, you want the recovery practices to be consistent with what the customers can really manage. If the customer is aggrieved and complains that somebody is harassing him, then those complaints should be investigated by the District Rural Development Authority.

 

Instead what the Bill says is that MFIs cannot go to the customer's premises to ask for recovery and that all transactions will be done in the Panchayat office. With great difficulty, MFIs brought services to the door of people. It is such a relief for the customers not to be spending time out going to banks or Panchayat offices, which could be 10 km away in some cases. A facility which has brought some relief to people is being shut. Moreover, you are practically telling the MFI where it should do business and how it should do it.

 

Social responsibilities were inbuilt when the MFIs were first conceived. If MFIs go for profit with loose regulations, how are they different from moneylenders?

Even among moneylenders there are very good people who take care of the customer's circumstance, and there are really bad ones. A large number of the MFIs are good and there are some who are coercive because of the kind of prices and processes they have adopted. But Moneylenders never got this organised. They did not have such a large footprint. An MFI brought in organisation, it mobilized the equity, it brought in commercial funding. It invested in systems. It appointed a large number of people. But some of them exacted a much higher price than they should have. They wanted to break even very fast and greed did take over in some cases.

Are the for-profit MFIs the only ones harassing people for recoveries?

Some not-for-profit outfits have also adopted the same kind of recovery methods. That may be because you have to show that you are very efficient in your recovery methods and that your portfolio is of a very high quality if you want to get commercial funding from a bank.

In fact, among for-profits there are many who have sensible recovery practices. Some have fortnightly recovery, some have monthly recovery. So we have differing practices. We just describe a few dominant ones and assume every for-profit MFI operates like that.

How can you introduce regulations to ensure social upliftment in a sector that is moving towards for-profit models?

I am not really concerned whether someone wants to make a profit or not The bottom-line for me is customer protection. The first area is fair practices. Are you telling your customers how the loan is structured ? Are you being transparent about your performance? There should also be a lender's liability attached to what you do. Suppose you lend excessively to a customer without assessing their ability to service the loan, you have to take the hit.

 

Then there's the question of limiting returns. You can say that an MFI cannot have a return on assets more than X, a return on equity of more than Y. Then suppose there is a privately promoted MFI, there should be a regulation to ensure the MFI cannot access equity markets till a certain amount of time. MFIs went to markets perhaps because of the need to grow too big too fast. The government thought they were making profit off the poor, and that's an indirect reason why they decided to clamp down on MFIs. If you say an MFI won't go to capital market, then it will keep political compulsions under rein.

 

Choose the word which is most nearly the same in meaning as the word/group of words printed in bold.
Under rein

Correct Answer: (3) let loose
Solution:The meaning of the word Under rein (Noun) as used in the passage is: the state of being in control. Its antonym should be let loose.

25. Read the following passage based on an Interview to answer the given questions based on it. Certain words are printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.

and in the process it could

The AP Bill has brought into sharp focus the need for customer protection in four critical areas. First is pricing. Second is lender's liability- whether the lender can give too much loan without assessing the customer's ability to pay. Third is the structure of loan repayment - whether you can ask money on a weekly basis from people who don't produce weekly incomes. Fourth is the practices that attend to how you deal with defaults.

 

But the Act should have looked at the positive benefits that institutions could bring in, and where they need to be regulated in the interests of the customers. It should have brought only those features in.

 

Say, you want the recovery practices to be consistent with what the customers can really manage. If the customer is aggrieved and complains that somebody is harassing him, then those complaints should be investigated by the District Rural Development Authority.

 

Instead what the Bill says is that MFIs cannot go to the customer's premises to ask for recovery and that all transactions will be done in the Panchayat office. With great difficulty, MFIs brought services to the door of people. It is such a relief for the customers not to be spending time out going to banks or Panchayat offices, which could be 10 km away in some cases. A facility which has brought some relief to people is being shut. Moreover, you are practically telling the MFI where it should do business and how it should do it.

 

Social responsibilities were inbuilt when the MFIs were first conceived. If MFIs go for profit with loose regulations, how are they different from moneylenders?

Even among moneylenders there are very good people who take care of the customer's circumstance, and there are really bad ones. A large number of the MFIs are good and there are some who are coercive because of the kind of prices and processes they have adopted. But Moneylenders never got this organised. They did not have such a large footprint. An MFI brought in organisation, it mobilized the equity, it brought in commercial funding. It invested in systems. It appointed a large number of people. But some of them exacted a much higher price than they should have. They wanted to break even very fast and greed did take over in some cases.

Are the for-profit MFIs the only ones harassing people for recoveries?

Some not-for-profit outfits have also adopted the same kind of recovery methods. That may be because you have to show that you are very efficient in your recovery methods and that your portfolio is of a very high quality if you want to get commercial funding from a bank.

In fact, among for-profits there are many who have sensible recovery practices. Some have fortnightly recovery, some have monthly recovery. So we have differing practices. We just describe a few dominant ones and assume every for-profit MFI operates like that.

How can you introduce regulations to ensure social upliftment in a sector that is moving towards for-profit models?

I am not really concerned whether someone wants to make a profit or not The bottom-line for me is customer protection. The first area is fair practices. Are you telling your customers how the loan is structured ? Are you being transparent about your performance? There should also be a lender's liability attached to what you do. Suppose you lend excessively to a customer without assessing their ability to service the loan, you have to take the hit.

 

Then there's the question of limiting returns. You can say that an MFI cannot have a return on assets more than X, a return on equity of more than Y. Then suppose there is a privately promoted MFI, there should be a regulation to ensure the MFI cannot access equity markets till a certain amount of time. MFIs went to markets perhaps because of the need to grow too big too fast. The government thought they were making profit off the poor, and that's an indirect reason why they decided to clamp down on MFIs. If you say an MFI won't go to capital market, then it will keep political compulsions under rein.

 

Choose the word which is most nearly the same in meaning as the word/group of words printed in bold.
Coercive

Correct Answer: (1) gentle
Solution:The meaning of the word Coercive (Adjective) as used in the passage is: using force or the threat of force.
Hence, its antonym should be gentle.

26. Rearrange the following six sentences (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.

(A) Two of the best-performing major economies in 2010 were China and Brazil, with growth estimated at 7.5% and 10.5% respectively.

(B) Despite that limp growth, major US stock market indexes are up between 11 % and 20% for the year.

(C) Even knowing where economies are headed sometimes is of no help to an investor.

(D) It is hard to anticipate the direction of financial markets.

(E) But as of December, stock markets of both nations were in the red for the year.

(F) By contrast, the US economy is likely to have expanded at only about 2.6% for the year.

Which of the following would be the SECOND sentence?

Correct Answer: (2) C
Solution:C

27. Rearrange the following six sentences (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.

(A) Two of the best-performing major economies in 2010 were China and Brazil, with growth estimated at 7.5% and 10.5% respectively.

(B) Despite that limp growth, major US stock market indexes are up between 11 % and 20% for the year.

(C) Even knowing where economies are headed sometimes is of no help to an investor.

(D) It is hard to anticipate the direction of financial markets.

(E) But as of December, stock markets of both nations were in the red for the year.

(F) By contrast, the US economy is likely to have expanded at only about 2.6% for the year.

Which of the following would be the FOURTH sentence?

Correct Answer: (4) E
Solution:E

28. Rearrange the following six sentences (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.

(A) Two of the best-performing major economies in 2010 were China and Brazil, with growth estimated at 7.5% and 10.5% respectively.

(B) Despite that limp growth, major US stock market indexes are up between 11 % and 20% for the year.

(C) Even knowing where economies are headed sometimes is of no help to an investor.

(D) It is hard to anticipate the direction of financial markets.

(E) But as of December, stock markets of both nations were in the red for the year.

(F) By contrast, the US economy is likely to have expanded at only about 2.6% for the year.

Which of the following would be the FIFTH sentence ?

Correct Answer: (5) F
Solution:F

29. Rearrange the following six sentences (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.

(A) Two of the best-performing major economies in 2010 were China and Brazil, with growth estimated at 7.5% and 10.5% respectively.

(B) Despite that limp growth, major US stock market indexes are up between 11 % and 20% for the year.

(C) Even knowing where economies are headed sometimes is of no help to an investor.

(D) It is hard to anticipate the direction of financial markets.

(E) But as of December, stock markets of both nations were in the red for the year.

(F) By contrast, the US economy is likely to have expanded at only about 2.6% for the year.

Which of the following would be the FIRST sentence?

Correct Answer: (3) D
Solution:D

30. Rearrange the following six sentences (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.

(A) Two of the best-performing major economies in 2010 were China and Brazil, with growth estimated at 7.5% and 10.5% respectively.

(B) Despite that limp growth, major US stock market indexes are up between 11 % and 20% for the year.

(C) Even knowing where economies are headed sometimes is of no help to an investor.

(D) It is hard to anticipate the direction of financial markets.

(E) But as of December, stock markets of both nations were in the red for the year.

(F) By contrast, the US economy is likely to have expanded at only about 2.6% for the year.

Which of the following would be the SIXTH (LAST) sentence?

Correct Answer: (2) B
Solution:B