On this page
- Where the Act lands across the lending and fintech workflow
- Why a loan agreement or key fact statement is not a consent notice
- Lending service providers, verification vendors and collection agencies
- When a borrower asks you to delete their data
- Our view: an eight-point control checklist for fintech and BFSI teams
- Common questions
- In the news
- Sources
A bank, non-banking financial company, digital lending app, payment aggregator or wealth platform handles personal data at every step of the customer journey. From mobile number onboarding and identity verification to credit bureau pulls, account aggregation, repayment servicing and overdue collections, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the DPDP Rules, 2025 apply to every digital personal data flow.
Where the Act lands across the lending and fintech workflow
In financial services, one entity rarely holds the entire customer journey alone. A regulated lender may own the loan book while a lending service provider runs the mobile interface, a verification vendor handles video or identity checks, a bureau supplies credit history, and a field or call-centre agency handles collections. Under the Act, the entity that decides why and how borrower or customer data is processed is the Data Fiduciary, and every vendor that processes data on its behalf is a Data Processor.
| Workflow stage | Typical systems and records | Role and operational control required |
|---|---|---|
| Onboarding and lead capture | Mobile app, web form, phone number, device identifiers, pan-India lead aggregators | Standalone itemised notice before consent; separate core service consent from promotional cross-sell |
| Identity and KYC verification | Identity numbers, selfie video, bank statement parser, verification vendor API | Collect only what is necessary for the specified verification and underwriting purpose; bind the vendor under a processor contract |
| Underwriting and bureau checks | Loan origination system, credit bureau pull, account aggregator data stream | Record timestamped proof of consent and the exact categories of personal data accessed |
| Servicing and payments | Loan management system, mandate gateways, customer support desk | Enforce role-based and attribute-based access control, encryption and one-year access logs |
| Collections and recovery | Outsourced call centres, field recovery apps, settlement portals | Strict processor contract, scoped data sharing, log retention and immediate stop when authority ends |
| Loan closure and archival | Closed account ledger, tax and regulatory archives, customer erasure requests | Retain records required by banking or tax law; erase non-statutory marketing and behavioural copies |
Why a loan agreement or key fact statement is not a consent notice
Financial products already carry regulatory disclosures such as key fact statements, sanction letters and terms of service. Under the data protection law, however, a consent notice must be presented and understandable independently of any other document you ask the customer to sign. Burying data sharing permissions inside a thirty-page loan agreement or bundling cross-sell marketing with credit underwriting puts the validity of consent at risk.

The notice must give an itemised list of the personal data you collect, the clear purpose for each item, and the direct link and description for withdrawing consent, exercising rights and filing a grievance. When a customer applies for a credit line, the request for core underwriting data must stay separate from any optional permission to pitch insurance, mutual funds or partner credit cards.
Lending service providers, verification vendors and collection agencies
Outsourced lending apps, KYC verification providers, cloud hosting platforms and debt recovery agencies process borrower data on the lender's instructions. The Act makes two rules crystal clear for every Data Fiduciary:
- You remain legally responsible for compliance even when a Data Processor carries out the processing on your behalf, regardless of what your vendor contract says.
- You may engage a Data Processor to handle customer data only under a valid contract that requires the processor to maintain reasonable security safeguards, restrict access, keep processing logs and delete data when instructed.
- When a customer withdraws consent for an optional flow, you must stop processing that data and cause your downstream processors to stop as well.
- If a breach occurs at a verification vendor or collection agency, the obligation to notify the Data Protection Board of India without delay, file the 72-hour detailed report and alert every affected customer still rests on you.
When a borrower asks you to delete their data
Borrowers and account holders have the right to ask for erasure of their personal data once the specified purpose is no longer served. In banking and lending, however, sector regulations and tax laws require keeping closed loan records, repayment ledgers and know-your-customer files for fixed multi-year periods.
The Act explicitly accommodates this overlap. Its own statutory illustration notes that when a customer closes a bank account, the bank must retain the customer's personal data if another law requires keeping the record for ten years. In practice, your loan management and archival systems should separate the statutory core record—which stays locked under legal hold until the banking retention clock expires—from optional marketing profiles, app telemetry and unaccepted lead records, which must be erased on request or when their purpose ends.
Our view: an eight-point control checklist for fintech and BFSI teams
In our view, fintech, banking and lending teams preparing for the 13 May 2027 enforcement date should put eight practical controls in place across product, engineering and compliance:
- Unbundle your onboarding screens so core product underwriting and optional cross-sell marketing sit on separate, affirmative consent actions.
- Strip mobile app permissions down to the minimum data needed for the transaction; avoid harvesting contact lists, call logs or photo galleries.
- Build a complete register of every lending service provider, verification API, bureau integration, cloud host and collection agency that touches customer data.
- Update every vendor agreement to require encryption, access control, one-year log retention, prompt breach reporting and certified erasure.
- Restrict collection agents to time-bound, masked views of only the borrower records assigned to them, with every query logged.
- Tag every database table and document bucket with its legal retention basis so your team can distinguish mandatory regulatory archives from erasable customer data.
- Centralise application, database and vendor API logs in a tamper-evident store retained for at least one year, backed by 24x7 monitoring to meet the 72-hour breach clock.
- Publish a clear rights and grievance workflow that verifies the customer's account identifier and resolves every grievance within 90 days.
Common questions
Does an RBI key fact statement or loan agreement count as a DPDP consent notice?
No. The consent notice must be presented and understandable independently of any other document. Lenders must show an itemised notice of the data collected and its purpose before taking consent.
Who is liable if a lending service provider or recovery agency misuses borrower data?
The bank, NBFC or fintech that decides the purpose and means of processing is the Data Fiduciary and remains responsible for compliance by its Data Processors, regardless of any agreement to the contrary.
Must a bank or lender delete a closed loan file when a borrower asks for erasure?
No, not while another law requires keeping the record. The Act illustrates that a bank must retain customer data after account closure when another law requires ten-year record retention, while erasing optional marketing data.
How fast must a fintech or lender report a personal data breach?
It must notify the Data Protection Board of India and every affected customer without delay, and submit a detailed report to the Board within 72 hours of becoming aware of the breach.
Next steps
- Check whether the DPDP Act applies to your business, free, in a few clicks
- How-to 05: Ask properly, in the toolkit
- How-to 09: Control your vendors, in the toolkit
- How-to 06: Keep only as long as needed, in the toolkit
- The free duties list, every duty in plain words
In the news
RBI alert about automated cyber risks, banks taking steps to plug vulnerabilities: Governor
RBI issues high-level advisory on automated cyber threats targeting banking and digital payment infrastructure, urging institutions to fortify continuous defenses.
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Banking fiduciaries must integrate RBI cyber directions with DPDP Rule 6 safeguards, maintaining immutable 1-year audit logs and 72-hour incident reporting to the Data Protection Board.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: The Economic Times (original report)SBI says customer funds are safe, but questions remain over suspected data breach involving 3,897 accounts
Examines how 3,897 customer banking records surfaced online despite fund-safety assurances, highlighting questions around vendor and API access monitoring.
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Shows why banks and NBFCs must pair core banking safety with DPDP Section 8(5) encryption, access control, 1-year visibility logs, and 72-hour Board reporting.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: PSU Watch (original report)DPDP Rules Put Co-operative Banks Under New Data Security Pressure
Detailed analysis highlighting how newly notified DPDP Rules, 2025 impact regional and co-operative banks, requiring rigorous data fiduciary compliance, technical access controls, and customer consent architectures.
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Examines statutory obligations under DPDP Sections 4, 8 and Rule 6 for financial institutions processing customer KYC, loan documents, and deposit histories, emphasising audit readiness and processor security.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: Urban Acres (original report)SBI Data Leak of 3,897 Customers: Three Agencies Flagged Breach Before Bank Could Detect It; Raising Questions Over Delay in Customer Alerts and Internal Security Protocols
External cybersecurity agencies flagged 3,897 leaked customer banking records on cybercrime forums prior to internal bank detection, underscoring monitoring delays.
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Demonstrates the necessity for financial fiduciaries and NBFCs under Section 8(5) and Rule 7 to maintain continuous dark web telemetry and 24/7 security event logging to avoid delayed breach detection.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: NewsGram (original report)SBI says customer funds safe after data breach exposes 3,897 records
State Bank of India confirmed customer funds remain unaffected and that it individually alerted affected customers after 3,897 records were exposed.
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: This article maps banking, NBFC, and digital lending data flows to DPDP Act notice, processor governance, 1-year log retention, and Rule 7 customer breach notifications.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: Telangana Today (original report)'Your funds are safe with us': SBI's message to customers after major data breach
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Reports customer reassurance and communication protocols following the exposure of 3,897 bank customer records.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: The Times of India (original report)SBI data breach: Personal data of nearly 4,000 exposed, how major is the incident?
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Examines how leaked banking records affect customers and why financial institutions must pair RBI cyber incident rules with DPDP breach reporting.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: The Indian Express (original report)Threat Actors Exploiting Payment and Disbursement APIs for Unauthorized Fund Transfers in BFSI Entities
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: CERT-In and CSIRT-Fin advisory for NBFCs, digital lenders and payment platforms on securing disbursement APIs, rotating credentials and preserving forensic logs.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: CERT-In (MeitY) (original report)SC asks Centre to consider devising safeguards to ensure no misuse of EPFO, ITR data
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Supreme Court observation flagging private entities pulling income-tax and provident-fund records—directly relevant to digital lenders and background-verification APIs.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: The Economic Times (original report)Government and RBI Strengthen Digital Lending Ecosystem Through New Regulatory Framework, Digital Lending App Directory and Enhanced Customer Safeguards
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Official update on the RBI (Digital Lending) Directions, 2025, public DLA directory and borrower data safeguards across regulated entities and LSPs.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: Press Information Bureau (original report)MeitY releases 2ⁿᵈ edition of the Digital Threat Report 2025-26 for India's BFSI Sector in Collaboration with SISA
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Joint MeitY, CERT-In and CSIRT-Fin threat report examining cloud, API and supply-chain risks in banking, financial services, insurance and payments.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: Press Information Bureau (original report)MeitY notifies Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025
DPDP Act & Rules takeaway: Official summary of the notified DPDP Rules, 2025 covering notice, consent, security safeguards and breach intimation across regulated sectors.
View statutory briefing illustration
Source & Courtesy Reference: Press Information Bureau (original report)
Videos
Sources
Every section, rule and date above was checked against the official text on 22 Oct 2026.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (No. 22 of 2023)
- Section 2(i)Data Fiduciary
- Section 2(k)Data Processor
- Section 3Scope and application
- Section 4(1)Lawful grounds for processing
- Section 5(1)Itemised notice before consent
- Section 6(1)Free, specific, informed, unconditional and unambiguous consent
- Section 6(6)Processor cessation on withdrawal
- Section 6(10)Burden of proof on the Data Fiduciary
- Section 8(1)Overall responsibility for Data Processors
- Section 8(2)Valid contract required for Data Processors
- Section 8(5)Reasonable security safeguards
- Section 8(6)Personal data breach intimation
- Section 8(7)Erasure unless retention is necessary for compliance with any law, with Illustration II (bank ten-year retention)
- Section 11Right to access information, including identities of Data Processors
- Section 12Right to correction and erasure
- Section 13Right of grievance redressal
DPDP Rules, 2025 (G.S.R. 846(E), 13 November 2025)
- Rule 3Standalone notice requirements
- Rule 6Security safeguards and one-year access logs
- Rule 7Breach intimation without delay and 72-hour Board report
- Rule 8(3)Minimum one-year retention of personal data, traffic data and logs
- Rule 14(3)Grievance response period not exceeding ninety days
Notifications
- G.S.R. 843(E), clause (c)Substantive duties in force eighteen months from 13 November 2025 (13 May 2027)
A drafting aid. Get legal advice for your situation. This article explains the published text of the Act and the Rules.





