Even though online shopping is mostly safe, there are a few instances where customers have happened to receive used, defective, or entirely different products from what they ordered. While the involved companies often make amends, especially when the product isn’t expensive, there are hundreds of cases where the customer didn’t get a timely response. In such situations, customers always have the option to appeal to the consumer court. However, people often don’t go down this road due to a lack of awareness.
Here’s What Happened
In a recent case where a customer received a used smartphone from a popular e-commerce platform, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled a verdict in favor of the customer. In July 2023, Ashwani Chawla ordered a new OnePlus 11R 5G via Flipkart from the seller Bathla Teletech. However, after a few days of receiving the product, Chawla started facing several problems. Upon visiting the service center, he realized the phone wasn’t new.
Per the record dated August 8, 2023, the service center discovered that the phone was activated on March 2, 2023, over four months before Chawla received it on July 17. The service center advised him to take this up with OnePlus and Flipkart. However, the complainant purchased a new smartphone after receiving no replies from the manufacturer and the e-commerce platform. Further, he also decided to inform the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chandigarh.
Commission Concluded That The Phone Was Old
After going through all the records, the Commission concluded that Chawla received a used phone as a brand new phone months after its activation date. Further, the Commission also criticized the two companies, stating that “the Opposite Parties acted themselves showed that they are least concerned about the customer grievance redressal but are just concentrated upon earning profits through misleading the public.”
It’s worth noting that Chawla received two invoices upon ordering the phone. While the first included the phone’s cost, shipping, and handling charges, the customer also received another invoice for an additional Rs. 49 handling fee. The Commission also took this into account and held it as an unfair trade practice. Further, the regulatory body has also imposed a fine of Rs. 30,000 on all the parties involved and asked them to refund the Rs. 40,941 Chawla paid for the phone and the Rs. 49 additional charges.
You can follow Smartprix on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Google News. Visit smartprix.com for the most recent news, reviews, and tech guides.
