Shop owner penalised for charging credit card on single purchase twice
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chandigarh, directed City Portraits and Colour Lab, Sector 22, Chandigarh, to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation to a customer for swiping his credit card twice for a single purchase, leading to double equated monthly installments (EMIs) for the customerchandigarh Updated: Oct 08, 2014 10:47 IST
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chandigarh, directed City Portraits and Colour Lab, Sector 22, Chandigarh, to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation to a customer for swiping his credit card twice for a single purchase, leading to double equated monthly installments (EMIs) for the customer.
Disposing off a complaint filed by 55-year old Sher Singh Guleria, a resident of Sector 56, the forum also directed the shop owner to pay Rs 5,000 as cost of litigation apart from paying rs 23,276 along with interest to the customer.
In his complaint, Guleria had said that in January 2013, he had purchased a Samsung phone from the lab for rs 14,300 and had made the payment, which was split into six monthly installments, through his credit card.
Guleria alleged that as per the credit card statement, two EMIs, each of rs 2,383, were deducted by the bank instead of one EMI.
He said despite paying the entire amount of the mobile phone, the credit card statement had shown the whole amount as unpaid.
The customer said he was informed that the shop owner had made two swipes instead of one, due to which the statement had shown an outstanding amount.
He added that the bank, instead of retrieving the excess amount from the shop owner after the complaint, was pressurising him to pay the amount.
The ICICI bank, in a reply, said that as per records, two transactions were made and the payment was made by the bank to the shop owner accordingly, which was reflected in the statement of account issued to the complainant.
The bank said as per Guleria’s complaint in August 2013, it had initiated the charge back dispute under off time disputes with Turn Around Time (TAT), but the same was declined by the merchant/ acquiring bank stating the transaction was more than a year old and hence, no action could be taken in this regard.
None appeared on behalf of the City Portraits and Colour Lab and hence the case was proceeded exparte.
The forum, presided by PL Ahuja on October 1, held, “It was the Sector 22-based City Portraits and Colour Lab which, even after getting the double amount for a single purchase, did not sort out the matter. The evidence of the complainant proves the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the City Portraits and Colour Lab.”