E-Paper
Charging ₹285 extra costs Panchkula car dealer ₹15,000
Even after being told they had charged him ₹286 in excess, the dealer did not refund the amount
Terming an automobile dealer guilty of charging ₹285 extra for a car’s repair, the district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed them to refund the amount and pay ₹10,000 as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment.
Berkeley Hyundai, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Panchkula, will refund the ₹285, along with interest at 9% per annum, and also pay ₹5,000 for litigation charges.
The complainant, Harender Padam of Pinjore, had submitted before the forum that his car was hit by a stray cow in Pinjore on January 28, 2019. When he approached the auto dealer, he was assured the repairs will be covered under insurance and he will only have to pay a nominal amount. But, he was made to pay ₹2,400. Thereon, he waited 45 days for a detailed bill, but the dealer never provided one.
Eventually, he was provided a soft copy of the bill via WhatsApp, which revealed that he was charged ₹285 extra. On his query, Berkeley replied that the total bill was for ₹36,375, of which the insurer paid ₹34,260, and the “remaining ₹2,400” needed to be paid by him.
However, Padam contended, that the remainder to be paid by him came down to ₹2,115, and as such Berkeley charged him ₹286 in excess. Though he informed the dealer about this, the amount was not refunded.
Proceeding ex parte against the dealer, the forum stated, “The opposite party (dealer) did not make any effort to refund the amount of ₹286 either by cash or by cheque to the complainant despite its admission about having charged excess as per an e-mail dated March 18, 2019.”
“The sequence of events clearly establishes the high-handedness of the opposite party for which the complainant became the victim and felt the burnt, as a result of which the complainant has been left with no alternative, except to knock the door of this forum, which further aggravated his pain and harassment. Thus, the complainant deserves to be duly compensated on account of lapse and deficiency on the part of opposite party while providing services to him,” the forum ruled.
