The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has recently ordered Amazon Retail India to refund ₹40,325 to the customer for selling a hacked phone.
As per a recent Times of India report, the hacked phone sold to an Amazon customer exposed customer data and was also used for making unauthorised purchases.
Moreover, the retail giant has been also fined a total of ₹18,000, which includes ₹10,000 to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment and ₹8,000 as the cost of litigation.
The case happened with Amazon customer Sumita Das, a resident of Sector 12 in Chandigarh.
Das recently purchased a smartphone from the Amazon website but later discovered the delivered device was already hacked. She faced fraud and financial loss due to the hacked device.
The fraudsters managed to gain access to her personal information via the hacked phone in September 2023.
Some unauthorised purchases were also made from her Amazon account by the fraudsters.
Das has informed that the fraudsters also hacked her ICICI Bank credit card along with her email using her hacked phone.
She claimed that suspicious activities were immediately reported to Amazon. However, the company failed to any appropriate action in time and didn’t cancel the fraud transactions.
It was also reported that Amazon initially promised that a refund of the fraudulent transaction amount would be processed.
However, the e-commerce company later cancelled the refund and Das did not receive any amount back.
Meanwhile, Amazon India and Amazon Pay in their combined reply to the consumer court mentioned that they had cancelled the fraudulent orders. The company claimed that it provided “proper and efficient assistance” to the complainant. Amazon Pay is the platform used to make transaction payments on the Amazon retail website.
“Considering the complainant’s grievance that her account was hacked, we immediately checked internally and assisted the complainant with sanitising/suppressing her account and ensuring all orders were cancelled to avoid any further issues,” the statement added.
Das alleged, “The act of demand made it clear that amount has not been refunded by Amazon Retail India and Amazon Pay Later, and the amount collected has illegally been retained by them despite numerous requests for refund having been made.”
Amazon India and Amazon Pay Later, in their reply, reportedly said, “The complainant contacted our customer support team wherein all orders which were placed had been cancelled and proper and efficient assistance was provided to the complainant against the cancelled orders. Considering the complainant’s grievance that her account was hacked, they immediately checked internally and assisted the complainant with sanitising/suppressing her account and ensuring all orders were cancelled to avoid any further issues.”
“It is a general practice of online platforms that particularly a product before collection at the time of return is verified thoroughly by the collecting agent and the same is collected only after the same is found to be the same as the item delivered. In case of any difference, the product is never collected by the collecting agent. More so, this plea was never communicated at any stage to the complainant and seems an afterthought of Amazon Retail India,” the commission said.
“We are of the considered opinion that all the transactions of sale, collection of amount, ensuring delivery of a product, processing cancellation request, return request and refund of amount are controlled and managed by Amazon only. But in the present case, the act of Amazon for not properly handle the situation despite having complete knowledge of the suspicious activity and not taking prompt action on the complaint of the complainant and ignoring the genuine repeated requests of the complainant, and forcing her to indulge in the present litigation proves deficiency in service on their part,” ruled Singh.
However, the response failed to satisfy the consumer court.
The consumer court maintained that it should be a regular practice for any seller or agent who delivers products from any online platform to “thoroughly verify” the product before delivering it to the customer.
The court added that Amazon has clearly failed to “act promptly” even though they were made aware of the suspicious activity by the customer. The court, in the end, ruled in favour of the complainant in this matter.
Answer. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ordered Amazon Retail India to refund ₹40,325 to the customer and fined Amazon ₹18,000, including ₹10,000 as compensation for mental agony and ₹8,000 as the cost of litigation.
Answer. Sumita Das faced fraud and financial loss due to the hacked device. The fraudsters gained access to her personal information, made unauthorized purchases, and hacked her ICICI Bank credit card along with her email.
Answer .Das alleged, “The act of demand made it clear that amount has not been refunded by Amazon Retail India and Amazon Pay Later, and the amount collected has illegally been retained by them despite numerous requests for refund having been made.”
Amazon India and Amazon Pay Later, in their reply, reportedly said, “The complainant contacted our customer support team wherein all orders which were placed had been cancelled and proper and efficient assistance was provided to the complainant against the cancelled orders. Considering the complainant’s grievance that her account was hacked, they immediately checked internally and assisted the complainant with sanitising/suppressing her account and ensuring all orders were cancelled to avoid any further issues.”
“It is a general practice of online platforms that particularly a product before collection at the time of return is verified thoroughly by the collecting agent and the same is collected only after the same is found to be the same as the item delivered. In case of any difference, the product is never collected by the collecting agent. More so, this plea was never communicated at any stage to the complainant and seems an afterthought of Amazon Retail India,” the commission said.
“We are of the considered opinion that all the transactions of sale, collection of amount, ensuring delivery of a product, processing cancellation request, return request and refund of amount are controlled and managed by Amazon only. But in the present case, the act of Amazon for not properly handle the situation despite having complete knowledge of the suspicious activity and not taking prompt action on the complaint of the complainant and ignoring the genuine repeated requests of the complainant, and forcing her to indulge in the present litigation proves deficiency in service on their part,” ruled Singh.
Also Read : Amazon Unveils Rufus: An AI Shopping Assistant for All U.S. Customers
Also Read : Amazon Prime Video Introduces Ads in Their Streaming Service
Highlights iQOO Z11 is tipped to debut in India in August. The India version of…
Highlights OnePlus N6x set to launch in India on July 31 with teaser confirming front…
Highlights Vivo T5e debuts in India as the most affordable model in the T5 lineup,…
Highlights Poco F9 Pro and F9 Ultra spotted in IMEI, IMDA, TKDN, and NCC listings,…
Highlights Official teaser of Oppo A7 Pro Max in China reveals its rear design with…
Highlights Latest leak tips Redmi 17 4G could feature MediaTek Helio G91-Ultra chipset. Leaked specs…
This website uses cookies.