“Consumers purchasing electric vehicles are left remediless and suffer severe inconvenience when manufacturers, dealers and service centres fail to provide proper after-sales service and warranty support. Such acts not only amount to a deficiency in service but also undermine consumer confidence,” the June 17 ex-parte order read
‘Well within warranty’
On February 6, 2022, a woman purchased an Okinawa Praise Pro Electric Scooter (Sparkle Black) from the authorised dealer of Okinawa Scooters for Rs 79,845. At the time of purchase, the company and the authorised dealer assured a 36-month warranty for the vehicle.
The woman regularly serviced the scooter through the authorised service centres. On August 7, 2024, while taking the scooter for servicing, the vehicle suddenly stopped functioning and could not be restarted. The woman towed the scooter to the service centre, where it was accepted for repair after collecting an advance amount of Rs 1,000. The service centre informed the woman that the technician was unavailable and that repairs would take about a week.
Subsequently, the woman was told through a video report that the scooter’s battery had become defective/dead, though other repairs and servicing had been completed. The woman also requested a defect in the speedometer to be repaired. Despite the battery and speedometer being within the warranty period, the authorised dealers refused to replace them and instead directed the woman to personally approach the company by email.
The woman sent emails on August 9, 2024 and on August 12, 2024, to the company and the authorised dealers seeking a replacement, but there was no response. Thereafter, the authorised dealer repeatedly force the woman to take delivery of the scooter without replacing the battery.
On August 14, 2024, the woman was forced to collect the non-functional scooter after paying an additional Rs 550, and since the scooter remained unfit for use, it had to be kept at a relative’s house. At the time of the defect, the scooter had completed only 31 months from the date of purchase and had run 22,475 kilometres, which was well within the warranty conditions. Hence, the woman was forced to file a consumer complaint.
‘Gross negligence’
The consumer commission was of the view that the conduct of the company and the authorised dealers clearly showed gross negligence and deficiency in service.
It was stated by the commission that once the vehicle was taken to the authorised service centre during the subsistence of the warranty, it was the duty of the company and the service centre to inspect and replace the defective battery, and their refusal to do so came under breach of warranty and unfair trade practice.
The commission observed that the act of the authorised dealer of pressuring the woman to take the delivery of the scooter and demanding additional payment caused severe inconvenience, mental agony, harassment and financial loss to the woman.
The court held that the failure to replace the defective battery, despite the warranty, fell within the manufacturing defect, and the conduct of the company and the authorised dealer amounted to unfair trade practice.
The commission also stated that the manufacturers and authorised dealers were duly bound to honour warranty commitments and could, by their wish, deny replacement of defective components arising during the warranty period.
According to the commission, several electric vehicle companies had entered the Indian consumer market with attractive advertisements, warranty assurances and promises of quality after-sales service, but when defects arose and the time came to honour warranty obligations, such companies either avoided responsibility, delayed replacement of defective parts, or altogether abandoned consumers without providing proper support and service.
It was further stated that the conduct caused immense hardship to innocent consumers who invested their hard-earned money relying upon the representations and warranty policies issued by such companies.
The commission was also of the opinion that consumers purchasing electric vehicles were left remediless and suffered severe inconvenience when manufacturers, dealers and service centres failed to provide proper after-sales service and warranty support and such acts not only led to a deficiency in service but also undermined consumer confidence.
Accordingly, the company and the service centres were directed to replace the battery and speedometer free of cost to the woman, and a compensation of Rs 10,000 was ordered to be paid to the woman for mental agony and trauma.
The commission also ordered Rs 5,000 to be paid as litigation costs to the woman.
Significance
The ruling establishes the obligation of companies to ensure proper after sale services and compliance of warranty promised to the consumers and that the concerns of the consumers must not be ignored, causing them unnecessary inconvenience.
Consumers must also pursue their complaints in before appropriate forums so that the companies and service providers at fault are held accountable for their actions. For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and union territories (Telangana helpline:(040) 2339-4399) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.
The Sangareddy consumer commission held the company and its authorised dealers to be liable deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. (AI Generated Image) 
Share
