Delhi woman wins Rs 2.33 lakh payout after IVF clinic’s ‘wrong diagnosis’

“The complainant has been able to prove that neither she has been given proper medical treatment nor she has been advised properly nor the proper Fibroid diagnosis was done upon her… no medical treatment for IVF was given by opposite party (clinic) nor this amount taken from her for the treatment has returned and as such there is apparent deficiency in service on the part of OP,” the commission said on July 2.

The commission found that despite collecting a substantial amount from the complainant, the clinic failed to provide the promised IVF treatment, offered contradictory medical advice and ultimately retained her money, forcing her to approach the consumer forum for relief.

Case

According to the complaint, the woman and her husband approached the fertility centre in 2024 for IVF treatment after struggling to conceive. During the consultation, she informed the clinic that she had uterine fibroids. The clinic allegedly assured the couple that the total cost of IVF treatment, including fibroid surgery, would be Rs 1.85 lakh.

After conducting an ultrasound, however, doctors allegedly informed her that she did not have fibroids and that surgery would not be required. When she sought a reduction in the package cost because the surgery component had been dropped, she was asked to visit the clinic’s Rajouri Garden branch for further discussion.

At the Rajouri Garden branch, the complainant alleged that she was made to wait for several hours before being offered another package costing Rs 1.78 lakh after adding an ‘Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection’ (ICSI) procedure. Although the clinic had initially attributed about Rs 40,000 of the package to fibroid surgery, she claimed the revised quotation reduced the amount only marginally.

Additional charges

The woman said she paid Rs 1.78 lakh towards the IVF package and registration. She further alleged that an additional Rs 10,000 was collected in cash after she was assured that everything required for the treatment was included and that no further payment would be demanded.

According to her complaint, the clinic also prescribed expensive medicines worth around Rs 25,000 for her husband and collected another Rs 2,500 towards preparation of an affidavit.

She further alleged that although she had initially been told that her treatment would be carried out at the Preet Vihar branch, she was later shifted to the Saket branch without prior intimation. Different doctors attended to her during each visit, allegedly without knowledge of her medical history.

Threatening calls, conflicting diagnosis

The complainant further alleged that on the night of October 1, 2024, clinic staff telephoned her asking for another Rs 5,000 despite her claim that all payments had already been made.

When she refused, she alleged that she received repeated abusive and threatening phone calls from different numbers throughout the night and was threatened with police action. She later lodged a police complaint.

Her grievance deepened days later when another ultrasound conducted on October 10, 2024 reportedly confirmed that she did have fibroids. The clinic then allegedly informed her that she could not conceive because of the very condition it had earlier said did not exist.

Clinic remained absent

The commission noted that although the fertility centre initially appeared through a lawyer, it never filed a written statement responding to the allegations. It also failed to appear during subsequent hearings despite being granted opportunities, following which the proceedings continued ex parte.

The commission therefore considered the complainant’s affidavit, payment receipts and documentary evidence while deciding the matter.

Findings

• Examining the records, the commission found documentary proof showing that the complainant had paid Rs 1.73 lakh to the clinic between July and October 2024.
• It declined to award reimbursement for the alleged Rs 25,000 spent on medicines because prescriptions and bills had not been produced.
• However, it accepted the complainant’s principal grievance that she had not been provided proper medical treatment, had received contradictory medical advice regarding fibroids and never underwent the promised IVF treatment despite paying the clinic.
• Holding the clinic liable for deficiency in service, the commission directed it to refund Rs 1.73 lakh along with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the complaint.

Payout

It also awarded Rs 50,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs, directing that the litigation cost be deposited with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority as the complainant had received legal aid.

The commission further directed the clinic to comply with the order within 30 days, failing which it would have to pay interest at 12 per cent per annum on the entire amount from the date of filing of the complaint until realisation.

Significance

The ruling underscores that contradictory medical advice and failure to provide promised treatment can amount to deficiency in service under consumer law.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Delhi Consumer Commission Helpline: 1800-11-4000) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance