A luxury SUV bought for Rs 53.72 lakh developed problems with its audio system within days of delivery. This triggered a consumer dispute that continued for years. The West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has now awarded the buyer Rs 1.5 lakh for deficient after-sales service, while rejecting its demand for a replacement or refund.
The Indian Express reported that the commission was hearing a complaint filed by a private company against a luxury car manufacturer and its authorised workshop over alleged defects in a newly purchased vehicle.
In its September 3 order, the commission held that a buyer of a premium vehicle is entitled to proper diagnosis, effective warranty support and clear communication from the service provider. “The failure to conclusively resolve the admitted audio complaint amounted to deficiency in service,” it said.
However, the commission did not find sufficient evidence to establish that the entire vehicle suffered from an inherent manufacturing defect.
Problems started days after delivery
According to The Indian Express, the vehicle was purchased on March 31, 2019, and delivered to the buyer on August 5 that year.
Problems allegedly emerged almost immediately. The buyer complained that the front door did not close properly and that the audio system was malfunctioning.
Emails regarding the complaints began on August 8, just three days after delivery. The vehicle was taken to the authorised workshop on August 19, while a legal notice was subsequently issued on September 16.
The buyer alleged that repeated inspections and repair attempts failed to resolve the problems satisfactorily and sought replacement of the vehicle or a refund.
The manufacturer and authorised dealer denied that the vehicle had any manufacturing defect. However, they acknowledged the complaint relating to the music system and said the necessary parts or system had been replaced under warranty at no cost to the customer.
The vehicle was eventually taken back by the complainant on November 26, 2019.
But, as reported by The Indian Express, the delivery feedback recorded after the repair noted that the front-left speaker sounded different and that the sound was continuous. This became an important factor in the commission’s assessment of whether the after-sales service had adequately addressed the complaint.
Audio defect established, but not a defect in the entire car
The commission distinguished between a problem with a particular component and an inherent manufacturing defect affecting the entire vehicle.
It noted that the audio complaint had been raised within days of delivery and that the opposite parties themselves had replaced the relevant audio components or system under warranty.
This supported the existence of a defect in the component at the relevant time.
But that, by itself, was not enough to conclude that the entire vehicle had a manufacturing defect.
The Indian Express reported that the commission noted the absence of an independent automotive engineer’s report, diagnostic scan, comparative audio test, laboratory analysis or other technical evidence establishing that the SUV suffered from an inherent or systemic defect.
The allegation concerning the front door was also not supported by a job card, inspection report, photograph or expert opinion.
Why was the buyer not given a refund or replacement?
The complainant had sought replacement of the vehicle or a refund, besides claiming Rs 8.21 lakh in damages.
The commission rejected these demands, finding that the evidence did not establish a fundamental manufacturing defect in the vehicle as a whole. Instead, it focused on the service provided after the audio problem was reported.
The commission held that the failure to close the admitted audio complaint with objective diagnostic confirmation amounted to a deficiency in after-sales service.
Rs 1.5 lakh compensation ordered
The commission allowed the complaint partly against the authorised dealer and directed the opposite parties to jointly pay:
- Rs 1 lakh as compensation for deficiency in after-sales service
- Rs 50,000 towards litigation costs
The total relief comes to Rs 1.5 lakh.
The amount has to be paid within 45 days. If the payment is delayed, it will attract simple interest of 9% per annum from the date of default until the amount is realised.
The commission also gave the buyer one final opportunity to have the vehicle’s audio problem examined.
What does this mean for car buyers?
The case is an important distinction in consumer disputes involving vehicles: a defective component does not mean that the entire vehicle has a manufacturing defect.
According to The Indian Express, the commission’s order also show that manufacturers and authorised service centres can face liability for inadequate after-sales service even when a manufacturing defect is not established.
For consumers, keeping “service records, job cards, emails, warranty documents, inspection reports and other evidence of repeated complaints” can therefore be important when pursuing a consumer claim.
The case also shows that a consumer may be entitled to compensation for deficient service even when a demand for a complete refund or replacement of the product does not succeed.