|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balagangadharan was thrilled when he won the bid at an auction for a refrigerator on an internet site. Soon after winning the bid, the site deducted Rs 20,000 (the bid amount) from his credit card. He was told that the refrigerator would be delivered within two to three weeks. When there was no sign of the refrigerator even after three weeks, he tried getting in touch with the owners of the site. However, he got no response to his e-mails and telephone calls to Delhi. That’s when he got panicked and wondered whether he was a victim of an internet fraud. Finally, when he got through to the owners of the site, they told him that they had shifted their office and that was the reason for the lack of communication. He was told that the delivery of the refrigerator would take some more time. Exasperated, he asked them to cancel the order and refund the money, which he hasn’t got back so far. Satya Rao bought an expensive electronic product from an internet shopping site, only because the purchase entitled him to a free gift of another electronic gadget. However, when he opened
the package that came by mail, he found the free gift missing. Both the
e-shop and the hosts of the internet shopping site are unwilling to take
responsibility for the missing These two cases show the need for consumer protection measures in the area of electronic shopping. Now that the government is amending the Information Technology Act, it must look at this aspect too. There should be a separate chapter dealing with e-shopping or consumer-business transactions. Besides protecting consumers against fraud, unfair trade practices, defective goods and deficient services vis-à-vis e-shopping, the law should formulate specific guidelines that are binding on those that sell goods through the internet. For example, the e-shop should collect the money only at the time of dispatching the order and not earlier. Similarly, even after paying for the order and getting delivery, a consumer should have the option of returning it within a specified period. When consumers shop via the internet or any ‘distance selling’ scheme, they have no face-to-face contact with the seller. Nor do they have an opportunity to examine the goods before purchase. So the possibility of getting a raw deal is far higher in these transactions. The United Kingdom has implemented the European Commission Directive on the protection of consumers regarding distance contracts and passed the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000, conferring certain specific rights on consumers who purchase goods and services via distance means. The regulations provide for a seven-day "cooling off" period during which a consumer can cancel or withdraw from the contract and return the goods without offering any explanation. The regulations also give the consumers the right to receive full information about the goods and services before placing the order. Once the order is placed, the consumer has to get a written confirmation of the original information, plus additional information such as the method of cancelling the order, details of guarantees and after sales service, who will pay for the postage if the goods are returned, date of delivery, etc. The contract is not enforceable by the supplier unless he gives the required information to the consumer. And if the goods are found to be faulty or are not what the consumer ordered, then the consumer is entitled to a full refund, including the delivery charges, plus the cost of returning the goods. It’s time consumers in
India too had such protection vis-à-vis electronic shopping. |
