The Aware Consumer

Sep 06, 2024 MUMBAI: Insurance Regulator and Development Authority of India (Irdai) has tightened timelines for various services undertaken by insurance companies, aiming to enhance accountability and customer service. In life insurance, death claims that do not require investigation must be settled within 15 days, down from 30 days earlier. For early death claims that require a probe, the resolution period is now 45 days while earlier it was “not later than 90 days”. Maturity claims, survival benefits, and annuity payments should be settled on their due dates, and policy surrenders or partial withdrawals must be processed within seven days, Irdai said in its master circular on protection of policyholders’ interests. ‘Insurers must allow 30-day free-look for life, health plans’ Insurance companies are also expected to send premium due intimations and information regarding policy payments, such as maturity or survival benefits, at least one month before the due date. The regulator has said that if the companies fail to meet the timelines, customers can approach the ombudsman who has the power to direct insurance companies. For new business proposals, insurance companies are required to process them and request any additional information within seven days. A copy of the policy, along with the proposal form, must be provided to the policyholder within 15 days. In case of health insurance, the regulator has reiterated that cashless claims must be settled within three hours and non-cashless claims within 15 days. New business proposals should be processed within seven days and policy documents issued in a fortnight. For customers exercising their right to free-look cancellation, insurance companies are required to process the refundwithin seven days of receiving the request. Services related to policy loans and alterations in original policy conditions are also bound by a seven-day timeline. In unit-linked insurance policies (ULIPs), services such as switch and top-up requests must be fulfilled within seven days, In cases of customer complaints, the insurer must acknowledge the complaint immediately and initiate action within 14 days. If the issue is not resolved within this period, the insurer must inform the complainant within 14 days of the original complaint date. Key features of the master circular include providing essential information at various stages of the insurance contract and mandating Customer Information Sheets (CIS) with policy details. Additionally, insurers must offer proposal forms and CIS in regional languages and allow a 30-day free-look period for life and health insurance policies. Source: Times of India

Sep 05,2024 Hyderabad: In the wake of the devastation unleashed by the recent floods in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, insurance regulator, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI) has issued detailed instructions to all insurance companies to ensure that claims arising out of the loss of life, property, businesses, and infrastructure are settled speedily. In a circular issued on Wednesday, IRDAI has directed all insurers to mobilise all their resources, including outsourced functions such as surveyors, loss adjustors, and investigators, to ensure immediate service response so that all the claims are surveyed immediately and payments are disbursed at the earliest. It also said that in cases of claims involving loss of life, where the flood-affected are facing difficulties in getting death certificates due to the inability to recover the dead body, it has instructed insurers to consider claims without insisting on a death certificate if the details of the insured match with the details of the deceased published by the appropriate govt authorities. As part of efforts to expedite claims settlements, all insurance companies have been instructed to nominate a senior executive to act as a nodal claims officer to oversee the claims response. Companies have also been instructed to inform the chief secretaries of the respective states about their appointment. However, districts reporting a large number of claims can be overseen by a designated district claims service head, the insurance watchdog said. “Special claims desks at the district level with adequate delegated claims settlement authorities are recommended to be set up for affected areas to facilitate speedy processing of claims and settlements, including the release of on-account interim payments to assist early reinstatement Of property and businesses,” the IRDAI circular said. IRDAI has directed insurers to immediately engage an adequate number of surveyors and loss adjustors and, if need be, also deploy such resources from neighbouring states. To ensure the final settlement process is expedited, IRDAI has directed insurers to review and streamline claims processing by ensuring they ask only for documentation that is necessary to substantiate the claim quantum. Source: Times of India

Aug 29, 2024 NEW DELHI: Govt will launch a ‘repairability index’ for mobile phones and electronic products by Dec, a move that will help consumers make informed decisions before purchasing them. The initiative aims to address the growing e-waste problem and encourage manufacturers to produce more easily repairable items. Speaking at a workshop on ‘Right to Repair Framework’ organised by the govt, Union consumer affairs secretary Nidhi Khare said after the roll out of the index, the department will come up with a regulatory framework as well. “As India emerges as the third largest economy in the world, we should have a vibrant and tech-savvy repair system,” she said. Top industry players attended the meeting and supported the govt’s move. The ‘repairability index’ is a display or information that manufacturers will have to put on electrical and electronic equipment to inform about their repairability. Sources said once the regulatory framework is notified, manufacturers in India will have to mandatorily display them like in France. The proposed index will rate products on criteria including availability of technical documents, ease of disassembly, spare parts availability and pricing of spare parts. It will assess various elements that determine how easily a product can be repaired and thereby ultimately promoting a circular economy and reducing e-waste. Officials said the repairability index would score products on a scale of 1 to 5. The lowest score of I will be given to products that have increased risk of getting damaged and require dismantling of multiple components to access a single part. Products that offer a compromise, making some components easily accessible while others requiring more complex disassembly will get the score of 3 while items that are easy to repair as they allow direct access to parts like battery or display without unnecessary removal of other components will get the maximum score of 5. In an official statement, the consumer affairs department said that the workshop was aimed at establishing a consensus among industry stakeholders on “key parameters for accessing and evaluating repairability index” besides promoting longevity in product design, and democratising repair information to enhance consumer experiences in reusing the mobile and electronics products they own. HCL Technologies founder Ajai Chowdhry called for legislation to drive the change. “Today, most products are not repairable. We need to design products which can be repaired… Unless we create a law, things will not change,” he said. The govt has launched a SRight to Repair’ portal, with 63 companies onboard, including 23 from the mobile and electronics sector. India is the third largest electronic waste producer globally after China and the US. Source: TOI

Sep 10,2024 The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed a Rs 5,00,000 fine on Shankar IAS Academy for misleading advertisements related to the 2022 civil service exam, the regulator said on Sunday. The CCPA, led by Chief Commissioner Nidhi Khare, found that the coaching institute made false claims about its success rate and the nature of courses taken by successful candidates. In its advertisement for the 2022 UPSC Civil Service exam, Shankar IAS Academy claimed “336 selections out of 933 at All India Level”, “40 candidates in Top 100”, and “2 candidates have cleared from Tamil Nadu, of which 37 studied at Shankar IAS Academy”. The institute also advertised itself as the “Best IAS Academy in India”. However, the CCPA discovered that Shankar IAS Academy “deliberately concealed” information about the specific courses taken by the successful candidates it advertised for. “This practice consequently attracts consumers into buying paid courses advertised by the coaching institutes,” the CCPA said in a statement. The regulator’s investigation revealed that out of 336 claimed successful candidates, 221 had only taken a free interview guidance program, while others participated in various short-term or specific exam components rather than full courses, it said. The academy also claimed credit for candidates who purchased preliminary exam courses after the 2022 exam had already taken place, likely in preparation for the following year’s test. The CCPA highlighted that over 1 million candidates apply for the prestigious civil services exam annually, making UPSC aspirants a vulnerable consumer class. This action comes as part of a broader crackdown on misleading advertisements by coaching institutes, with the CCPA issuing notices to numerous organisations for similar practices. The regulator emphasised the importance of transparent information about courses taken by successful candidates, enabling consumers to make informed choices when selecting coaching programs. Source: Business Standard

Sep 10,2024 Here is a simple way to protect the bulk of your money if you fall victim to an online scam. You can do it by setting transaction limits on your cards and online banking transactions by evaluating your financial needs on a one-time basis. It will ensure that the amount of money withdrawn from your bank account or on your credit card is only within the limit set by you Fraudsters usually work at luring people to part with their identification details required for fulfilling know-your-customer (KYC) requirements. They also con you into sharing one-time passwords (OTP) through scam calls, or worse, take control of your screen. Basically, fraudsters aim to get all information required to misuse credit or debit cards by luring people to part with details. They do this by frightening people by masquerading as bank officers and threatening to block accounts or credit or debit cards for want of KYC information and then offer to guide them online to comply with the requirements. This is when they dupe people into parting with information that allows them to log into net banking accounts or even share OTPs. How many of us know that limits set for our debit and credit cards and online transactions play a vital role in deciding how much money can be siphoned out of our accounts by fraudsters? The higher the limit, the higher the loss. Let us now understand various limits that can be set. You can set two types of limits: first, on the number of transactions, and second, the amount or size of a transaction.  The first allows you to set the total number of transactions per day based on your usage – for instance, it can be four transactions per day on your debit card.  The second option allows you to set the maximum amount that can be withdrawn or transferred from your card or account daily. Again, this depends on your personal spending pattern. You can set it up at anywhere between Rs25,000 to Rs1 lakh per day. Ideally, you should cap your overall transaction amount at a little higher than your usual payment requirements to provide for unforeseen contingencies.  These limits are not independent but integrated with one another. So, if you have set your limits at Rs1 lakh and four transactions, you can make four transactions of Rs25,000 each or a single transaction of Rs1 lakh or any such combination on any given day. Online banking software also allows us to set further limits and sub-limits also.  To elaborate, if I want to transfer a certain amount to Mr XYZ online – say in a unified payment interface (UPI) or net banking transaction, I can add him as a beneficiary and go on to define whether I want to make a one-time payment to him or plan on a recurring transaction with a cap on the maximum limit of amount that can be transferred.  This is ideal for making payments directly into the accounts of domestic help or transferring allowances to children, parents or dependents who may live in another city or for subscription payments like newspapers, etc.  The same applies to debit and credit cards also. If you have a good credit score and monthly income, banks will try and lure you with a premium card or a gold or platinum card with significantly higher spending limits. While this is flattering, it also exposes you to a higher risk if you are a victim of fraud. So, it is ideal to set your limits based on your spending patterns and will usually be much lower than the default limits set by your card issuer or bank. Most banks allow you to set default limits online. Some banks even facilitate setting a time slot during which no online banking transaction can take place. For example, if my routine starts at 9 in the morning and ends at 10 at night, I can set the time slot for ‘no online banking’ from 9.30pm to 9.30am, ensuring that your card simply cannot be misused while you are sleeping.  Please check the various limits available to you and make it a point to re-set them as a one-time exercise to protect yourself and limit losses in case you become the victim of fraud.  Please note that this is an overall concept and may differ from bank to bank, so you may like to contact your bank for help with the specific features on offer for you.   Needless to add, this is not a guarantee against fraud because fraudsters are ingenious and always find new tricks to dupe people. The transaction limits circumscribe potential losses and establish you as a prudent customer when fighting for redress if the need should arise. Source: Money Life

The Supreme Court observed that a consumer complaint filed by a company is maintainable. The court rejected the contention that the word ‘company’ is not covered within the definition of ‘person’ under Section 2(1)(m) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Court observed thus in an appeal under Section 67 of 2019 Act preferred by Kozyflex Mattresses Private Limited (KMPL) against the final order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) by which it rejected the consumer case against the SBI General Insurance Company Limited. The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta noted that the Consumer Protection Act of 2019, has brought a body corporate within the definition of ‘person’, and said: “This by itself indicates that the legislature realized the incongruity in the unamended provision and has rectified the anomaly by including the word ‘company’ in the definition of ‘person’.Hence, the first preliminary objection raised by learned counsel for the respondent regarding ‘company’ not being covered by the definition of ‘person’ under Act of 1986 has no legs to stand and deserves to be rejected.” Advocate Krishna Kumar Singh represented the appellant while Advocate D. Vardhrajan represented the respondents. In this case, the appellant company (insured) prayed for the direction to the insurance company (insurer) to indemnify it for the loss caused by fire in the insured premises being the manufacturing unit of the insured. The insured was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of coir foam mattresses, pillows, cushions, and other coir by-products. It obtained a ‘Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (Material Damage)’ and by an endorsement, the sum insured for stock was further enhanced. It was claimed that a massive fire incident took place in the manufacturing unit of the insured and an immediate action by way of informing the police and fire service station was taken and fire tenders were sent to the spot. The insured submitted an insurance claim for a sum of Rs. 3.31 crores i.e. Rs. 40,11,152/- for building, Rs.1,08,47,435/- for plant and machinery and Rs.1,87,72,489/- for stock. The insured made a representation to the Grievance Redressal Manager against the repudiation of its claim and the same did not meet the desired result, upon which the insured filed a complaint before the National Commission. The complaint was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh complaint and thereafter, the subject complaint was filed, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the insurer. The National Commission upheld the repudiation letter, rejecting the complaint and hence, the insured approached the Apex Court. The Supreme Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case noted, “The insured-appellant has taken a pertinent plea in the instant civil appeal that the copies of the surveyor’s report and the investigators’ report were not provided timely and thus, the insured-appellant did not get proper opportunity to rebut the same. This pertinent plea taken by the insured-appellant in the memo of appeal has not been specifically refuted and only a formal denial was offered in the counter-affidavit filed by the insurer-respondent.” The Court further said that the ends of justice require that the insured should have been provided proper opportunity to file its rebuttal/objections to the affidavit/reports submitted by the insurer before the National Commission and consequently, the complaint should be reconsidered on merits after providing such opportunity to the appellant. “… the appellant shall be permitted to file its rebuttal/rejoinder affidavit before the National Commission limited to the contents of the reports referred to supra. Thereafter, the matter shall be reheard and decided on merits afresh”, it directed. Accordingly, the Apex Court disposed of the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the matter to National Commission for considering and deciding the complaint afresh. Cause Title- M/s. Kozyflex Mattresses Private Limited v. SBI General Insurance Company Limited and Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 234) Appearance:Appellant: Advocate Krishna Kumar Singh, AOR Sravan Kumar Karanam, Advocates Tayade Pranali Gowardhan, Mamatha Ralla, Rudroji Rakesh Kumar, and Shaik Sohil Akthar.Respondents: Advocates D. Vardhrajan, Rajat Khattry, Shagun Ruhil, and AOR Abhay Kumar. Source: Verdictum

Mumbai: A district consumer court has asked Air India to pay Rs 85,000 compensation to a 33-year-old man who missed work because of a 24-hour delay in Bangkok-Mumbai flight in 2018. It was alleged that while the Air India fight was to depart Bangkok on a Sunday evening, and land in Mumbai on early Monday, but it took off from Thailand on late Monday evening. The Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Commission said that as the complainant, Mohit Nigam, pointed out to deficiency in service, he is entitled to get compensation for physical and mental agony and loss of work. Nigam produced before the commission information received through a Right To Information (RTI) query which showed that the delay was due to the airline’s negligence. The fight was to arrive from New Delhi to Bangkok and then depart to Mumbai. Nigam said that he arrived at the airport three hours before the scheduled departure of 8 pm, collected his boarding pass and waited at the boarding gate but the flight was delayed. He added that the passengers were informed that flight would depart at 3 am and so everyone boarded the plane and waited for departure. However, later, it was announced that flight has been cancelled. This confusion continued till 5 am after which the fliers were provided accommodation. The commission said that a delay of almost 24 hours in departure of flight seems to have been caused because the opponent (Air India) at New Delhi Airport did not follow the scheduled mandatory requirements, which should have been done before departure of the flight. “It was duty of the opponent to follow mandatory check-ups before departure of flight, in which they failed. The RTI document submitted by the complainant clearly establishes the mistake on the part of the opponent,” the commission added. “As the complainant has pointed out deficiency in service of the opponent, he is entitled to get compensation for physical and mental agony, loss of work but not fully what he has prayed i.e. refund of ticket at both ends. It will be proper to impose costs of litigation upon the opponent,” the Commission said adding that it cannot be overlooked that this has caused inconvenience and mental agony to the complainant, for which he is entitled to be compensated. No Refund on Flight Tickets After announcing the compensation, the commission dismissed Nigam’s claims for a refund of the flight tickets. The commission noted that Nigam had travelled hassle-free from Mumbai to Bangkok. “The complainant’s claim for refund of ticket is not justified… It is not the case that the complainant had to bear additional expenses to purchase another air-ticket,” the commission said. Source: Times Now News

A retired non-resident Indian (NRI) has allegedly lost Rs 5.67 lakh when representatives of Kotak Securities dabbled in futures and options (F&O) with his money without his knowledge. In this regard, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has ordered Kotak Securities to refund the entire amount of money lost by them due to F&O trading, i.e., Rs 5,67,375 along with Rs 5,000 as compensation and Rs 1,000 as litigation expenses. According to the NRI complainant’s testimony before the district consumer forum, he was an individual, who after giving up his job abroad, was lured by the advertisement made by Kotak Securities and hence invested. “Attracted by the advertisements made by Kotak Securities, the investment for trading in shares in September 2007 was made. The two executives deputed by Kotak Securities promised that they will trade in the account only after getting confirmation for each transaction,” said the NRI individual. Lawyers say that generally, a stockbroker is not liable for the losses caused to an individual while trading in the stock market. “The inherent risk of investing lies with the individual and not the stockbroker. However, a broker can be held liable if the individual can prove that the stock market trading loss has resulted directly due to the broker’s negligence, misconduct, or failure to fulfil their obligations,” says Rishi Segal, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India. Kotak Securities contested that they are a member of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) and is acting as share broker and it is not their fault that money was lost trading in F&O(s). “The Complainant is not consumer as defined under section 2(1)(d) as the trades were executed with a speculative motive to earn profit. It is true that he had invested Rs 10,00,750/- with Kotak Securities but the loss is the trading loss for which we are not responsible,” said Kotak Securities. According to Kotak Securities, “The Complainant concealed the fact that he received pay-in of funds from the statement of accounts claiming the disputed period. The copies of contract notes, bills, trade confirmation statement of account were forwarded to the Complainant in his email. The Complainant did not raise any objection against the trades executed in his account. After execution he had taken a pay out of Rs 58,496.54 as revealed by the ledger A/c dated 01.02.2008.” According to the complainant who is a retired NRI, Kotak Securities very well knew that for trading in the derivative segment of the stock market margin money has to be deposited. For this specific purpose (margin money), a separate bank account in the name of the complainant was opened and the demat account was linked to it. On November 15, 2007, Kotak Securities representatives contacted the retired NRI and asked for approval in a trade, which he refused to give and asked the company to forward the trade ledger file. “They did not forward the same. The company has done derivative trade in the account without the written authority and without any kind of instruction,” alleged the complainant in the consumer forum. Mar 07,2024 Source: Economic Time

India’s federal election commission has fixed flaws on its website that exposed data related to citizens’ requests for information related to their voting eligibility status, local political candidates and parties, and technical details about electronic voting machines. India is heading for its next general elections, expected between April and May, to elect the members of its parliament’s lower house who will form the new government. The Election Commission of India fixed the bugs in its Right to Information (RTI) portal, which allows citizens to request access to records of constitutional authorities, as well as state and central government institutions and private organizations receiving substantial funds from the Indian government. The bugs allowed access to the RTI requests, download transaction receipts and responses shared by the officials without properly authenticating user logins. Some of the exposed data included the RTI filing date, the questions asked, the applicant’s name and mailing address, the applicant’s poverty line status and RTI responses. Security researcher Karan Saini found the bugs in February and asked TechCrunch to help disclose them to the authorities after the Election Commission, the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) and the National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Center did not initially respond to his requests to fix them. The bugs were fixed earlier this week following CERT-In’s intervention. “CERT-In has been coordinating the issue with the concerned authority. Recently, CERT-In has been informed by the concerned authority that the reported vulnerability has been fixed,” the Indian cybersecurity agency said in an email to TechCrunch on Tuesday. The agency also confirmed the fix to the researcher. Even though the RTI applications and responses are not confidential by Indian law, a judgment (PDF) by the Kolkata High Court in 2014 ordered authorities taking RTI applicants’ personal data “to hide such information and particularly from their website so that people at large would not know of the details.” By default, the Election Commission’s RTI portal does not provide access to individual RTI applications and responses without logging in, which means external access to the data and its ability to be scraped — because it is accessible without a login — made the flaws a privacy issue. Mar 08,2024 Source: Techcrunch