)
In December 2012, Reena Kumaran (name changed), a resident of Bangalore, got a direct-to-home (DTH) connection from a leading company. Within 15 days, her set-top box stopped receiving signals. On lodging a complaint, a customer service executive replaced the set-top box. Soon, the second box, too, started malfunctioning. This time, however, the DTH company blamed Kumaran for the problem.
Acting on her friends' advice, she posted her complaint on a consumer grievance website. But the DTH company didn't respond and the website said it couldn't push companies. Today, Kumaran's case is in a consumer court. Unlike Kumaran, many benefit from the scores of online redressal websites that have come up, especially in past four to five years (see box). Some are dedicated to redress. Others like mouthshut.com are buyers guide for products and allow posting complains also.
The process of filing complaints with most of these sites is simple: The consumer has to register with the website and file the complaint. Mostly this is free of charge. Along with free service, some sites such as Akosha offer paid packages. Akosha's Rs 499 service follows up with the complainant for more details of the complaint and with the company concerned. The Rs 999 service also helps the consumer document and draft a complaint for a court case, if needed.
In its terms of usage, AbToBolo.com states, "AbToBolo.com is not responsible for helping consumers resolve their complaints. AbToBolo.com is only a tool consumers can use to try to help themselves."
Though a consumer involved in a dispute(s) with service provider(s), or brands, can approach websites, many complain most of these sites merely discuss issues or provide a public platform to state woes. Subsequently, the registered members discuss and suggest ways to resolve these issues, like in any other discussion forum.
Ankur Singla, founder and chief executive of Akosha, says, "Now, we get 1,000 complaints a day, against 150 during the corresponding period last year. This is largely because no one wants to approach consumer courts, as the cost of hiring a lawyer could be huge. Also, the resolution period could be prolonged, efficiency might be low and lengthy documentation might be required." Comparatively, websites could be handy.
Good part is that the problems go public and brands tend to reply promptly. Says an executive from a leading private bank, "These websites are a great way to know consumer problems/feedbacks and make amends instantly, as it impacts our brand value. Given a large number of customers are going online, many times, branch managers are asked about the complaints seen online. So, we need to be aware. At the same time, not all complaints can be resolved."
Once a complaint is filed, it is up to the brands that have tie-ups with the website to address the grievance. Some websites may forward the complaint to the brand or help spread the word on social networking sites; while some may guide consumers on how to ensure brands heed the complaint.
These websites cannot solve all complains; the reasons could be many, including no amicable solution or no response from brands. But the number of unresolved complaints is low; in Akosha's case, it is about four to five per cent. It largely depends on the sector in which the company concerned functions. For instance, experts say complaints against telecommunication and consumer appliances companies are resolved quickly, maybe in three to six days. However, complaints against insurance and real estate firms take longer, maybe 30-40 days, as these firms are the least reactive.
An insurance company executive, however, defends this, saying most policyholders don't understand a product before buying it. Later, write ill about the company.
According to a former owner of a consumer grievance website, on many occasions, once the brand reverts, the exchange between the consumer and the brand shifts from the website. At times, brands seek contact details of the consumers concerned and reach out to them on their own, not through the website, for fear of wrong publicity. In such cases, it becomes difficult for websites to provide additional help.
Faisal Farooqui. founder and chief executive of MouthShut.com, says most brand managers care about consumer complaints, as the cost of acquiring a customer is 70 times higher than repairing ties with an existing one. "We don't advise taking the consumer court route, though that is always an option, because brands do respond to complaints, as they realise customers are going online," he says.
Consumer lawyers are unanimous in favouring consumer courts for a proper verdict, something websites cannot provide. Also, once a lawyer is involved, he/she takes complete responsibility for the case, unlike many websites. However, many feel for complaints on small product parts or telecom services, consumers can try resolving through websites, as, at times, court cases might involve a fee higher than the cost of the product/service.
