POCO Held Liable for Defective Phone and Unfair Trade Practices

The recent ruling of the Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has brought to light the questionable practices of the tech giant POCO. In a case involving Mrs. Divyashree P.R., POCO was found liable for selling a defective mobile phone and engaging in unfair trade practices.

Mrs. Divyashree purchased a POCO X3 Pro mobile phone, expecting it to be a reliable device. However, just a few months after the purchase, the phone encountered a critical issue with its motherboard, rendering it completely unusable. Seeking assistance, Mrs. Divyashree contacted POCO, who initially assured her of a replacement with a new motherboard.

To her dismay, after waiting for 20-30 days, she received a notification from POCO stating that the required motherboard was unavailable. Instead of fulfilling their initial promise, POCO decided to offer her a refurbished phone of the same model. This turn of events left Mrs. Divyashree dissatisfied and rightfully concerned about the quality of service provided by POCO.

Following unsuccessful attempts to resolve the issue with POCO, Mrs. Divyashree filed a consumer complaint with the Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. POCO, however, failed to appear during the proceedings, leading to an ex-parte ruling against them.

The Commission thoroughly examined the case and concluded that POCO’s actions constituted a deficiency in services and unfair trade practices. By originally committing to replace the motherboard but later providing a refurbished phone, POCO breached the trust of their customer and failed to meet their obligations.

In light of these findings, the Commission directed POCO to refund Mrs. Divyashree the full value of Rs. 20,999 for the mobile phone and pay compensation of Rs. 3,000 for the deficiency in service. Additionally, POCO was ordered to cover the litigation costs of Rs. 3,000.

This ruling serves as a reminder that companies must uphold their commitments to customers and demonstrate transparency in their business practices. Consumers should be aware of their rights and take appropriate action if they encounter similar issues with products or services.

An FAQ section based on the main topics and information presented in the article:

1. What is the recent ruling against POCO about?
– The recent ruling found POCO, a tech giant, liable for selling a defective mobile phone and engaging in unfair trade practices.

2. What happened to Mrs. Divyashree P.R. after purchasing a POCO X3 Pro mobile phone?
– Mrs. Divyashree’s phone encountered a critical issue with its motherboard, rendering it completely unusable, just a few months after purchase.

3. What did POCO initially promise to Mrs. Divyashree when she sought assistance?
– POCO initially assured Mrs. Divyashree of a replacement with a new motherboard for her defective phone.

4. What did POCO offer instead of the promised replacement?
– POCO offered Mrs. Divyashree a refurbished phone of the same model when the required motherboard was unavailable.

5. How did Mrs. Divyashree try to resolve the issue with POCO?
– Mrs. Divyashree filed a consumer complaint with the Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission after unsuccessful attempts to resolve the issue with POCO.

6. What was the ruling of the Commission?
– The Commission ruled in favor of Mrs. Divyashree, concluding that POCO’s actions constituted a deficiency in services and unfair trade practices.

7. What were the consequences for POCO according to the ruling?
– POCO was directed to refund Mrs. Divyashree the full value of Rs. 20,999 for the mobile phone, pay compensation of Rs. 3,000 for the deficiency in service, and cover the litigation costs of Rs. 3,000.

Definitions:
– Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission: This is a consumer disputes redressal commission in Bangalore, India, which settles disputes between consumers and businesses.
– Deficiency in services: This refers to a situation where a service provider fails to deliver the promised service or provides a service that does not meet the expected standards.
– Unfair trade practices: Unfair practices used by businesses to gain an advantage over competitors or deceive consumers.

Suggested related links:
– POCO Official Website
– National Consumer Helpline, India