“Lifestyle Compensates Customer for Undisclosed ₹7 Paper Bag Charge with ₹3,000”
Fashion giant Lifestyle, a prominent clothing retail chain in India, recently found itself in a legal tangle, resulting in a directive to pay ₹3,000 in damages to a customer for charging ₹7 for a paper bag without his prior knowledge. The Delhi Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (DCDRC) rendered this decision following a complaint lodged by Anmol Malhotra, highlighting the issue of undisclosed additional charges.
Fashion giant Lifestyle, a prominent clothing retail chain in India, recently found itself in a legal tangle, resulting in a directive to pay ₹3,000 in damages to a customer for charging ₹7 for a paper bag without his prior knowledge. The Delhi Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (DCDRC) rendered this decision following a complaint lodged by Anmol Malhotra, highlighting the issue of undisclosed additional charges.
The commission, in its statement reported by The Indian Express, underscored that Lifestyle’s action of charging customers for carry bags, especially for items purchased from their outlets, constituted a deficiency of service. “OP (Lifestyle) cannot charge any amount for carry bags, particularly those items which have been purchased from the OP outlet itself, and charging any amount from the consumers for that amounts to a deficiency of service on the part of the OP,” mentioned the commission.
Malhotra, the complainant, expressed dissatisfaction with his shopping experience, citing distress over being levied an unanticipated charge for the paper bag. He contended that Lifestyle’s imposition of additional fees caused inconvenience and frustration.
The focus of the DCDRC deliberation centered on the acceptability of corporations like Lifestyle imposing extra charges on customers for carry bags without prior notification. While several retailers, including Lifestyle, transitioned to charging customers for paper bags following the ban on plastic bags in India, the contention arose around informing customers about these additional fees.
The commission ruled decisively in favor of Malhotra, emphasizing that Lifestyle should refrain from charging customers for paper bags without prior intimation. It noted that presenting such information at the payment stage caused customer harassment, imposed additional costs, and compromised the customer’s right to make an informed decision about choosing a particular outlet.
This incident sparks a broader conversation regarding transparent pricing practices in retail, particularly concerning incidental charges like carry bag fees. The ruling reinforces the importance of ensuring customers are fully informed about any additional costs associated with their purchases, aiming to safeguard consumer rights and prevent undue inconvenience.
Lifestyle’s mandate to pay damages highlights the significance of transparency in business transactions, emphasizing the need for retailers to adhere to stringent consumer disclosure norms to avoid similar disputes and ensure a fair shopping experience for all customers.
Sources By Agencies
About The Author
