Consumer panel pulls up MakeMyTrip for failing to act on fraudulent transactions; orders payout

Mumbai: A consumer court has held MakeMyTrip (MMT) guilty of deficiency in service as well as adopting unfair trade practice for not acting on fraudulent transactions and deducting cancellation charges on a customer's air tickets as it asked the firm to pay him compensation.

Observing the online travel firm "cannot shirk from its responsibility of keeping customers' financial and private details safe", it asked MMT to pay the remaining airfare of Rs 61,608, remaining airfare for illegal transaction of Rs 6,260 with 6 per cent annual interest from November 1, 2019, Rs 50,000 for mental agony, harassment and Rs 20,000 for legal expenses (total Rs 1.37 lakh) to the customer.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai Suburban (Additional), in its order on June 30, noted the travel portal was also guilty of deducting cancellation charges "without any clear (and) mutually agreed terms and policy with the complainant (customer)".

The company's response to the verdict was awaited.

The commission highlighted "there should be immediate follow up" if it comes to the company's notice that details and private personal information of a customer is compromised and fraudulent transactions took place.

Merely directing the customer to lodge a complaint with cyber police is a "lame excuse", it observed and added the company "cannot shirk from its responsibility for keeping customers' financial and private details safe".

The commission pointed out that MakeMyTrip works on a pan-India market, having a customer base in lakhs, and hence there should be a standard operating procedure (SOP) to address such complaints.

Unfortunately, the company failed to bring any such procedure on record "which is a matter of huge concern", it added.

The complainant, a resident of suburban Ghatkopar, had booked flight tickets for his family from Mumbai to Hong Kong and return in 2019 via the portal. The total cost of these two-way tickets was Rs 70,800 and Rs 77,609, respectively, the complainant claimed.

As per the complaint to the commission, he received an SMS informing him of the cancellation of the confirmed tickets without his consent.

MakeMyTrip refunded only Rs 20,192 and Rs 15,165 respectively, which was significantly less than the amounts indicated by the airlines (Rs 45,465 and Rs 51,400), he claimed.

He further stated that fraudulent transactions occurred through his MakeMyTrip online wallet, including bookings for air travel from New Delhi to Moscow and Lucknow to Jaipur, also without his consent.

The complainant claimed he incurred a total loss of Rs 1,24,844 due to lower refund and fraudulent transactions.

In its defence, the company submitted the complainant himself cancelled the bookings and the refund was processed according to their cancellation policy.

Further, the company stated the amount lost in fraudulent transactions was already refunded.

The commission, upon perusal of documents on record, stated that there are no specific terms or conditions in the user agreement, which address the subject of cancellation.

Further, the panel stated that since MakeMyTrip claimed to be a facilitator, they should understand and admit that their role is limited to the booking of travel tickets.

On fraudulent transactions, the commission said the company refunded the money of one such transaction after deducting some amount, which sufficiently confirms that the firm had the knowledge of such a transaction.

It was their statutory duty to initiate an inquiry in this matter, lodge a police complaint and collect evidence from all parties concerned, including the complainant, the commission stressed.

Instead, it simply refunded some part of the fraudulently transacted ticket, which is "highly objectionable and unacceptable", it noted.

"It would not be out of place to form an opinion that the opposite parties (MMT and its office in suburban Borivali) "have made an attempt to push the dirt below the carpet", the commission ruled.

The commission held the company guilty of deficient service as well as adopting unfair trade practice for deducting cancellation fees and failing to act "on noticing fraudulent transactions in relation to its consumers".