Domestic help hiring agency penalised for unfair trade practices in Bengaluru

Bengaluru: In a consumer court case in Bengaluru, a domestic help hiring agency has been slapped a penalty of over Rs 31,000 after failing to fulfil its commitment.

Last September, Dr Poonam Agarwal, a 42-year-old resident of KS Layout in South Bengaluru, hired a house help from Bookmybai, a Mumbai-based company that connects customers with domestic workers in various cities across India. The company advertises a “free replacement” policy for customers.

Poonam paid Rs 21,240 to the company for domestic help, with the agreement that three replacements would be provided if the initial worker was unsuitable or left abruptly. However, after the domestic help assigned to her left within two days, and despite multiple assurances from the company, no replacement was sent.

This failure led Poonam to file a complaint, seeking Rs 2 lakh in compensation, in addition to the prepaid amount, citing "mental harassment" and "inconvenience".

The complainant also claimed that the initial agreement for Rs 16,000 was increased by Rs 2,000 following several rounds of negotiation.

Poonam further accused the company representatives of instructing her not to disclose the full details of the work to potential candidates before finalising the agreement, which she considered unethical and indicative of “malafide intent”.

The case was heard by the 3rd Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on November 27. The bench ruled that the company had taken the full amount after implementing unreasonable salary hikes and failed to deliver, constituting an unfair trade practice.

Poonam, who urgently needed domestic help due to her mother’s medical condition, experienced a two-month delay in receiving service. Despite numerous calls, the company sent profiles of workers with salary requirements of Rs 20,000, which was deemed unreasonable.

Also, the company’s suggestion to withhold full details of the work from potential candidates was seen as part of its unfair trade practice. Their non-participation in the proceedings further highlighted their failure to provide adequate service.

The court ordered the company to compensate Poonam Rs 21,240, along with an additional Rs 10,000 for litigation costs and the inconvenience caused.