A woman who paid Rs 1.15 lakh to transport her household belongings from Delhi to Dimapur was left with 23 missing items and damaged appliances after the move. The South Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has now ordered the packers and movers to pay Rs 3 lakh in compensation and Urban Company to pay an additional Rs 50,000.
According to a report by *The Economic Times*, the complainant, identified as Longchar, booked the relocation service through Urban Company in September 2020 to transport her household goods, including furniture, electronic appliances, fixtures and her car, to Dimapur.
The household goods were loaded onto a truck on September 20, 2020. While her car was delivered on October 23, the household belongings arrived only on November 19, nearly two months after dispatch.
On checking the consignment, Longchar found that only 70 of the 93 items sent for transportation had been delivered. The remaining 23 items were missing.
Several of the delivered items were also damaged. Her air conditioner was reportedly beyond repair, while her LED television, crockery, utensils and other electronic and electrical goods were found broken.
Longchar said the moving company initially refused to accept responsibility for the damage. The company later reportedly agreed to pay Rs 25,000 for the air conditioner and promised compensation for other damaged items. It also assured her that the missing belongings would be sent by courier, but she told the commission that the promised items never arrived.
She subsequently approached the consumer commission seeking a refund of the Rs 1.15 lakh paid for the service, along with compensation for financial losses, mental agony and litigation expenses. Her total claim amounted to Rs 7.75 lakh.
Commission rejects Urban Company’s defence
Urban Company contested the complaint, arguing that it operated as a managed marketplace connecting customers with independent third-party service providers and should not be held liable for the moving company’s actions.
The commission rejected this argument, noting that the packers and movers had a service rating of 4.45 on Urban Company’s platform. It observed that consumers could consider such ratings when deciding whether to engage a service provider.
The commission held that Urban Company could not escape liability merely by describing itself as an intermediary providing a platform for consumers to access third-party services.
It found the packers and movers “grossly deficient in service”, taking into account the delay in delivery, the damage to household belongings and the 23 missing items.
The commission directed the packers and movers to pay Rs 3 lakh for deficiency in service and the loss and damage to the complainant’s belongings. Urban Company was separately ordered to pay Rs 50,000 towards compensation for mental agony, harassment and litigation costs.
Both parties were directed to make the payments within three months of the order, according to the report. (With inputs from The Economic Times and Livemint)
