‘Consumer expects care’: Packers and movers to pay Rs 60,000 over ‘damaged’ goods

A Kerala district consumer commission has directed Agarwal Packers & Movers to pay Rs 60,000 to a man who had hired them to shift his household items after he had been transferred to Ernakulam from Delhi and the items arrived in a damaged condition, and a couple of them were lost.

A bench comprising DB Binu (president), V Ramachandran (member)  and Sreevidhia TN (member) of the Ernakulam District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission was hearing a complaint filed by a man who had hired the services of Agarwal Packers & Movers for shifting his household items, but the items arrived in a damaged condition and the grievances of the man were not addressed.

“The materials on record establish that the complainant suffered damage to household articles, loss of two packets and mental agony due to the negligent handling of the consignment by the opposite parties. The damaged articles

include crockery and articles stated to be antique and valuable. Such articles may have personal and sentimental value which cannot be measured merely by the figures mentioned in the packing list,” the May 26 order read.

‘Antique crockery’

On April 19, 2022, the man booked the company to shift his belongings from New Delhi to Ernakulam as he had been transferred, and he was assured of a safe delivery. The consignment contained household articles, including valuable and antique crockery.

The company undertook the transportation and delivered the goods at the man’s residence in Ernakulam. However, upon unloading, the man found that several crockery items were severely damaged, including broken glass items and furniture components.

Also, two packets were found missing from the belongings. The man alleged that the damages and loss resulted from careless packing, improper handling, and a lack of supervision by the company.

Despite promptly informing the officials of the company, the man claimed that no effective steps were taken to redress his grievance. It was contended that the company was liable for deficiency in service and had caused financial loss, inconvenience, and mental agony.

Story continues below this ad

Sentimental value: Consumer body

The commission noted that despite due service of notice, the company consciously failed to file its written arguments within the time granted by law and that in the absence of any legally acceptable defence, the arguments and evidence of the man remained unchallenged.

According to the commission, the plea that the unloading was done by the man himself is not supported by any evidence, and that the company, being professional packers and movers, could escape liability by making a “bald allegation” that the damage might have occurred during unloading.

The Commission further observed that the man immediately reported the loss and damage. Instead of resolving the grievance, the company failed to offer any effective remedy. Such conduct aggravates the deficiency and has caused financial loss, inconvenience, and mental agony to the man.

It was held by the commission that the man suffered damage to household articles, loss of two packets, and mental agony due to the negligent handling of the goods by the company. The commission also noted that such articles might have had personal and sentimental value, which could not be measured merely by the figures mentioned in the packing list.

Story continues below this ad

Accordingly, the commission ordered the company to pay Rs 50,000 to the man as compensation for loss and damage to goods, deficiency in service, and negligence suffered by the man. The company was also directed to pay Rs 10,000 as litigation costs.

‘Several items damaged’

The man contended that he had engaged the company to transport his household articles from New Delhi to Ernakulam upon his transfer while working with the National Investigation Agency and that when the goods were delivered on April 28, 2022, several items were found damaged and two packets containing costly dresses and a room heater, valued at Rs 85,000, were missing.

It was further argued by the man that the damages involved unique and antique articles that cannot be adequately compensated monetarily and that, despite repeated complaints through email, phone, and WhatsApp, the company did not take any effective remedial action.

‘No deficiency’

It was submitted by the company that all goods were transported as ordinary household articles and that the unloading was carried out by the man himself; therefore, any damage could have occurred during unloading and not while the goods were in their custody.

The company argued that the damages were stated to be minor, repairable, and had been exaggerated to claim undue compensation.

The company also emphasized that proper packing standards were followed and they acted with reasonable care, attempted to address the man’s concerns as a goodwill gesture.

Significance

The ruling establishes the obligation of companies to ensure proper service and grievance redressal of the consumers and that the concerns of the consumers must not be ignored, causing them unnecessary inconvenience.

Consumers must also pursue their complaints in before appropriate forums so that the companies and service providers at fault are held accountable for their actions. For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and union territories (Kerala helpline:1800-425-1550) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.