Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Presentation On
Consumer Protection Act,1986
Submitted
By:
Submitted To:
Prakhar Singh
Mrs.Nisha Bano Siddique
Pratiksha Jadhav
Pritha Upmanyu
1
Priya Nainani
CONSUMER PROTECTION
ACT, 1986
2
Content
Consumer Protection Act,1986
Definitions Related To CPA
Consumer Rights
Nature and Scope of Remedies Available to
Consumers
Case Studies
Conclusion
References
3
Consumer Protection Act
7
UN GUIDELINES FOR THE
CONSUMER PROTECTION
Protect from hazard to health & safety;
Consumer education;
9
WHAT IS A COMPLAINT?
10
WHAT IS A COMPLAINT?
11
WHAT IS A COMPLAINT?
12
WHAT IS A COMPLAINT?
13
WHO IS COMPLAINANT ?
A Complainant means any of the following and
having made a complaint:
A consumer ;
Any voluntary consumer association registered under
the companies act , 1956 or under any other law .
The Central Government or any State Government
One or more consumers, where there are numerous
having the same
In case of consumer , his legal heir or representative.
14
WHO IS A
CONSUMER ?
15
WHO IS A CONSUMER ?
16
WHAT IS A SERVICE?
Service means service of any description, which is
made available to potential users and includes, but not
limited to the provisions of the facilities in connection
with
Defects
Deficiencies
18
CONSUMERS NEED
PROTECTION AGAINST
UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
Adopting unfair methods or deception to promote sale, use or
so).
Charging above MRP printed.
19
CONSUMERS NEED
PROTECTION AGAINST
RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICE
Price fixing or output restraint re: delivery/flow of supplies
to impose unjustified costs/restrictions on consumers.
Collusive tendering; market fixing territorially among
competing suppliers, depriving consumers of free choice,
fair competition.
Delaying in supplying goods/services leading to rise in
price.
Requiring a consumer to buy/hire any goods or services as
a pre-condition for buying/hiring other goods or services.
20
WHAT IS A DEFECT ?
Fault In the
Imperfection Quality
Quantity
Shortcoming Potency
Purity Or
Standards
Inadequacy
22
THE 8 CONSUMER
RIGHTS
23
RIGHT TO THE
SATISFACTION OF BASIC
NEEDS
24
Right to Basic Needs
(Food, Water, Health, Sanitation , Education , Transport, Communication
and Energy)
31% respondents believe that the water from these sources is not potable,
hence not safe for drinking
About 74% of the respondents who tried to access govt. housing finance or bank
finance scheme believe that finance is not easily accessible and affordable
25
Right to Basic Needs
Only 44% respondents consider cost of obtaining healthcare
services affordable
27
Right to Safety
Though about 83% respondents believe that
certification and warnings are an important means to
ensure right to safety.
29
RIGHT TO BE INFORMED
Awareness Regarding Consumer Protection Related Laws (%)
30
Awareness Level of Different Legislations
28
Aware Urban Aware Rural
19
18
16
15
14
13
12
11
9
8 8
6
5
4 4
31
RIGHT TO CHOOSE
32
Right to Choice
Products/Services which Should
Offer Portability
Only few consumers are aware about
competition issues and their importance to
protect interests of consumers.
Insurance 15
only 1.6% respondents were able to correctly
name at least one product/service which has
only one or two producers/providers. LPG Connection 17
34
Right to be Heard
/Consumer Representation
Hurdles in ensuring effective consumer
representation/ participation
Only 23% are aware
about the process of
public consultation or Participation do not result in framing of consumer friendly regulations5
consumer
representation.
In rural area only 18% Date/time and Objective of public consultation are not properly communicated6
respondents are aware
About 28% of those
who are aware about Lack of interest among people to participate25
public consultation or
consumer
representation have Lack of awareness among people64
also participated
0 10 20 30 40 50 35
60 70
35
RIGHT TO SEEK
REDRESSAL
36
Right to Redressal
61% normally voice their complaints to seller, at first point
When it come to actual situation - 93% respondents have never made a
formal complaint
Only 0.3% respondents have approached consumer for a for grievance
redressal,
78% have rated the grievance redressal process as difficult.
75% cases were not completely redressed while only 18% of such
unresolved cases were taken to a higher authority for redressal.
67% cases were not redressed within stipulated time frame
Only 18% consumers are fully satisfied with the existing redressal
mechanism
Only 28% of those who know about external redressal mechanism
believe that it is easily accessible by a common man
About 89% aggrieved consumers are represented through advocates in
SCDRC and DCDRC. 37
RIGHT TO CONSUMER
EDUCATION
38
Right to Consumer
Education
Only 42% respondents have heard about consumer rights
40
RIGHT TO A HEALTHY
ENVIRONMENT
Awareness regarding
environmental friendly
Only 9% respondents are aware certifications
42
3-Tier Redressal Agency
The aims and objectives of the Act are achieved by the
constitution and creation of 3-tier judicial machinery
depending upon the amount of loss involved
District Forum NATIONAL COMMISSION
Lok Adalats:
The Consumer can approach the Adalat with his
grievance. The issue is discussed and decision is taken
on the spot. This saves time and money
Lok Adalat has become a speedy, effective and
economical redressal system.
45
FILING OF COMPLAINTS
A complaint may be filed by
46
FILING OF COMPLAINTS
The Fee for filing the Complaint for the district forum is as under
Sr. Value of Goods / Service and Compensation Amount
No. of Fees
1) Upto Rs. 1 lakh rupees Rs. 100
2) Rs. 1 Lakh and above but less than Rs.5 lakhs Rs. 200
3) Rs. 5 Lakhs and above but less than Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 400
48
F OR MS
T
COM PLAIN
49
APPEAL
50
LIMITATION PERIOD
51
Penalty Under
Section 27 CPA
According to CPA ,where a trader or
the complainant fails to comply with
an order made by the relevant
consumer forum , such person is
liable to a punishment with
imprisonment for a term which is not
less than 1 month but which may
extend to 3 years or with fine of not
less than 2000 INR but which may
extend to 10000 INR with both
52
LIMITATION
53
National Consumer
Helpline
1800-11-4000
(from MTNL or BSNL)
54
Remind Ourselves
24 December
National Consumer Day
15 March
World Consumer Rights Day
55
ALERT
56
CASE LAWS ON THE ACT.
Doctor ordered to pay Rs 2 lakh as damages to patient
A resident of Bidhuna town in Auraiya district, the complainant stated that he was
suffering from fever in December 2001 and on advice of local doctors he had visited the
clinic of child specialist RC Gupta situated at Chunniganj on January 14, 2002.
The doctor examined him and prescribed medicines and advised him to visit clinic again
for check-up after seven days. The complainant claimed that prescribed medicine did not
provide any relief. When he went again to the doctor on stipulated time and explained his
condition. The doctor enhanced the dose of medicine prescribed in old prescription..
57
CASE LAWS ON THE ACT.
The complainant consulted the child specialist of Etawah and he stated that wrong
treatment was being given to him. He was suffering from meningitis. On January 29, he
again consulted Dr Gupta and he referred him to a home.
During examination doctors, observed there that he was suffering from meningitis and
brain TB and so far he received wrong treatment. Due to wrong treatment, the
complainant got handicapped and lost his eyesight.
The doctor appeared before the forum and admitted that he had treated him on the
basis of external symptoms. He did not return for follow-up check in time and spent his
time in consulting other doctors. On January 29, his condition was critical and the doctor
had advised the patient to get admitted at the nursing home where meningitis and brain
TB was detected.
Forum president LB Singh and member Sumanlata Sharma observed that doctor was
negligent towards his duties and his act comes under the preview of dereliction of duty,
therefore he was liable to pay a sum of Rs 2 lakh as damages to the complainant.
58
CASE LAWS ON THE ACT.
Google to face action over privacy rules
PARIS: European data protection agencies intend to take action against the
US internet giant Google after it failed to follow their orders to comply with
EU privacy laws, a French agency said.
In October the data protection agencies warned Google that its new
confidentiality policy did not comply with EU laws and gave it four months
to make changes or face legal action.
"At the end of a four-month delay accorded to Google to comply with the
European data protection directive and to implement effectively (our)
recommendations, no answer has been given," said France's CNIL data
protection agency.
Google rolled out the new privacy policy in March 2012, allowing it to track users
across various services to develop targeted advertising, despite sharp criticism from
US and European consumer advocacy groups.
It contends the move simplifies and unifies its policies across its various services
such asGmail,YouTube,Androidmobile systems, social networks and Internet search.
But critics argue that the policy, which offers no ability to opt out aside from
refraining from signing into Google services, gives the operator of the world's largest
search engine unprecedented ability to monitor its users.
Google reiterated on Monday that its confidentiality policy is in line with European
law. "Our privacy policy respects European law and allows us to create simpler, more
effective services," Google said in a statement following CNIL's announcement.
60
The California-based firm said previously that the changes are designed to improve
the user experience across the various Google products, and give the firm a more
integrated view of its users, an advantage enjoyed by Apple and Facebook.
But critics argue that the policy, which offers no ability to opt out aside from
refraining from signing into Google services, gives the operator of the world's largest
search engine unprecedented ability to monitor its users.
Google reiterated on Monday that its confidentiality policy is in line with European
law.
Our privacy policy respects European law and allows us to create simpler, more
effective services," Google said in a statement following CNIL's announcement.
The California-based firm said previously that the changes are designed to improve
the user experience across the various Google products, and give the firm a more
integrated view of its users, an advantage enjoyed by Apple and Facebook.
"We have engaged fully with the CNIL throughout this process, and we'll continue to
do so going forward," it added.
61
European data protection agencies had recommended to Google that
it improve information provided to users, particularly on the
categories of data being processed, and for what purposes and
services.
CNIL said they had also asked Google to specify precise periods it
would hold onto personal data.
CNIL said that by Monday that Google had not provided "any precise
and effective answers to their recommendations.
62
CONCLUSION
A person may be consumer of goods, or services. When I purchase
a fan, a gas stove or a refrigerator, I could be the consumer of
goods.
When I open a bank account, take an insurance policy, get my car
repaired, I could be the consumer of services.
The consumer protection Act, 1986 tries to help a consumer when
for example, the goods purchased are defective or the services
rendered to him are subject to so deficiency.
Prior to the consumer Protection Act, 1986 for any consumer
complaint one had to go to an ordinary Civil Court. He had to
engage a lawyer, pay the necessary fee, and be harassed for years
or decades before any outcome, positive or negative, was there in
that litigation.
Under the Consumer Protection Act, no Court fee has to be paid
and the decision on the complaint is much quicker, as the Court
can evolve a summary procedure in disposing off the complaint.
63
Thank You
64