Question

Interview 4 - 5 persons in your neighbourhood and collect varied experiences regarding how they have been victims of such exploitation and their responses.

Answer 1

Neighbourhood Survey Report on Consumer Exploitation

Respondent 1: The Homemaker (Grocery Exploitation)

1. Name & Age: Mrs. Sunita singh, 42
2. Type of Exploitation: Adulteration and under-weighting of goods.
3. The Experience: She purchased 5 kg of packed loose pulses (dal) from a nearby food store. When she opened it at home, she discovered that it included little stones and colorful impurities. When she weighed it on her digital kitchen scale, the shipment weighed just 4.6 kg, not the 5 kg she paid for.
4. The Response: She instantly went back to the store. The shopkeeper refused to acknowledge the error and blamed her home scale. Dissatisfied, she stopped purchasing from that shop and alerted her neighbours. She did not submit a formal complaint because she did not have a cash memo.

Respondent 2: The College Student (E-Commerce Exploitation)

1. Name & Age: Rahul Sharma, 22
2. Type of Exploitation: Delivery of a fake/counterfeit product and refusal of refund.
3. The Experience: Rahul ordered a branded pair of wireless earbuds online during a festive sale. Upon delivery, the sound quality was quite bad, and the serial number did not appear on the brand’s official website, indicating that it was a counterfeit copy.
4. The Response: He contacted customer service, but they rejected his return request, claiming the product was non-returnable under the “sale terms”. Rahul complained on X (previously Twitter), identifying both the corporation and the National Consumer Helpline (NCH). To maintain their business image, the e-commerce company responded within 48 hours by processing his payment refund.

Respondent 3: The Retired Professional (Medical Exploitation)

1. Name & Age: Mr. K.S. Murthy, 65
2. Type of Exploitation: Overcharging (selling above MRP) during a health emergency.
3. The Experience: During a medical emergency, Mr. Murthy hurried to a private hospital pharmacy to obtain a life-saving shot. The pharmacy clerk charged him 20% more than the maximum retail price (MRP), alleging “urgent handling charges” and supply shortages.
4. The Response: Out of helplessness, he paid the amount at the time to save his family member. He insisted on getting a genuine, printed cash receipt. He thereafter filed a formal online complaint against the pharmacy for unfair trade practices through the central government’s e-Daakhil platform.

Respondent 4: The IT Employee (Service Deficiency)

1. Name & Age: Priya Nair, 28
2. Type of Exploitation: Hidden charges and misleading service contracts.
3. The Experience: Priya signed up for a yearly broadband internet connection marketed as “No installation charges and flat ₹599/month”. When her first bill arrived, she was charged an additional ₹1,500 for “mandatory modem maintenance fees” hidden in fine print.
4. The Response: She called the company’s nodal officer to challenge the hidden charges based on the false advertisement. When they refused to waive it, she terminated the subscription, filed a complaint through the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) portal, and shifted to a transparent competitor.