[RahulNagaraj]

Thanks to Sameer for sending this in. Heartfelt gratitude for sharing it with other enthusiasts via this Team-BHP share page!

Hi,

I own a Kia Seltos GTX 7DCT & would like Team-BHP to know about the poor quality of the chrome.

Parts started to rust and discolour within the first 9 months of purchase. I contacted the Kia dealership in Delhi, but there was no proper response or solution for the same. Subsequently, I also approached Kia India but again there was no proper response. So, I approached the consumer court and after 2 years of filing the case, the consumer court gave its order in my favour and fined Kia India. Rs 70,000/- for deficiency of service.

I am attaching the order of the consumer court.

Would like you to carry this post for the benefit of all the Team-BHP members.

Thanks

[PreludeSH]

Not sure what car makers or their dealers achieve through litigation. Since the deficiency is on one car, couldn't they have just agreed to replace the parts ? I think its mostly ego and show the other party at fault which drives them not to accept. One of the reasons given was that it was washed daily !

Congrats to the owner for pressing through without giving up and getting the award.

[CarNerd]

That's fantastic! That's what we all should do wherever possible to get justice. Companies should remember that they are not here to just make money, they are here to serve their customers as well. The govt should further strengthen consumer protection laws and increase awareness in the public. If we buy world-class products and services, we deserve world-class consumer laws as well.

[Maverick0027]

Feels great to see that there are consumers who desire to take action against the companies, who are at fault. If I personally would have been in your situation, I would have paid from my pocket to get those replaced, due to the fear of how long the court proceedings can go in terms of years and the mental stress it provides as well. I am such a coward

Great ! You have taught a nice lesson to the dealership and brand, and now they will be much attentive for the customers' issues, as their responsibility should not end with just selling of the product.

[am1m]

Kudos to you! Hardly anyone will bother to take a manufacturer to court unless it is a very, very serious issue. But more people need to because every single manufacturer and dealer takes us for granted. They should be aware that poor quality and service has legal consequences.

[ashvek3141]

Kudos to you man! Well fought and dare I say it is the need of the hour. Really appreciate your perseverance. These supposedly 'premium' brands think that they can just take their customers for a ride and dictate terms to them. But hell no!

On a side note, this conducive market for the auto industry is in turn bad for us customers. I remember there was this major slack in the market somewhere in 2019 and the auto industry was in kind of a recession. I really hope those times return and that the auto industry has to come running behind us customers, than the other way round! The auto industry has hit a pretty high, it's just about time.

[Maverick Avi]

Just out of curiosity, is the complainant a lawyer? In today's fast paced world it's tough to commit to a litigation just because of a defective chrome piece.

[naikameya]

If Kia is fined only 70k, I feel discouraged to pursue something like this for 2+ years. It will leave a sour taste forever and I would rather want peace of mind and enjoy my car. For lawyers and people with easy access to lawyers, it could be different.

[ValarMorghulis]

Originally Posted by Maverick Avi

Just out of curiosity, is the complainant a lawyer? In today's fast paced world it's tough to commit to a litigation just because of a defective chrome piece.

Originally Posted by naikameya

If Kia is fined only 70k, I feel discouraged to pursue something like this for 2+ years...

Seriously! 70k is pittance for slogging for two years.

This judgement will also embolden KIA. Courts should make such penalties harsher for manufacturers rather than provide a pittance.

[Geo_Ipe]

Originally Posted by PreludeSH

Not sure what car makers or their dealers achieve through litigation. Since the deficiency is on one car, couldn't they have just agreed to replace the parts ?

Manufacturers & dealers are empowered by the fact that only a minute fraction of unhappy customers actually take the legal route!

Originally Posted by am1m

Kudos to you! Hardly anyone will bother to take a manufacturer to court unless it is a very, very serious issue.

Originally Posted by naikameya

If Kia is fined only 70k, I feel discouraged to pursue something like this for 2+ years.

Originally Posted by ValarMorghulis

This judgement will also embolden KIA. Courts should make such penalties harsher for manufacturers rather than provide a pittance.

Agree that 70k isn't too much of money, but the important issue here is that the company has been sued. Will act as a precedent when other consumers decide to go down the legal route (I'm not a lawyer and I hope I'm using the right terms).

A single judgement of 70k may not change too much in the system. What it is going to do is give more customers the will & guts to take the legal route. Once 10 customers sue the company, the amount becomes 7 lakhs, when the number grows to a 1000, the amount becomes a significant one! Power to the customer should be the message this whole fiasco is conveying!

[Jeroen]

Well done. Great case of perseverance wins the day (albeit it took two years)


It is interesting to note how the court expects Kia to provide statistical evidence as to how many car develop how much rust over the years. Which of course, they did not.

It means if Kia had done their home work a bit better, they would have likely won. Kia blames the environment and the maintenance. What is really at stake here is whether the chrome was of inadequate quality.

Although the court does rule in favour of the consumer, I don’t think it is a particularly strong verdict. From a consumer point of view it would have been better if the court would have made it a ruling along the lines. Paint and chrome should be produced and applied in such a way, it will stand up to corrosion and normal use in Indian environment.

Jeroen

[steadfast]

Request the author to please list down steps in very brief as bullet points, approx spend to pursue the case for 2 years and frequency of visit to court and any other challenges or any experiences that made process easy.

Will help troubled owners to know the details if needed to file a complaint

[Sammy_wOah]

Originally Posted by PreludeSH

Not sure what car makers or their dealers achieve through litigation.

I have many friends who are practicing law, I asked them the same question, Their reply was simple "In most cases, customers give up after several follow-up's, it is in their interest to make the path difficult and time consuming. If they were to address the issue fast, it could lead to many more customers coming in for similar problems, Leading to higher cost to company. Also perhaps they sometimes have in-house lawyers or yearly paid fees to external team of lawyers to tackle smaller cases, since they are on companies pay roll or paid in for entire year , they do not care for number of cases to address in court.

[DHARM]

Originally Posted by ValarMorghulis

Seriously! 70k is pittance for slogging for two years.

This judgement will also embolden KIA. Courts should make such penalties harsher for manufacturers rather than provide a pittance.

The loss of reputation is costlier than Rs.70,000 for KIA Motors, I am sure they will take appropriate action on the vendor and will do better QC henceforth, that said the efforts taken by Sameer won't go in vain. It may prompt other group Company also to look at QC. Anyways OEM's in India take Customers for granted so this kind of law suit are necessary. Courts in India are known to give lower compensation and sometimes it boldens seller but large organisations are always wary of reputation loss.

[SN88]

Originally Posted by PreludeSH

Not sure what car makers or their dealers achieve through litigation.

Ego and confidence that the consumer will not pursue it further for lack of time and money. Confidence in the judiciary to make it as time consuming as possible, harrassment, mental agony running pillar to post and absolute apartheid to the general public.

Secondly, lawyers on payroll who will never tell their clients/ employers that they can also loose.