The rise of online service aggregators has undoubtedly made life more convenient, enabling us to book and order nearly everything with a few clicks. However, these aggregators have minimal liability in case of service failure, delays, or unsatisfactory experiences; their responsibility is often confined to simply refunding the payment, regardless of the financial or emotional distress caused to the consumer.
My last pre-planned, well-researched trip was a fiasco. I faced anxiety, mental and emotional trauma, and distress because the car from the car rental was suddenly unavailable, and the booked villa on check-in informed – they hold no reservation. I got the refund, but that hardly compensated for the trauma and missed opportunities.
Hidden in the Fine Print
Most service aggregators function under elaborate terms and conditions. The documents are so long and convoluted that most users click the ‘Agree’ button without reading the terms. They fail to read and appreciate the limited liability camouflaged and buried deep inside the clauses.
If one suffers losses due to a service failure, the aggregator must only refund the transaction amount. Even if the car rental is cancelled at the last minute, leading to a missed flight or opportunity loss due to missed business meeting, the consumer receives nothing more than the refund -no compensation for the disruption caused -Zilch for the trauma and anxiety.
Unsaid differentiation
It is a fallacy that offers and information are democratic and inclusive with these aggregators. On the contrary, the experience demonstrates that they differentiate and discriminate, are non-inclusive, and serve a narrow set of options that look and sound grand in the name of choices and liking. The consumer’s liability and requirement for adherence to process and terms remain substantial.
Delays
Technology has taken away the human interface. You are forced to navigate an army of bots and a sea of FAQs before facing the notorious AVR, and then your call is placed on hold while the tantalising loop of how important your call is plays.
Trust me, there is a degree of insensitivity. The e-mails to support go unanswered. The social media platforms are windows to the complaint surges and mental cruelty. Every action is justified by the terms and conditions and their being intermediatory- who can only revert and compensate if the final service provider does. It is worse than roulette in a casino- at least you know your betting options.
There is improvement, but a lot more is required a lot earlier
In India, consumer protection laws have improved with the introduction of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, but online aggregators continue to exploit legal loopholes.
Unlike traditional service providers, aggregators label themselves as intermediaries, absolving themselves of direct responsibility for service failures. This allows them to pass the blame to the end service provider while maintaining a lucrative position in the transaction.
India vs. Other Countries: A Regulatory Perspective
Comparatively, several countries have enforced stricter regulations:
The European Union’s (EU) consumer protection laws require platforms to disclose the nature of their liability. In cases where an intermediary plays a critical role in facilitating a transaction, it shares responsibility for service failures.
In the United States (US), Class-action lawsuits against service aggregators have strengthened consumer protection. Platforms are mandated to provide clear refund policies and, in some cases, compensation for damages beyond ticket refunds.
The United Kingdom (UK) mandates fair contract terms, ensuring that aggregators cannot enforce terms that are ‘unfair or misleading.’ The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) actively investigates service providers who exploit legal loopholes, ensuring consumer-friendly policies.
The Need for Reform in India
Given the increasing dependence on online service aggregators, Indian consumers need stronger consumer protection measures to ensure intermediaries do not entirely escape liability. These include some simple steps.
Platforms must present terms and conditions and key liabilities in simple, understandable language rather than burying them in pages full of incompressible legal jargon.
Aggregators should share some liability with the end service provider, ensuring consumers receive fair compensation when a service failure results in significant inconvenience or loss.
We need a dedicated regulator to oversee digital aggregators. This may help prevent unfair business practices and ensure that consumer rights are upheld.
Addressing such cases of consumer complaints and the liability of the aggregators must be easy and fast. Most of the time, consumers let it go not because they don’t want to take it up but because they know it is time-consuming and tedious. It will disrupt their life, and, in the end, the settlement may not justify the efforts.
Net-net
While online aggregators have revolutionised services, their current liability model is heavily skewed against consumers. The aggregators conveniently hide behind complex terms and conditions, limiting their obligations to simple refunds. India must adopt best practices from global regulatory frameworks to bridge this gap and ensure that aggregators are held accountable for service failures beyond refunds. Stronger consumer protection laws and regulatory bodies can help make it a fairer digital marketplace where consumer rights are safeguarded.
BLOG/017/1075 If the content interests you, please subscribe to my weekly update. Follow on Twitter S_kotnala. And if you wish to connect, email me.
