Consumer panel asks Ola Electric to replace consumer’s faulty scooter

A consumer commission in Thane has asked Ola Electric Technologies to replace a defective electric scooter or provide a full refund following a series of technical failures, citing “sheer deficiency” in customer service.

Also Read | Ola Electric recalls 1,441 units of electric two-wheelers

The Bengaluru-based manufacturer was also engaged in “unfair trade practice”, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Additional Thane) noted in a recent order.

The chronology of events emphatically shows that the vehicle was not in proper condition and had various defects, it held.

“It was imperative upon the opponent to rectify the problems by giving a proper service to the complainant,” the commission remarked.

“Not disclosing all relevant and necessary information in regard to the service of the vehicle and not removing the defects is a sheer deficiency on the part of the opponent,” it stated.

The complainant, a Navi Mumbai-based advocate, purchased the Ola electric scooter in July 2024 for ₹96,997.

On his first major ride, just two days after delivery, the vehicle experienced acceleration snags and broke down multiple times in traffic, as per the complainant.

He noted that during a ride on August 29, 2024, the battery level plummeted from 21% to 3% within just 500 meters. It led to a sudden halt of the vehicle, which could have caused a fatal accident, the complainant claimed.

Also read: Case against Ola Electric founder, senior officials after death of employee

When the issue was not resolved even after multiple communications, the advocate approached the commission, alleging a deficiency in service on the part of the company.

The commission highlighted that there was a pattern of neglect by Ola Electric. Despite repeated emails and WhatsApp messages, the complainant received no response until he took his grievances to X.

Notably, even after the vehicle was picked up for service, the complainant was informed by his insurance provider that the scooter had not even been reported to the designated garage.

When the vehicle was finally returned to the customer months later, after filing of the present complaint, it was in “unclean condition, having scratch marks,” the order pointed out.

The commission was of the view that the consistent dropping of the battery level and other issues that arose from the first ride showed the vehicle was defective.

It underlined that the act of not updating the status of the vehicle and withholding the custody certainly amounts to a deficiency as well as an unfair trade practice.

“More importantly, the delivery of the vehicle was given during the pendency of complaint which is an attempt to cover up the negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the opponent,” the commission concluded.

It directed that Ola Electric must replace the vehicle with a brand-new one of the same specifications.

Alternatively, if it cannot be replaced, then the company must refund the full cost of ₹96,997 along with 6% annual interest.

The company was also ordered to pay ₹20,000 for mental agony and hardship and ₹15,000 for litigation expenses. Since Ola Electric failed to appear or file a written statement, the case was decided ex parte.