LI Network
Published on: December 30, 2023 at 13:04 IST
In a recent ruling from the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in Ernakulam, a case revolving around migration services has established a pivotal point in safeguarding consumers dealing with immigration assistance.
The instance involved Roshna K. V. taking action against immigration agents Syed Bakir and others, spotlighting the challenges faced by consumers and the obligations of service providers in migration assistance.
Roshna K. V. approached the respondents seeking aid for migration to Australia. Allegedly, misled by them, Roshna encountered a setback in her migration process due to missing research publications, a crucial requirement for the University Lecturer skill assessment.
The complaint contended that the respondents provided misleading information, mishandled documents, and made false assurances, resulting in financial loss, wasted time, and mental distress. The claim sought compensation for various expenses like PTE exam fees, bank statement costs, document procurement, and mental anguish.
In response, the respondents argued the complaint lacked legal grounds and was an attempt to harass them. They stated that the complainant breached the contract through plagiarism, leading to the rejection of her husband’s skill assessment.
After carefully examining evidence from both sides, Judges Mr. D.B Binu, President, Mr. Ramachandran V, and Mrs. Sreevidhia T.N, ruled on the case.
Judge D.B Binu noted, “The complainant’s assertions of false assurances, misleading guidance, and financial and emotional harm have been substantiated through the evidence.”
The judgment underscored the duty of care held by immigration agents, stating, “The respondents, registered immigration agents, had a duty of care and ethical responsibility to provide accurate information and guidance to the complainant.”
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum ruled in favor of the complainant, instructing the respondents to reimburse Rs. 1,30,953 and pay an additional Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation for deficient service and mental distress. Additionally, they were to cover the cost of proceedings, amounting to Rs. 10,000.
This ruling stands as a crucial legal precedent, emphasizing transparency and ethical conduct in migration services. It reinforces consumer rights and mandates service providers’ accountability for the accuracy of information provided.
The respondents have been given a 30-day deadline to comply with the orders. Failure to do so will result in an interest charge of 9% on the ordered amounts.
Case Name: ROSHNA K V MURIYANGARA Vs SYED BAKIR DOOR