Hyderabad: The District Consumer Forum directs Raymond MTM (made to measure) to return RS 58,500 and pay Rs 15,000 to consumers because it fails to change and send the blazer, which is not suitable.
Mohammed Hameedduddin, a complainant, filed that he bought a ready-made blazer from Raymond MTM, Banjara Hills by paying Rs 58,500 on December 12, 2018, and should collect a blazer on December 22 after the change.
He said that when he went to collect the blazer, he found that it was not converted as needed and it looked ugly and not suitable.
Hameedduddin said he refused to collect the blazer and demanded that Raymond return the number.
He added that he had to buy another blazer to attend the family function.
He said that the Blazer was brought to his office claiming that it was changed again, after wearing a blazer, he and Raymond representative, which brought a blazer, noting that the arm was fixed on the inside and representatives must take it back to repair it.
The complainant said that he even received a legal notice issued to find a refund and compensation because Raymond failed to send a blazer after the changes needed.
In the same pursuit, he filed this complaint.
The store manager, in the written version, denied the allegations of service deficiency and opposed that as Gesture Goodwill, they offered to re-claim / blazer with fresh measurements for complainants after receiving legal notice.
The opposite party claims even though there are several attempts to repair and resolve the problem, the complainant fails to respond and receive the changed blazer delivery.
During the trial, the Consumer Consumer Disputes Commission-III noticed that the opposite party contacted the complainant with an offer to make the necessary changes or reset the blazer, only after the event and also after the legal notification was issued.
“Whether it’s a ready-made blazer that is changed according to the measurement of the complainant or Blazer MTM, the fact is fixed that the opposite party fails to send a timely blazer for complainant satisfaction.
The complainants are entitled to a reasonable compensation for discomfort and disappointment caused,” said the consumer court bench.
The store was ordered to pay for the customer for the suitable setting
