OBJECTING PETITION UNDER ORDER VII RULE XI (D) CPC R/W S.151 CPC PRAYING FOR REJECTION OF PRESENT COMPLAINT ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED BELOW

Objection document submitted on 5 October 2023 by the primary complainant Ratul Aich to the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum against the petition submitted by HDFC ERGO.

Before the Learned District Consumer Dispute Redressed Commission, North 24 Parganas, Barasat.

C.C. No. 353 Of 2022

In the matter of: Complaint under Sections 34 (1), 34 (2) (d), 35, 36, and 39 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AND In the matter of:

Ratul Aich,
………………Complainant

Versus

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited.
IRDAI Reg №146
1st Floor, HDFC House,
165/166 Backbay Reclamation,
H.T.Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai — 400 020
………………Respondent

OBJECTING TO THE PETITION GIVEN BY THE OP

Most Respectfully Sheweth:

1. There I submitted my points for the objection to merging the case CC/353/2022 and CC/354/2022 that has been requested by the Respondents HDFC ERGO in the petition submitted on 11 August 2023 with the heading “PETITION UNDER ORDER VII RULE XI (D) CPC R/W S.151 CPC PRAYING FOR REJECTION OF PRESENT COMPLAINT ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED BELOW” to the Hon’ble District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum.
2. The inception of case CC/353/2022 is related to HDFC ERGO Optima Restore Health Insurance Policy number 2805203553540502 (2021–2022) and the inception of case CC/354/2022 is related to HDFC ERGO Optima Restore Health Insurance Policy number 2805203553540501 (2020–2021).
3. The nature of the two cases is completely different from one another. The case CC/353/2022 is related to UX, Dark Patterns, Usability, accountability of user’s personal data (vitals), HIPAA regulations, authentication of external data asked by respondent HDFC ERGO, quality assurance, and quality control of the IT Systems. The mismanagement at multiple levels caused harassment and agony to the consumer. The case CC/354/2022 is related to mis-selling renewal insurance by a false promise to the customer.
4. CC/354/2022 is an open and shut case with the existence of hard evidence.
5. CC/353/2022 is a complex tech case with many delinquencies.
6. Submitting a petition stating CC/353/2022 and CC/354/2022 are similar in nature exhibits the incapability of the legal department of HDFC ERGO to interpret and distinguish the two cases from one another.
7. CC/353/2022 verdict is expected to have a farfetched societal impact enhancing the judicial knowledge pool of similar types of tech cases in the new normal Tech Savvy Society.
8. Retaining the individuality characteristics of the tech-related case CC/353/2022 is in the best interest of our modern tech-savvy society because it will ascertain easy discoverability for public scrutiny and better searchability in the judicial archive.
9. The retail consumer case CC/353/2022 is a matter of prominence because we all are retail consumers of ample digital products and services in the age of hyperconsumerism. Therefore the number of such digital tech cases is rising steeply.
10. CC/353/2022 once resolved could be assessed to uncover the effort, time, and cost of such digital tech cases. The newly found knowledge would enhance the capability of the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum and the legal department of digital tech-assisted service providers across the horizon.
11. The case might progressively reform an aspect of the digital tech due diligence capability of the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum and the Service Providers operating domestically and internationally.
12. Addressing the case will likely enforce the accountability of all the companies providing services through digital technology to the Digital Nagrik of Bharat.
13. This case has surfaced the deficiencies in the deployment of the digital product and services by the tech team of HDFC ERGO. Alongside it has uncovered the poor capability of the HDFC ERGO law department in defending cases related to the digital tech paradigm. This case might force the digital service providers to reform the standard practices of the in-house legal department which will invariably assist Consumer and the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum in resolving digital cases speedily, cost-efficiently, with minimum effort. So the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum in participation with the Indian Judiciary may decide to conduct studies to enhance legal frameworks for streamlined documentation of the customer experience team (customer care), tech team, and the service provider’s in-house legal team. This will ease the review effort of the people involved.
14. CC/353/2022 case might mandate the digital service providers and product makers to incorporate UX, Usability, Accessibility, Quality Assurance, and Quality Control in the agile deployment pipeline enhancing the statutory stature of UX, Usability, Accessibility, Quality Assurance, and Quality Control departments. This case might adduce and assign a protected title to the Academia of UX Design distinguishing it from the Academia of UX Engineering, Human Factors, and Usability Engineering transforming the practice of human resources recruitment pipeline which will secure overall compliance and therefore retain the trust of end customers, users, and consumers on the products and services. So the case CC/353/2022 is significant for the growth of my professional and academic community of UX.
15. The associated documents submitted in the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum with the Evidence document of CC/353/2022 contain the conversation with HDFC ERGO in the month of October and November 2022 which shows the uncaring attitude of companies towards the digital tech deficiencies brought to the notice of HDFC ERGO during the last renewal a year ago. The associated document title is ‘Even a year later (2022–2023) since it has been brought to the notice of HDFC ERGO (2021–2022) about the non-existence of automatic discount calculation in the policy renewal checkout user flow which leads to a lot of complication, confusion, and waiting over email, nothing has changed. This is the reason the Hon’ble District Consumer Court needs the provision of User Experience and Usability Digital Forensic Investigation and I’d request the same from the Hon’ble Consumer Court.’ https://rat9.medium.com/no-improvement-in-hdfc-ergo-policy-renewal-user-flow-even-a-year-later-b70b1b2bc21e
16. The respondent HDFC ERGO has already attempted to club two cases CC/353/2022 and CC/354/2022 in the response submitted to the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum called the ‘Written version on behalf of the opponents’ on 17 Jan 2023.
17. The complainant objected to any inclusion of case CC/354/2022 in the response of CC/353/2022 and clearly asked the respondent to address two cases separately. The following points have been raised by the complainant in the associated documents submitted with the Evidence document. The associated document title is ‘CC/353/2022 edaakhil A22090004397 OP HDFC ERGO Response Received on 17 Jan 2023 Objected and Replied by Complainant Ratul Aich.’ https://rat9.medium.com/replied-hdfc-ergo-on-1-march-2023-8205a70d08c
18. The defamation allegations against the plaintiff by OP HDFC ERGO is a planned attempt at character assassination of the plaintiff by questioning the intentions w.r.t the straight-forward evidence, dialogues, and arguments put forward by the plaintiff in colloquial language, in the course of litigation, which seems to be a planned tactical move by OP HDFC ERGO, in a lieu of it, a trick to dismiss all the cases by the plaintiff against HDFC ERGO.
19. I’d request the court to take notice to be not pulled into the bias, such that the dialogues around one litigation with grey areas to address should not bloat onto all the other lawsuit as some of them has been backed by black-and-white hard evidence.
20. The poor capability of HDFC ERGO legal department in addressing digital tech cases appropriately could be the reason for their attempt to divert attention by merging two cases into one.
21. CC/354/2022 was ex parte until 22 September 2023. It is best to my knowledge HDFC ERGO submitted a document to the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum on that day.
22. I’d request the consumer dispute redressal forum for maximum reimbursement.
23. If required please discuss the digital tech case with the Three Grievance Appellate Committees (GACs) Notified on the recently amended “IT Rules 2021”. Safety and trust of Digital Nagriks and Accountability of Platforms to their Digital Nagriks are policy objectives for the Shri Narendra Modi Govt: MoS Shri Rajeev Chandrasekhar. Posted On: 28 JAN 2023 11:08 AM by PIB Delhi.
24. I’d like to bring to the notice of the CDRC that HDFC ERGO has launched a new app called ‘Here’ replacing the older application. This is one of the reasons for developing steadfast digital investigation and justice delivery capability in today’s hyperconsumerism tech-savvy society. I’m submitting an essay on the same topic “The Effectiveness of Consumer Courts in the Age of Hyperconsumerism”. https://rat9.medium.com/the-effectiveness-of-consumer-courts-in-the-age-of-hyperconsumerism-8f5b8b62963c
25. Some of the unverified archived lawsuits including that of the Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission related to UX Dark Patterns found in Google Bard and Bing Chat could help to compare and resolve the case sooner. I’m submitting the search results (article).
26. The statements made in paragraphs 1 to 25 of the foregoing affidavit are true to my knowledge and thereof are my humble submissions before this Learned Commission.

DEPONENT

PRAYER

In view of the aforesaid submission made herein and in the interest of justice, it is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to dismiss the present request being frivolous, vexatious, and devoid of merits with a heavy cost at the outset.

Pass any such further other order(s) as this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit and proper under the present facts and circumstances of this case.

Place: North 24 Parganas, 700118

Date: 22 September 2023

VERIFICATION

I, Mr. Ratul Aich, S/O Subrata Aich, Aged about 37 Years the above-mentioned complainant, do hereby verify that the contents of this complaint are true and correct to my knowledge and belief. Nothing has been concealed therein.

Date- 22 September 2023

Place- North 24 Parganas, Kolkata

A F F I D A V I T

I, Mr. Ratul Aich, S/O S. Aich, Aged about 37 Years, Occupation Former Principal Consultant User Experience (UX) and Design, By Faith- Hindu, by Nationality- Indian and Residing at North 24 Parganas, Kolkata, do hereby solemnly swear and affirm and state as follows:-

1. That I am fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the cases CC/353/2022 and CC/354/2022.
2. That the statements made in paragraphs 1 to 26 of the instant written statements for the objection to merging the case CC/353/2022 and CC/354/2022 that has been requested by the Respondents HDFC ERGO in the petition submitted on 11 August 2023 with the heading “PETITION UNDER ORDER VII RULE XI (D) CPC R/W S.151 CPC PRAYING FOR REJECTION OF PRESENT COMPLAINT ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED BELOW” are true to my knowledge and are true to my information derived from records which I believe to be true and the rest are my humble submission before the Hon’ble Forum.

“Oath”

That I swear that this my declaration is true, that it conceals nothing, and that no part of it is false, so help me God.

And I sign this affidavit on this the 22 day of September 2023 at North 24 Parganas.

Deponent

First in the series is Judicial Investigation Friendly Digital Systems, Judibility. (Link)

Previous in the series is PETITION UNDER ORDER VII RULE XI (D) CPC R/W S.151 CPC PRAYING FOR REJECTION OF PRESENT COMPLAINT ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED BELOW. (Link)

Next in the series is an essay, The Effectiveness of Consumer Courts in the Age of Hyperconsumerism, Consumer Forum Version. (Link)