Arun Kareer
New member
- Bank Name
- FPL Technologies Private Limited (trading as OneCard),
- Customer Care Number
- 18002687111
- Loss Amount
- 12626
- Ratings
- Opposite Party Address
- Registered Office: West Bay, Survey No. 278, Hissa No. 4/3, Pallod Farm, Phase II, Baner, Taluka Haveli, Baner Gaon, Pune – 411045, Maharashtra, India.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019, FOR DEFICIENCY OF SERVICE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
The Complainant above named respectfully submits as follows:
1. PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
1.1. The Complainant is a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, being the lawful holder of a OneCard credit card (Card No. ending 0278) issued by the Opposite Party, availed for personal use and consideration.
1.2. The Opposite Party, FPL Technologies Private Limited ("OneCard"), is a company engaged in the business of issuing credit cards and rendering related banking/financial services for consideration, and is thus a "service provider" within the meaning of Section 2(42) of the Act.
1.3. This Hon'ble Commission has territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as the Complainant resides and carries on his affairs within its jurisdiction, and the cause of action, being use of the OneCard app/services and receipt of statements, has substantially arisen within this jurisdiction. This Hon'ble Commission also has pecuniary jurisdiction as the value of goods/services and compensation claimed falls within the prescribed limits.
2. FACTS OF THE CASE
2.1. Owing to a period of personal hardship, the Complainant fell into arrears on certain monthly payments due on the said OneCard credit card, on which interest was consequently charged by the Opposite Party.
2.2. Prior to clearing the outstanding dues, the Complainant engaged with the Opposite Party's official WhatsApp Business Account, wherein a representative of the Opposite Party expressly assured the Complainant, in writing, that upon full and immediate payment of the outstanding balance, the accrued interest charges of ₹17,812.37 would be waived. Relying on this express assurance, the Complainant paid the entire outstanding balance of ₹4,22,802 (Rupees Four Lakh Twenty-Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Two only) in full on 8th June 2026.
2.3. The Opposite Party did honour the assurance to the extent of processing a refund/waiver of ₹17,812 in the billing cycle immediately following the payment.
2.4. However, in the very next billing cycle, and without any prior intimation, disclosure, or communication whatsoever at the time the Complainant was induced into making the payment, the Opposite Party levied a fresh interest charge of ₹12,626 on the Complainant's account. This charge was never disclosed as payable, contingent, or likely at the time the Complainant relied on the Opposite Party's assurance and cleared the dues in good faith.
2.5. Aggrieved by this unexplained and undisclosed levy, the Complainant raised the grievance with the Opposite Party on multiple occasions, namely:
(a) Ticket No. 9815079, raised on 8th July 2026;
(b) Ticket No. 9859371, a follow-up raised on 18th July 2026;
(c) Ticket No. 9872288, raised on 21st July 2026.
2.6. The Complainant also attempted to seek redressal through the Opposite Party's WhatsApp Business Account — the very channel on which the original waiver assurance had been given — but was informed that the said channel is handled by the "collections department" and that it could not assist with the grievance.
2.7. Despite repeated follow-ups across email and WhatsApp, and despite the statutory requirement to redress grievances within a reasonable time, the Opposite Party has failed and neglected to resolve the matter or provide any satisfactory explanation for the undisclosed interest levy.
2.8. Left with no alternative, the Complainant also escalated the matter directly to the Opposite Party's Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Anurag Sinha, by way of a detailed email, which too has not been redressed as of the date of this complaint.
3. DEFICIENCY OF SERVICE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
3.1. The act of the Opposite Party in inducing the Complainant to pay the full outstanding balance on the express assurance of an interest waiver, and thereafter levying a fresh, undisclosed interest charge in the subsequent cycle without any prior communication, amounts to a "deficiency in service" within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
3.2. The said conduct further amounts to an "unfair trade practice" within the meaning of Section 2(47) of the Act, inasmuch as the Opposite Party withheld material information regarding further interest liability at the time it induced the Complainant to part with a substantial sum of money.
3.3. The failure of the Opposite Party to redress the Complainant's grievance despite three separate tickets and repeated follow-ups over several weeks demonstrates a callous and negligent approach towards a bona fide consumer complaint, causing the Complainant unnecessary financial strain, mental agony, and harassment.
4. CAUSE OF ACTION
The cause of action first arose on 8th June 2026, when the Complainant cleared the outstanding balance relying on the Opposite Party's assurance; it further arose upon the undisclosed levy of ₹12,626 in the subsequent billing cycle; and it continues to subsist, and arises afresh with each unredressed follow-up, the last of which was on 21st July 2026. The cause of action is thus continuing and this complaint is within limitation.
5. RELIEF SOUGHT
In view of the above, the Complainant most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Commission may be pleased to:
(a). Direct the Opposite Party to reverse/waive the undisclosed interest charge of ₹12,626 levied on the Complainant's account;
(b). Direct the Opposite Party to pay compensation of ₹5,00,000 to the Complainant for the deficiency in service, unfair trade practice, and the mental agony and harassment caused;
(c). Direct the Opposite Party to pay litigation costs of ₹5,00,000 incurred by the Complainant in pursuing this complaint;
(d). Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
The Complainant above named respectfully submits as follows:
1. PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
1.1. The Complainant is a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, being the lawful holder of a OneCard credit card (Card No. ending 0278) issued by the Opposite Party, availed for personal use and consideration.
1.2. The Opposite Party, FPL Technologies Private Limited ("OneCard"), is a company engaged in the business of issuing credit cards and rendering related banking/financial services for consideration, and is thus a "service provider" within the meaning of Section 2(42) of the Act.
1.3. This Hon'ble Commission has territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as the Complainant resides and carries on his affairs within its jurisdiction, and the cause of action, being use of the OneCard app/services and receipt of statements, has substantially arisen within this jurisdiction. This Hon'ble Commission also has pecuniary jurisdiction as the value of goods/services and compensation claimed falls within the prescribed limits.
2. FACTS OF THE CASE
2.1. Owing to a period of personal hardship, the Complainant fell into arrears on certain monthly payments due on the said OneCard credit card, on which interest was consequently charged by the Opposite Party.
2.2. Prior to clearing the outstanding dues, the Complainant engaged with the Opposite Party's official WhatsApp Business Account, wherein a representative of the Opposite Party expressly assured the Complainant, in writing, that upon full and immediate payment of the outstanding balance, the accrued interest charges of ₹17,812.37 would be waived. Relying on this express assurance, the Complainant paid the entire outstanding balance of ₹4,22,802 (Rupees Four Lakh Twenty-Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Two only) in full on 8th June 2026.
2.3. The Opposite Party did honour the assurance to the extent of processing a refund/waiver of ₹17,812 in the billing cycle immediately following the payment.
2.4. However, in the very next billing cycle, and without any prior intimation, disclosure, or communication whatsoever at the time the Complainant was induced into making the payment, the Opposite Party levied a fresh interest charge of ₹12,626 on the Complainant's account. This charge was never disclosed as payable, contingent, or likely at the time the Complainant relied on the Opposite Party's assurance and cleared the dues in good faith.
2.5. Aggrieved by this unexplained and undisclosed levy, the Complainant raised the grievance with the Opposite Party on multiple occasions, namely:
(a) Ticket No. 9815079, raised on 8th July 2026;
(b) Ticket No. 9859371, a follow-up raised on 18th July 2026;
(c) Ticket No. 9872288, raised on 21st July 2026.
2.6. The Complainant also attempted to seek redressal through the Opposite Party's WhatsApp Business Account — the very channel on which the original waiver assurance had been given — but was informed that the said channel is handled by the "collections department" and that it could not assist with the grievance.
2.7. Despite repeated follow-ups across email and WhatsApp, and despite the statutory requirement to redress grievances within a reasonable time, the Opposite Party has failed and neglected to resolve the matter or provide any satisfactory explanation for the undisclosed interest levy.
2.8. Left with no alternative, the Complainant also escalated the matter directly to the Opposite Party's Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Anurag Sinha, by way of a detailed email, which too has not been redressed as of the date of this complaint.
3. DEFICIENCY OF SERVICE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
3.1. The act of the Opposite Party in inducing the Complainant to pay the full outstanding balance on the express assurance of an interest waiver, and thereafter levying a fresh, undisclosed interest charge in the subsequent cycle without any prior communication, amounts to a "deficiency in service" within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
3.2. The said conduct further amounts to an "unfair trade practice" within the meaning of Section 2(47) of the Act, inasmuch as the Opposite Party withheld material information regarding further interest liability at the time it induced the Complainant to part with a substantial sum of money.
3.3. The failure of the Opposite Party to redress the Complainant's grievance despite three separate tickets and repeated follow-ups over several weeks demonstrates a callous and negligent approach towards a bona fide consumer complaint, causing the Complainant unnecessary financial strain, mental agony, and harassment.
4. CAUSE OF ACTION
The cause of action first arose on 8th June 2026, when the Complainant cleared the outstanding balance relying on the Opposite Party's assurance; it further arose upon the undisclosed levy of ₹12,626 in the subsequent billing cycle; and it continues to subsist, and arises afresh with each unredressed follow-up, the last of which was on 21st July 2026. The cause of action is thus continuing and this complaint is within limitation.
5. RELIEF SOUGHT
In view of the above, the Complainant most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Commission may be pleased to:
(a). Direct the Opposite Party to reverse/waive the undisclosed interest charge of ₹12,626 levied on the Complainant's account;
(b). Direct the Opposite Party to pay compensation of ₹5,00,000 to the Complainant for the deficiency in service, unfair trade practice, and the mental agony and harassment caused;
(c). Direct the Opposite Party to pay litigation costs of ₹5,00,000 incurred by the Complainant in pursuing this complaint;
(d). Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.