consumer harassment case study

Top 10 Case Study on Consumer Rights

We know consumer laws and courts exist, but only by reading through some case law can you understand how you as a consumer can exercise your rights!

Table of Contents

On an everyday basis, we purchase products and services. From our basic necessities like food and clothing to services like banking and education, we are dependent on companies and organisations to live comfortably in the present day, and we give them our hard-earned money in return. But sometimes, companies might fail to provide quality services or products. Many know there exist consumer courts and laws that protect consumers from consumer exploitation . But have you ever wondered who goes to these courts and what types of cases are filed? You would be surprised to know how basic these cases can be. So, here are 10 interesting case study on consumer rights curated for you.

Top 10 Case Studies on Consumer Rights

1. banks can’t always escape using ‘technical difficulties’.

We have come to rely on banks so much. A recent case study on consumer rights highlighted the need for stronger regulations. More than ever, most of our transactions are digital and heavily reliant on banks for these. Have you ever had your transaction fail due to the server being down or other errors?

Dipika Pallikal, a squash champion and Arjuna awardee found herself in an awkward situation when she used her Axis Bank Debit Card in a hotel at Netherlands’ Rotterdam failed. She had had 10 times the bill amount in her account at that time. Due to this, she faced a loss of reputation and humiliation. The bank said the incident was a case of ‘ Force Majeure’ (an act of god/ something beyond control)

Apart from that, the bank had also returned a cheque of ₹1 lakh issued to her by the government of India and blamed it on a technical error.

Dipika moved the consumer court in Chennai against Axis Bank

Court Decision

The court found that there was a deficiency of service on the part of Axis Bank and directed the bank to pay a compensation of ₹5 lakh and ₹5000 as expenses.

Key Takeaway

Banks are like any other service provider. We trust them with our money and they must perform the services we were promised. They cannot hide behind ‘technical difficulties’ or ‘ force majeure ’ and let customers suffer for it.

2. You Don’t Have to Be a Celebrity to Win a Consumer Case

A humble tea vendor, Rajesh Sakre, is an example of this. He had ₹20,000 in his State Bank of India account and had withdrawn ₹10,800. On his next visit to the ATM, however, he realized all his money was gone. When he asked the bank authorities they blamed it on him. 

So, he went to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum with his grievance. He couldn’t afford a lawyer and he argued the case himself. This case study on consumer awareness presents insights into how consumers are becoming more vigilant.

The forum ruled in his favor and ordered the State Bank of India to return the ₹9,200 with 6% interest, pay ₹10,000 as compensation for mental anguish caused by the issue, and ₹2,000 for legal expenses.

It doesn’t matter who you are, as long as you have a valid case you can approach the Consumer Cases Forum. And even big companies and government entities like the State Bank of India can be made to answer for their mistakes.

3. Not All Free Items Are Welcome

Imagine you bought a bottle of Pepsi and found a packet of gutka floating in it! It happened to Rajesh Rajan from Ahmedabad when he bought Pepsi from a local store. He sent a legal notice for defective goods to the company immediately and approached a Consumer Cases Dispute Redressal Forum. Every case study on consumer complaints tells a unique story of a consumer’s journey towards justice.

Moreover, he claimed that there was a deficiency in service that could have caused a health hazard to him. He demanded compensation of ₹5 lakh for the same.

The consumer forum passed an order in favor of Rajesh Rajan and directed the company to pay a total of ₹4008 (₹4000 for compensation and ₹8 for the Pepsi he purchased).

Rajesh moved the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, asking for higher compensation as ₹4008 was too low and he had spent ₹500 on sample testing itself. The State Commission passed an order asking the company to pay ₹20,000 as compensation and ₹2000 towards costs as it found Rajesh’s argument reasonable.

Free items are not all welcome! It is a deficiency in service on the part of the provider if you find anything in your food (packaged or otherwise) that isn’t supposed to be there. The Consumer Cases Forums are a good place to take them.

4. Paying More Than the MRP? You Shouldn’t.

It has become common to charge more than the maximum retail price (MRP) for packaged goods. Especially in places like theatres, food courts, railway stations, etc, we see this happen a lot and mostly ignore it. Among the prominent consumer cases last year, the MRP case stood out for its complexity

Mr Kondaiah from Andhra Pradesh, on the other hand, didn’t ignore it when he noticed that Sarvi Food Court charged him ₹40 for a water bottle where the MRP was ₹20. He filed a case against them in the District Consumer cases Disputes Redressal Forum for ‘unfair trade practice’. He supported his claim by producing the bill. The MRP case study on consumer rights brought to light some gaps in the existing regulations.

The court decided in favour of Mr Kondaiah and said that a practice is not justified just because it is widely common. Mr Kondaiah was awarded a compensation of ₹20,000, ₹20 (the extra money charged) and ₹5,000 in costs. 

No authority has the power to charge above the MRP for any packaged goods. It doesn’t matter where it is sold, you are not required to pay a rupee above the MRP.

5. No MRP at All on the Product?

Baglekar Akash Kumar, a 19-year-old got a book and ₹12,500 because of the book. How? He purchased the book online and when it was delivered, he noticed that there was no MRP mentioned in it. He browsed the internet and saw that the book was sold at different prices in different places.

So, he went to the consumer cases forum and filed a case against Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd and the paper company.

The court held that not publishing MRP on the product without a valid reason is an ‘unfair trade practice’. MRP exists to ensure that a consumer is not overcharged for the product. So, it is mandatory for companies to print MRP.

The publishers were asked to print the retail price of the book and Akash was awarded ₹10,000 as compensation and ₹2,500 as costs.

It is required under law for companies to put MRP on every product. If you see a product without MRP, then it is a violation of Consumer Cases Protection Laws and you can take them to court. 

6. Medical Services Fall Within the Scope of the CPA

Do medical services fall under CPA? When there was a little confusion in this regard, the Indian Medical Association (IMA) decided to get this question resolved once and for all. The CPA case study on consumer rights brought to light some gaps in the existing regulations. The Medical Services case study on consumer complaints became a landmark case in consumer rights advocacy.

IMA approached the Supreme Court, asking them to declare that medical services are out of the scope of the CPA. They gave the following arguments to support their claim:

• Medical professionals are governed by their own code of ethics made by the Medical Council of India. 
• In the medical profession, it is hard to guarantee the end result of treatments. Many external factors which are out of the control of the professional can impact the outcome. So, allowing consumer claims will cause people to file a case whenever a treatment doesn’t work out.
• There are no medical science experts in the consumer complaints online.
• Medical service provided by government hospitals will not fall under the Act especially when the service is provided for free. 

These were decent points. After consideration, the court settled the claims in the following manner.

Medical services provided by any professional (private or government) will be covered by CPA. This means  people can file a case in a Consumer Court if the service provided is not in confirmation with the Act.

• Doctors and hospitals who treat patients for free cannot be sued by a person who availed their services for free. 
• In a government hospital, where services are provided free of charge – the Consumer Protection Act India would not apply.

Apart from these two exceptions, the Act will apply when a person gets treated in government hospitals for free, when a poor person gets treated for free, and when insurance money is used for treatment.

7. Tired of the False Claims Made by Skin and Hair Care Products Yet?

Maybe you are not tired yet or you are too tired to question. However, a 67-year-old man from Kerala’s remotest areas was tired of these consistent lies and how companies got away with them.

In 2015, K Chaathu complained against Indulekha (beauty product manufacturers) and Mammootty (an actor who was the brand ambassador of the company) for putting up misleading ads. The tagline of the soap was ‘soundaryam ningale thedi varum’ which meant ‘beauty will come in search of you. The ads also claimed that people using the soap would become ‘fair’ and ‘beautiful’ but the 67-year-old didn’t become fair or beautiful.

Funny, right?

Compensation Paid

Indulekha paid him ₹30,000 in an out of court settlement while the initial claim of Chaathu was ₹50,000. When he was asked about this, he said that this case was never about the money but about how these companies put up advertisements every day with false claims. And it is not okay to let these people get away with it.

Key Takeaways

Advertisements are made to sell the products, so exaggeration of results is too common. But this doesn’t make it okay to make false claims just for the sake of selling the products. Making false claims in violation of the CTA.

8. Homebuyers Are Consumers

Imagine you decide to buy a house (a dream come true for many). You do a lot of research, pool your hard-earned money, and pay a real estate developer to build the house for you. They promise to deliver within 42 months but 4 years later they haven’t even started construction. 

This is what happened to two people and they decided to move the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for it. The Homebuyer’s case study on consumer rights was instrumental in changing local regulations.

NCDRC decided in favour of the homebuyers and asked the real estate developer to refund the money with a simple interest of 9% per annum. They were also awarded a compensation of ₹50,000 each.

The real estate developer challenged this in the Supreme Court, saying that the issue is covered under another Act (Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act) and therefore cannot be taken in a consumer court. But the Supreme Court denied their argument saying that as long as the other Act explicitly stops people from getting remedy under other laws, they will be allowed to do so.

Our laws are in such a way that even though there are other remedies available, in most cases where you are a buyer of a product or a service, you will have protection under the Consumer Protection Act. 

9. Insurance Claims Cannot be Rejected on Mere Technicalities

We pay the premium and get insurance to protect us from losses we can’t foresee. Sadly, many people have had bad experiences with the insurance company. Om Prakash, for example, had his truck stolen and claimed insurance for the same. The truck was stolen on 23.03.2010, the FIR was filed on 24.03.2010, and the insurance claim was filed on 31.03.2010. 

The insurance investigator was sent and he confirmed that the claim was genuine. The claim was approved for the amount of ₹7,85,000/-. But the amount was never given to Om Prakash. With the rise in consumer court cases , companies are now more cautious about their policies and practices. When he sent the insurance company a legal notice for the same, they replied saying that there was a breach of terms and conditions: 

“immediate information to the Insurer about the loss/theft of the vehicle”

Om Prakash was late to apply for insurance because he was held up by the police to try and recover his vehicle.

While the consumer courts didn’t allow his case, the Supreme Court allowed his appeal and held in favour of him. It was ruled that insurance companies cannot escape from paying the claimants on technical grounds. Especially when the claimant has valid reasons for it.

The Court directed the Respondent company to pay a sum of ₹8,35,000/- to the Appellant along with interest @ 8% per annum. He was also awarded ₹50,000 as compensation.

Over the years, many judgments have been made to ensure that insurance companies are accountable and do not escape from paying valid claims. If you experience a similar situation with your insurance provided, you can approach the consumer court.  

10. iPhone 5S Gold for ₹68 + ₹10,000

Let’s close the list with a fun one! How would it be to get an iPhone at just ₹68? In 2014, Nikhil Bansal (a student) saw this unbelievable offer on Snapdeal (a discount of ₹46,651) and ordered it immediately as any sane person would. He received an order confirmation but later he was told that the order was canceled. They claimed that the offer itself was a technical glitch. “The iPhone case study on consumer complaint showcased the challenges consumers face even in today’s digital age.

When he approached the e-commerce consumer complaints India Forum, he claimed that these kinds of offers were misleading people and it was the duty of Snapdeal to honour the order. The forum ruled in his favor and asked Snapdeal to deliver him the iPhone for ₹68 and asked him to pay a compensation of ₹2,000.

When Snapdeal appealed this order, the compensation was raised to ₹10,000! 

Key Takeaway – Case Study on Consumer Rights

E-commerce stores are just as answerable as any other shop owner under the Consumer Protection Act. So if you face any issues like this with them, consider taking it to the consumer court. Through each case study on consumer rights, we can learn more about our rights and responsibilities

Consumer forums exist to protect consumers from consumer exploitation and ensure that we are not cheated by the companies we pay for getting products or services. Knowing your rights is the first step towards becoming a conscious consumer. 

Don’t hesitate to approach the consumer court if you have a valid claim of consumer exploitation . Even if it is for an ₹ 8 product like Pepsi, a valid claim should be taken to the forum.

What is the Consumer Protection Act?

The Consumer Protection Act is a law that safeguards the interests of consumers against unfair trade practices and ensures their rights to quality goods and services.

When was the Consumer Protection Act passed?

The Consumer Protection Act was passed in 1986 and later updated with the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Who is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act?

A consumer is any individual who purchases goods or services for personal use, not for manufacturing or resale.

Who can file a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act?

A complaint can be filed by a consumer, any recognized consumer association, or the Central or State Government on behalf of a consumer.

What is a consumer rights case study?

A consumer rights case study involves analyzing a real-life scenario where a consumer faced issues with a product or service and sought legal resolution under consumer protection laws.

What are consumer cases in India?

Consumer cases in India refer to legal disputes brought by consumers against businesses for grievances related to defective goods, poor services, or unfair trade practices.

What are some examples of consumer rights?

Examples of consumer rights include the right to safety, the right to be informed, the right to choose, the right to be heard, and the right to redressal.

What is the consumer rights class 10 project?

The consumer rights class 10 project typically involves students researching and presenting on the various rights of consumers and how they are protected under the law.

Who is a consumer class 10 SST project?

In the class 10 Social Science (SST) project, a consumer is defined as an individual who purchases goods or services for personal use and is protected under consumer laws.

What is COPRA? (Consumer Operating Protection Regulation Authority)

The Consumer Protection Act (COPRA) is a significant piece of legislation in India aimed at protecting the rights of consumers.…

What is Consumer Privacy and Why is it Necessary?

Understanding Its Significance and Necessity In an era where personal data has become a valuable commodity and digital interactions are…

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA): Rules, Works and Provisions

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) stands as a cornerstone of consumer protection in the United States, aiming to…

What Will Get Covered in the Consumer Protection Act?

Introduction Enacted in 1986, the Consumer Protection Act stands as a beacon of empowerment and protection for consumers in India.…

Understanding G-Secs and How to Invest in Them for Business?

G-secs refer to government securities or, in other words, loans or capital issued by the government. The biggest advantage associated…

Startups to Continue Receiving a Tax Holiday

Businesses of all sizes and types have been having a tough year courtesy of the coronavirus pandemic. The Indian government…

How the Rupee Depreciation is Enticing NRIs in Real Estate?

The Indian currency has depreciated as much as 5.2% against the US dollar in 2022 so far. The rupee’s depreciation…

Subscribe to our newsletter blogs

• Law of torts – Complete Reading Material
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – September 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 5 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – December 2019
• Sign in / Join

Top Ten cases on Consumer Disputes

This article is written by Deepanshi of JGLS. The article discusses ten cases of Consumer Disputes.

Introduction

Purchase or hire of good and services has become an inevitable part of our daily lives. This decision to effectuate such purchase or hire such service is essentially based on trust, failing which can cause, more often than not to the consumers, anything from a monetary loss to physical harm. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as CPA) aims to provide speedy relief to such breach of trust or negligence. A hierarchy of three tribunals has been set up for this purpose —

• The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF),
• The State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (SCDRC), and
• The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) .

Over the years, these tribunals, along with the apex court, have developed a better understanding of the CPA, meanwhile making sure to strike a perfect balance between the demands of both sides.

Following are ten important cases that hold relevance in case of consumer disputes:

Corporate Bodies can be sued under CPA

Karnataka power transmission corporation v ashok iron works private limited.

The Supreme court, in this case, held that a corporate body is included in the meaning of ‘person’ in section 2(1)(m) of the CPA. It reiterated the position of Lord Watson in Dilworth v. Commissioner of Stamps that the word “includes” is generally used to enlarge the meaning of the word but can alternatively be used to say “mean and include”, in which case what follows is an exhaustive explanation. The interpretation depends on the text, context, and objective of the Act. It was held that the section never intended to exclude juristic persons from its purview and the definition is inclusive in nature.

It also reiterated its own position in Southern Petrochemical Industries that the word “supply” is not the same as “sale” and in the context of electricity, it would be a provision of service as under section 2 (1)(d)(ii) of the Act.

Professional services fall within the scope of the Act

Indian medical association v v.p. shantha and others.

In deciding this case of deficiency of medical service, the court held that the services rendered by a medical professional fall within the ambit of ‘services’ under the section 2(1)(o) of the Act. It rejected the contention that a medical practitioner, being a professional and falling under the scope of Indian Medical Council Act, stands excluded from the CPA.

Moreover, it held that provision of a token fee (for the hospital administrative purposes) would not include an otherwise free service within the ambit of the definition of services. Also, the cost of the services paid by the employer or the insurance company would be deemed similar to paying for the service by the consumer itself.

Services have to be rendered with due care and in accordance with the Law

Arvind shah (dr.) v kamlaben kushwaha.

In this case, the complainant alleged that his son died due to the administration of a wrong treatment by the doctor. The State Commission upholding negligence provided a compensation of five lakh rupees.

In appeal, the National Commission observed that the two prescriptions that were available on record neither contained any description of the symptoms that the patient was experiencing nor did it have any preliminary vital information that a doctor is mandated to check, as per the guidelines and regulation of the Medical Council of India or the concerned State Medical Council, like body temperature, blood pressure, pulse rate, prior medical history et cetera. If further tests were required for the diagnosis, such was also mandated to be mentioned. The commission, following the case of Samira Kohli v Dr Prabha Manchanda [I (2008) CPJ 56 (SC)], held that failure to put such essentials in the prescription amounted to medical negligence. The Commission also noted that availability of such essentials, clinical observations and consent of the patient, point towards the care and diligence of the doctor and act as evidence against frivolous cases of medical negligence.

However, due to lack of available evidence that attributed the death of the patient directly to the negligence, the National Commission reduced the compensation to two and a half lakhs along with the interest thereon.

Poonam Verma v Ashwin Patel & Ors

In this case, the respondent, a homoeopathic doctor, prescribed allopathic medicines for the treatment of a patient who did not respond to the medicine and subsequently died. The Supreme Court held that the right to practice the allopathic system of medicine was restricted by the Central and State Acts which prohibit such practice unless the person possesses requisite qualification and is registered according to the Acts. Based on the fact that the respondent was qualified and registered to practice Homeopathy only, he was found to be in violation of the statutory duty not to practice Allopathy given under the section 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Respondent’s act was held to be actionable negligence and he was ordered to pay a compensation of three lakhs.

Educational institutions must refund extra fee paid

Sehgal school of competition v dalbir singh.

To seek admission in a medical coaching center, the petitioner, in this case, was made to deposit a lump sum fee for two years within the first six months. When the petitioner left the course midway on account of deficiency in the services, the coaching center refused to refund the remaining amount. The State Tribunal, following the view of the apex court and the National Commission, held that no educational institution shall collect lump sum fee for the duration of the entire course and if one does, such extra fee should be returned in case the student drops out due to deficiency. It noted that any clause in a contract contrary to this is invalid due to lack of equal bargaining power and contravention of the principles of natural justice.

The court was also of the opinion that additional compensation should be granted for the mental agony caused due to approaching the legal forum. However, since such was not asked in the petition, it could not be granted.

Sympathy should not influence compensation

Nizam institute of medical sciences v prasanth s. dhananka & ors ..

In this case, the complainant claimed for compensation due to alleged medical negligence before, during and after a medical procedure that led to a partial paralysis of the patient. The National Tribunal ruled medical negligence stating various lapses in all three phases mentioned including on the ground that consent of the patient was taken only for the examination of the tumor and not for its removal.

In the appeal, the Supreme Court confirmed the findings of the Commission and stated that the removal of the tumor was deferred through discussion on record and therefore an implied consent cannot be inferred.

The court recognised that a balance has to be struck between the inflated demands of the victim and the unreasonable claim of the opposition party that on compensation needs to be paid. It recognised that sympathy for the victim should not come in the way while deciding compensation but the court should not refuse to provide “adequate compensation”. In light of this and the peculiar facts of the case, it increased the sum of compensation to twenty-five lakhs each for the continuous medical expenses that need to be borne and the loss of employment that the petitioner had suffered. Additionally, compensation for the pain and suffering that the appellant had undergone amounting to ten lakhs, for the expenses of a driver-cum-attendant for thirty years amounting to seven lakhs and twenty thousand, for nursing care amounting of fourteen lakhs and forty thousand and physiotherapy expenses of thirty years amounting to ten lakhs and eighty thousand  along with interest of 6% was also granted.

Discovery rule for medical negligence

V.n.shrikhande vs anita sena fernandes.

The petitioner alleged negligence by a medical practitioner, claiming that he left a mass of gauge in her abdomen during a procedure to remove stones from the gallbladder. However, the petition was raised nine years after the procedure when the petitioner underwent a second operation, in another hospital, to remove the mass.

The Supreme Court recognized that in cases of medical negligence no straightforward formulae is present to determine when the cause of action has accrued. The court, following ‘Discovery Rule’ evolved by the courts in the United States, stated that in the case where the effect of the negligence is obvious, the cause of action is deemed to have arisen at the time of negligence. However, in case the effect of negligence is dormant, the cause of action arises when the patient figures out about the negligence with reasonable diligence. The court noted that the petitioner had been experiencing pain and discomfort since the time of the operation for which she continued to take painkillers for nine years without consulting the doctor. In the light of this and the fact that she herself was an experienced nurse who can reasonably be expected to possess more knowledge than a layman, the court set aside the Commission’s order and dismissed the complaint.

Both parents and minor can claim for compensation under Consumer Protection Act

Spring meadows hospital & anr v harjol ahluwalia.

This appeal was filed before the Supreme Court by a hospital defending the negligence of its nurses and a doctor which resulted in a minor being in a permanent vegetative state subsequent to a brain haemorrhage. The issues revolved around whether the parents of the child, not being the patient themselves, can ask for compensation for mental agony caused to them. The court held that the definition of services in the CPA is wide enough to include both the parents who pay for the services and the child who is the beneficiary of the services. The National Commission was found correct in its approach as it granted compensation to the child for the cost of equipments and recurring expenses that he would have to bear owing to his vegetative state, whereas the compensation provided to the parents was for the agony caused and the lifetime care that the parents would have to provide.

Imposition of penalty for frivolous consumer claims

Sapient corporation employees provident fund trust v hdfc & ors..

In a complaint against HDFC for debiting money without the permission of the holder, the National Commission noted that payment was done in compliances with the order of a statutory authority and only after giving the complainant due notice of the same. The Commission stated that there is a need to guard against the possibility of frivolous complaints from being filed due to the absence of any court fees. For this reason, holding that the complaint lacked seriousness and was filed without sufficient grounds, the Commission imposed a fine of twenty-five thousand on the complainant under section 26 of the Act.

Compensation to the complainants for frivolous appeals

Delhi development authority v d.c. sharma.

In the case of an accidental double allotment of a plot by the Delhi Development Authority, the State Commission refused to accept the defence that the plot had not been provided to the complainant only for his failure to pay the cost. It was found from the records that the plot had been allocated to another person. It, therefore, ordered the Delhi Development Authority to either provide another plot of the same description to the appellant under the same conditions or pay the escalated price of the plot.

The National Commission dismissed the revision petition for lack of infirmity in the State Commission’s judgment and ordered the payment of five lakhs for indulging in unfair trade practices and unduly harassing the respondent for more than eighteen years.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_ 0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Aruna ramchandra shanbaug vs. union of india & others (2011), noor aga vs. state of punjab and ors. (2008), synthetics and chemicals ltd. etc vs. state of uttar pradesh & ors. (1990).

It is satisfactory but please give the dates of when these happened.

Do Make it user friendly.. Good job tho..

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

How to Crack Indian Judiciary Exams

For Indian Lawyers and Law Students Only

Register now

Thank you for registering with us, you made the right choice.

Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the webinar. See you there.

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Raise corporate tax rates! No, cut them! Maybe take a look first?

You want to be boss. You probably won’t be good at it.

Revising the cost of climate change 

Customer rage has been an unwelcome feature of post-lockdown life.

Oivind Hovland/Ikon Images

Why all the abuse of servers, flight staffs, sales clerks as COVID rules ease?

Christina Pazzanese

Harvard Staff Writer

Businesses need to communicate more with customers and empower workers, expert says

Just months ago, many people were longing to go out to dinner and travel once again or worrying whether a favorite café or local shopkeeper would be able to survive an entire year of COVID business restrictions.

Now, news stories about angry customers behaving badly over minor inconveniences — diners berating wait staff over slow service or menu shortages, shoppers upset over hard-to-find items, and airline passengers refusing to comply with flight attendant directives about safety protocols — have become a near-daily occurrence. The Federal Aviation Administration has more than 3,400 unruly passenger reports on file so far for 2021, sparking 555 investigations; by comparison, just 146 investigations were initiated in all of 2019. And a recent poll of food service workers found 39 percent were quitting over concerns about hostility or harassment from customers, and 80 percent had either witnessed or experienced such behavior over COVID safety protocols.

Besides the extra hardship for workers, these incidents further add to the challenge facing many service industry businesses struggling to return quickly to pre-pandemic capacity and finding it difficult to recruit and retain staff.

Harvard Business School Professor Ryan W. Buell , who studies the dynamics of business-customer relationships, spoke with the Gazette about why more and more customers suddenly seem to be lashing out and what businesses can do to support their workers.

GAZETTE:  Upset customers are not new to those working in the service industry. But the rash of customers shouting at staff, flouting safety policies or local ordinances, even threatening or becoming violent over trivial matters is decidedly new. What do you think is going on?

BUELL: I think there are a few things that are going on. One is we have been pent up in our houses, and we’ve been building expectations about what it will be like when we’re finally out. But the reality is that, from an operational perspective and a public health perspective, we’re not totally out. Things have become safer in some ways, but we still have [COVID] variants. And the problem is also unevenly felt around the world, which is leading to different kinds of constraints.

One is, there are labor constraints that a lot of these service businesses are facing. It’s difficult to motivate talent to apply and bring them in. And then to retain them is harder, too. Lots of service organizations are facing turnover rates that are higher now than they were pre-pandemic.

Another is just supply-chain challenges. It’s hard to make sandwiches if you don’t have all the ingredients. And they may not have all the ingredients because supply chains aren’t up and running at their peak capacity. It takes a while to spin these things up. So you’ve got customers who have been looking forward to being back out in the world and so their expectations are high, but [the] capacity to deliver on those expectations isn’t quite where it needs to be.

Another challenge is different organizations have different policies. Do you need to wear a mask? Do you not need to wear a mask? Customers don’t always know what the terms are when they engage with a company. And what that does, it means that when you walk into the door and you thought one thing and the reality is something different, it creates a lot of awkwardness and can lead to a blow-up. Beyond that, masks and the way we engage with the pandemic has become political, and so people are sometimes using their service encounters as a political platform to show what they think should be the state of the world. Even if you’re well-intending, but now you’re in a room where you’re clearly not engaging the way that everybody else is, that can make people feel deeply uncomfortable. I think we see blow-ups coming from that as well.

“There’s real trepidation to actually share those kinds of warts and blemishes with customers. But failure to do so means that people are coming in with a set of expectations that businesses can’t meet.”

GAZETTE: While businesses are understandably eager to finally get more customers in the door, some have had major hiccups since reopening. Are some expecting customers to be more flexible or understanding than they ought to be? And what can they do proactively to minimize the likelihood that pandemic-related problems, the delays and shortages, will be felt by their customers?

BUELL: Some of my research is on something called operational transparency — what happens when people can see the hidden work that’s going on behind the scenes to serve them. And what we know is that even in the best of times, people tend to underestimate the effort and expertise and work and care and thoroughness and coordination that goes into serving them. Now, in more challenging times, the gap can be even bigger. And so, anything they can do to provide customers a window into what’s going on behind the scenes to serve them can help realign their expectations with the gravity of the situation they’re encountering. We also know that it can help them appreciate and value service more. So a huge prescription here — half of it is transparency. If they’ve got rules and policies, customers need to know that before they walk into the store. They need to know that that’s not the discretion of an individual employee, that it’s the rules of the road for the whole organization. Everyone has to follow it; our employees do and every single customer. Companies, in the name of hospitality, don’t want to jam that message down customers’ throats, but it’s critical if they want to set people up to really thrive in the interaction.

Beyond policies, if there are constraints that they’re dealing with on the labor side or on the supply side, they need people to understand that they’re not holding back on customers. They’re not making them wait intentionally, they’re doing the best they can. And the earlier they can convey and communicate that information, the better off they are.

There’s real trepidation to actually share those kinds of warts and blemishes with customers. But failure to do so means that people are coming in with a set of expectations that businesses can’t meet.

The other side of this is what businesses do for their employees. These days, these are, in many cases, new employees. At best, they’ve been retained through the pandemic and they understand, but their training needs to be updated. At worst, they’re brand-new and don’t know and are still coming up to speed. Whatever transparency they need to provide the customers about policies and constraints, they need to doubly communicate that to employees so that everybody understands and everyone’s on the same page.

Harvard Business School Professor Ryan Buell.

Photo by Stu Rosner

GAZETTE: What can business owners and managers do to support and protect their staff members from mistreatment without turning away business, as some have, or alienating the desirable, cooperative customers?

BUELL: What successful leaders are doing now more than they’ve ever done is they’re checking in a lot more with their teams and making sure they have what they need, making sure that they’re OK, and making sure that they feel appreciated for the work that they’re doing. More fundamentally, though, there are three things they need to make sure that individuals have if they want to stave off burnout, if they want to set them up to be successful. The first is they need capability: They need the knowledge, skills, abilities, information, resources, processes to get the job done. Really focus on trying to make their systems robust to help people come up to speed as quickly as possible, know what the resource constraints are, and understand what they can do to address or remediate those resource constraints.

The second thing people absolutely need is motivation. They need to feel like the work they’re doing matters. They need to feel like it’s important, and they need to feel like it’s making a positive difference. Which means that businesses need to really celebrate the successes. Think about the way that we thought about grocery store employees in the early days of the pandemic: These were heroes who were putting their lives on the line to make our lives possible, to give us the food we needed to survive. That’s gone away, that has evaporated. And if anything, it’s flopped in the other direction. And so, we have to find ways to help people understand the value they’re creating, and really celebrate it so that they’re built up, so in those moments when the [emotional] reservoir gets drawn down, it’s getting drawn down on a deeper reservoir.

They want to separate people from the problem as much as possible. Have quick and easy ways to be able to pivot in a manager who presumably has more discretion, so the moment something goes wrong, the frontline [employees have] a ripcord to be able to get away from that situation.

The third thing that’s really important is they need to give them a little bit of discretion so that in those moments when something bad has happened, they have the tools to address that challenge and gap. Here’s the thing: If they have an upset customer and can turn it around for them, and by the end, they’re thanking you, that is a triumph. That is going to make people feel successful and empowered. And so, if you have capability, you have motivation, and you’ve got this discretion, that’s a really powerful triad of things that can help not just stave off burnout, but really help employees thrive in these moments of constraint.

Interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Share this article

You might like.

New study scrutinizes what did, did not work as disputed 2017 law becomes partisan football in election year

Study pinpoints two measures that predict effective managers

New study of economic toll yields projections ‘six times larger than previous estimates’

Harvard releases race data for Class of 2028

Cohort is first to be impacted by Supreme Court’s admissions ruling

Parkinson’s may take a ‘gut-first’ path

Damage to upper GI lining linked to future risk of Parkinson’s disease, says new study

Professor tailored AI tutor to physics course. Engagement doubled.

Preliminary findings inspire other large Harvard classes to test approach this fall

Understanding Consumer Rights Against Harassment in Legal Context

• August 7, 2024
• Consumer Advocacy

Consumer rights against harassment are essential in safeguarding individuals from unfair treatment and intimidation by businesses and service providers. As consumers navigate the marketplace, it is vital to understand the legal protections available to combat various forms of harassment.

These rights serve not only to empower consumers but also to promote fair practices within the economy. Awareness of consumer rights against harassment ensures that individuals can assert their entitlements and seek justice in instances of violation.

Table of Contents

Understanding Consumer Rights Against Harassment

Consumer rights against harassment encompass the protections afforded to individuals in the marketplace, aimed at shielding them from coercive and abusive practices by companies. These rights ensure that consumers can engage in fair transactions without facing undue pressure or intimidation. Such rights are fundamental to maintaining a just marketplace where individuals can feel secure.

Consumers often face various forms of harassment, including aggressive telemarketing, deceptive sales tactics, or even threats regarding debt collection. Understanding these rights empowers consumers to recognize when actions exceed acceptable boundaries and helps them take the necessary steps to protect themselves.

Legal frameworks established at the federal and state levels provide robust protections against consumer harassment. These frameworks include specific statutes that prohibit aggressive sales tactics and outline consumer rights in situations involving unfair practices. Awareness of these laws enables consumers to assert their rights confidently.

The recognition of consumer rights against harassment is crucial for fostering trust within the marketplace. An informed consumer base is better equipped to advocate for themselves and hold companies accountable for their practices, ultimately contributing to more ethical business interactions.

The Legal Framework Protecting Consumers

Consumer rights against harassment are safeguarded by a robust legal framework designed to protect individuals from unfair practices. This framework encompasses several key laws that address various forms of harassment, including deceptive advertising and aggressive sales tactics.

The Federal Trade Commission Act, for example, empowers consumers by prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts in commerce. Additionally, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act specifically safeguards consumers from abusive debt collection practices. These laws establish clear guidelines for acceptable business conduct and empower consumers to seek justice.

Regulatory agencies play a crucial role in enforcing these consumer protections. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigates complaints and ensures compliance with consumer protection laws. Other agencies, such as state attorneys general, also provide essential oversight, offering consumers resources to address harassment.

Overall, the legal framework protecting consumers not only defines their rights but also provides avenues for recourse against harassment, emphasizing the importance of consumer advocacy in today’s marketplace.

Key Laws Enforcing Consumer Rights

Key laws enforcing consumer rights against harassment establish a framework intended to protect individuals from exploitative practices. These laws ensure consumers have recourse when facing harassment by businesses, particularly in instances of aggressive marketing or debt collection.

• The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) restricts the behavior of debt collectors, prohibiting harassment and outlining consumers’ rights regarding debt communications.
• The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) safeguards against intrusive telemarketing practices, setting limits on automated calls and texts to individuals without consent.

In addition, state-specific consumer protection laws further bolster these rights, often providing additional avenues for addressing harassment. Regulatory bodies, such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), enforce these laws, promoting fair trade and safeguarding consumer interests. These legislative measures collectively enhance consumer rights against harassment, ensuring that individuals can seek protection and justice effectively.

Understanding the Role of Regulatory Agencies

Regulatory agencies play a pivotal role in enforcing consumer rights against harassment. These governmental bodies are tasked with protecting consumers and ensuring fair practices within the marketplace. They establish rules and standards that businesses must comply with, thereby providing a framework for consumer protection.

Agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state consumer protection offices investigate claims of harassment and unfair treatment. They provide resources and guidance for consumers, helping them understand their rights and the proper channels to pursue when faced with harassment.

Through monitoring, enforcement, and education, these agencies are instrumental in addressing issues that consumers encounter. They hold businesses accountable, ensuring compliance with laws designed to safeguard consumer rights against harassment.

Additionally, regulatory agencies often collaborate with consumer advocacy groups to enhance awareness and provide educational resources. This collaboration is crucial for empowering consumers and promoting a marketplace where their rights are respected and upheld.

Types of Harassment Faced by Consumers

Consumers encounter various types of harassment, impacting their ability to make informed purchasing decisions and engage with businesses productively. Such harassment can take many forms, including aggressive marketing practices, unwanted contact, and deceitful schemes.

Aggressive marketing tactics may involve persistent phone calls or messages after a consumer has opted out. This can lead to feelings of intimidation and annoyance, undermining consumer rights against harassment. Similarly, unwanted solicitations—whether in-person or via electronic means—place an undue burden on consumers, limiting their peace of mind.

Deceptive practices, such as false representations or misleading advertisements, can be classified as harassment. When consumers are misled regarding the quality or price of goods or services, their trust is exploited, and they may feel coerced into making purchases they otherwise would not consider.

Lastly, harassment can also manifest through scams or fraudulent schemes preying on vulnerable populations. Such actions not only violate consumer rights but also erode public confidence in legitimate businesses, highlighting the vital need for awareness and protection against consumer harassment.

Recognizing Your Rights as a Consumer

As a consumer, it is important to understand that you possess specific rights designed to protect you from harassment. These rights are grounded in various consumer protection laws that aim to create a fair marketplace, ensuring that your dignity and safety are upheld during transactions.

Consumers have the right to be free from aggressive sales tactics, unsolicited communication, and threats, which may be categorized as harassment. This includes practices such as incessant telemarketing calls, abusive behavior from service providers, or being pressured into making purchases.

Additionally, you are entitled to transparency regarding products and services. This encompasses receiving accurate information about pricing, quality, and any potential risks associated with a product. If any of these rights are violated, consumers have the power to seek justice and report such incidents.

Understanding your rights as a consumer is the first step in effectively combating harassment. By being informed, you can better advocate for yourself and utilize the legal frameworks established to protect consumer rights against harassment.

How to Report Harassment as a Consumer

Reporting harassment as a consumer involves a systematic approach to ensure that your rights are upheld. Begin by documenting incidents meticulously, noting dates, times, and the nature of the harassment. This information serves as vital evidence.

Next, consider reporting the harassment to the appropriate authorities. This may include consumer protection agencies, the Federal Trade Commission, or state-level regulatory bodies. Each organization typically offers specific guidelines on how to file a complaint.

In some cases, legal recourse may be necessary. Consumers can seek assistance from legal professionals who specialize in consumer rights. They can help navigate potential claims or lawsuits against harassers who violate consumer rights against harassment.

By following these steps, consumers can effectively address instances of harassment and seek resolution through proper channels. Knowing how to report harassment as a consumer empowers individuals to safeguard their rights and maintain a fair marketplace.

Documenting Incidents

Documenting incidents of harassment is a vital step in protecting consumer rights against harassment. Accurate records provide essential evidence that can substantiate claims if disputes arise. Effective documentation begins with detailed notes on each incident, including dates, times, locations, and the individuals involved.

It is advisable to keep copies of any communications related to the harassment. This includes emails, text messages, and voicemails that demonstrate the nature of the harassment. Visual evidence, such as photographs or screenshots, can further strengthen your case.

Additionally, maintaining a consistent log of incidents helps identify patterns over time. Documenting recurring harassment can highlight a potentially systemic issue that may require intervention from regulatory agencies or legal representatives. Properly documented incidents become crucial in seeking resolutions or pursuing legal recourse.

In summary, diligent documentation not only serves as a record for personal reference but also equips consumers with the necessary information for reporting harassment, reinforcing consumer rights effectively.

Reporting to Authorities

When reporting harassment as a consumer, understanding the appropriate authorities to contact is vital. Begin by identifying whether the harassment stems from a business or a specific industry, as different regulatory bodies oversee various sectors. For instance, financial institutions may be reported to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, while telecommunications issues can be directed to the Federal Communications Commission.

Once the relevant authority is established, consumers should gather all pertinent information regarding their complaint. This may include documentation of incidents, such as dates, details of harassment, and any correspondence with the entity involved. Being organized and concise enhances the likelihood of effective action by the reporting authority.

Filing a formal complaint can be done through online forms or customer service hotlines provided by these agencies. Some organizations may also offer consumer advocacy groups to assist individuals in navigating the reporting process. It is essential to follow up on the complaint to ensure it is processed, as this can lead to an investigation and potential resolution of consumer rights against harassment.

Choosing Legal Recourse

When faced with harassment, consumers have several avenues for seeking legal recourse. The primary step is identifying the nature and details of the harassment, which will guide the next actions. Legal options include filing a formal complaint, pursuing mediation, or initiating a lawsuit against offending parties.

Filing a complaint with regulatory agencies can be an effective first response. Agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may address unfair practices, while state consumer protection offices can intervene in specific disputes. Mediation, facilitated by a neutral third party, can also resolve issues without escalating to court.

Should these measures fail, consumers have the right to pursue litigation. Initiating a lawsuit may provide compensation for damages suffered due to harassment. Affected individuals are encouraged to consult with qualified legal professionals to assess the viability of a case and navigate the complexities of the legal system effectively.

Choosing legal recourse is a significant step in enforcing consumer rights against harassment. It not only seeks restitution but also helps establish accountability, deterring future violations within the marketplace.

Consequences for Violating Consumer Rights

Violating consumer rights can lead to severe repercussions for businesses and individuals engaged in such practices. Legal consequences may include financial penalties, restitution to affected consumers, and the possibility of civil lawsuits. Courts typically view harassment and other violations seriously, as they undermine consumer trust and the integrity of the market.

In addition to legal repercussions, companies may suffer reputational damage. Negative publicity can result from consumer harassment cases, leading to a loss of customer loyalty and trust. This erosion of reputation can have long-lasting effects, ultimately impacting a business’s bottom line.

Regulatory agencies often impose sanctions on businesses found guilty of violating consumer rights. These actions may include fines, the revocation of business licenses, or requirements to change practices to protect consumer interests. Compliance with consumer rights laws is not just a legal obligation; it’s also essential for maintaining a competitive edge in the marketplace.

Finally, individuals responsible for harassment can face criminal charges in severe cases. These charges may encompass fraud, coercion, or other illegal activities, leading to jail time or other penalties. Ensuring consumer rights against harassment is critical for fostering a fair and just marketplace.

Consumer Advocacy Groups and Resources

Consumer advocacy groups and resources play a vital role in safeguarding consumer rights against harassment. These organizations strive to educate consumers about their rights and offer support to those facing difficulties. By providing information and guidance, they empower individuals to take action against their harassers.

Consumer protection agencies operate within the legal framework to address issues like deceptive practices and harassment. They often handle complaints, investigate irregularities, and enforce regulations that protect consumer rights against harassment. Regulatory bodies ensure that businesses comply with consumer laws.

Numerous nonprofit organizations exist to champion consumer interests. Groups such as the Consumer Federation of America and Public Citizen provide valuable resources, legal assistance, and advocacy efforts to enhance consumer protections. Engaging with these organizations can help consumers better understand their rights and navigate the complexities of harassment.

Accessing resources from these groups often involves consumer hotlines, online toolkits, or local chapters that offer personalized support. By leveraging these advocacy avenues, consumers can actively defend their rights and combat harassment effectively.

Role of Consumer Protection Agencies

Consumer protection agencies serve as vital entities in safeguarding consumer rights against harassment. They are responsible for enforcing laws designed to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive practices. These agencies investigate complaints, educate consumers about their rights, and promote fair market practices.

Their primary functions include:

• Investigating consumer complaints and allegations of harassment.
• Providing information and guidance to consumers on their rights.
• Collaborating with businesses to ensure compliance with consumer protection laws.

Additionally, these agencies may take enforcement actions against entities that violate consumer rights. This can include fines, sanctions, or other legal measures aimed at stopping harassment and preventing future incidents. They work diligently to maintain a balanced marketplace where consumer rights against harassment are respected.

Consumer protection agencies also play a crucial role in policy-making and advocacy, ensuring that consumer rights remain a priority in legislative discussions. By representing the interests of consumers, they contribute significantly to a safer and more equitable marketplace.

Nonprofits Dedicated to Consumer Rights

Nonprofits dedicated to consumer rights serve as vital advocates for individuals facing harassment and unfair treatment in marketplace interactions. These organizations aim to empower consumers through education, resources, and legal assistance. By promoting awareness of consumer rights against harassment, they play a pivotal role in fostering a fair and equitable marketplace.

One notable example is the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), which provides legal assistance and educational resources to low-income consumers. NCLC focuses on issues such as debt collection practices and unfair lending, addressing systemic harassment experienced by consumers. Other organizations, such as Consumer Reports, engage in research and policy advocacy, reinforcing consumers’ rights and pushing for stronger protections.

In addition, many local and regional consumer advocacy groups work tirelessly to address specific community issues related to consumer harassment. These nonprofit organizations often collaborate with governmental agencies to hold businesses accountable for their practices, ensuring that consumer rights against harassment are respected and upheld. By supporting these organizations, consumers can access crucial information and supportive networks to navigate their rights effectively.

Preventive Measures Against Consumer Harassment

To reduce instances of consumer harassment, individuals should adopt proactive strategies that will safeguard their rights. Awareness of laws and regulations is vital for consumers, as it empowers them to recognize and assert their rights effectively.

Effective communication with service providers can also help in mitigating harassment. By clearly stating boundaries and preferences, consumers may deter unwanted solicitations and aggressive marketing tactics. Organizations should be informed about consumer complaints, which could lead to improved practices.

Documenting all interactions with businesses is another critical preventive measure. Keeping records of phone calls, emails, or any correspondence creates a trail that can be invaluable should further action become necessary. Consumers might consider blocking unwanted communications or using call screening apps to minimize harassment.

Engaging with consumer advocacy groups provides another layer of protection. These organizations offer resources and guidance on how to handle harassment situations while promoting awareness of consumer rights against harassment. Supporting and participating in these initiatives can strengthen community efforts against exploitative practices.

Case Studies of Consumer Harassment

Case studies of consumer harassment provide critical insights into the various ways consumers are subjected to unfair treatment. One notable case involved a telecommunications company that repeatedly contacted a consumer despite her explicit requests to cease communication. This led to substantial emotional distress and ultimately resulted in legal action on her behalf.

Another significant instance occurred within the financial services sector, where a debt collector employed aggressive tactics against a consumer. The relentless phone calls and threats disrupted the individual’s daily life, prompting the consumer to file a formal complaint and seek assistance from a consumer protection agency.

These examples underline the serious implications of harassment against consumers and showcase the importance of understanding consumer rights against harassment. Analyzing these cases reveals the necessity for stronger legal protections and more effective responses from regulatory agencies to safeguard consumers from similar invasions.

Reinforcing Consumer Rights for Future Protection

Strengthening consumer rights for future protection necessitates a proactive approach involving multiple stakeholders, from government agencies to private organizations. A comprehensive understanding of consumer rights against harassment, combined with robust legislative measures, is vital for fostering a safe marketplace.

Education serves as a cornerstone for reinforcing these rights. Consumers must be aware of their rights and the mechanisms available for redress. This awareness empowers individuals to recognize harassment and seek help without hesitation, promoting a culture of accountability among businesses.

Policy advocacy plays a significant role in initiating reforms. Advocacy groups must work collaboratively with lawmakers to amend existing laws or introduce new legislation that fortifies consumer protections. This engagement ensures that consumer rights remain responsive to emerging issues, particularly in the digital age.

Collective action among consumers can lead to significant systemic change. When individuals report instances of harassment, they contribute to a broader understanding of the issue, prompting regulatory agencies to address patterns of abuse. Such grassroots involvement is essential for maintaining strong consumer rights against harassment.

Consumer rights against harassment are essential for maintaining a fair marketplace. By understanding these rights and the available resources, consumers can effectively protect themselves and hold violators accountable.

Empowering individuals to recognize and assert their rights fosters a culture of respect and transparency, ultimately benefiting both consumers and legitimate businesses. Let us advocate for a system that prioritizes consumer welfare and addresses harassment with seriousness and urgency.

See how AARP Foundation helped 1 million+ seniors bounce back from hardship in 2023. Watch our highlights video

Public benefits/senior assitance

Job Training

Legal Advocacy

You have the power to change the lives of seniors in poverty .

1 in 3 older adults struggle to meet their basic needs. Your gift can help seniors secure good jobs, get the benefits they've earned, and stay connected to their communities.

• right_container

Get Involved

News & Stories

Executive Leadership

Board Members

Financials & Governance

Our Mission

Empowering Older Workers

Work Programs and Career Support for Older Adults

At the Intersection of Aging and Social Justice

Grantmaking

Current Opportunities

Ways to Give

Donate Today

Make a Gift to Help Struggling Seniors

Partnerships

Bring Our Programs and Services to Your Community

Volunteer with Tax-Aide

Help Older Adults Prepare Taxes

Volunteer with Experience Corps

Make a Difference in a Child's Life

Our Programs & Services

Find Local Assistance

Food Security

Make Food More Affordable

Workorce Development

Build Job Training Skills and Coaching

Medicare Savings Programs

Save on Medicare

SCSEP - Paid Job Training

Senior Community Service Employment

Featured Story

Volunteer Transforms Kids’ Lives … and His Own

Litigation In the News

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Raytheon for Age Discrimination

Our Video Gallery

See How We Work to Improve Quality of Life for Older Adults

2023 Supreme Court Cases Preview

What's at Stake for Older Adults

You are now leaving AARP.org and going to a website that is not operated by AARP. A different privacy policy and terms of service will apply.

Looking Ahead: Consumer

The Court is likely to continue to evaluate consumers’ right to have their day in court in the coming year. In the decade since the Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion , 563 U.S. 333 (2011) , clauses requiring mandatory pre-dispute arbitration and prohibiting class actions have proliferated. In Concepcion , the Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempted a California law under which class-action bans in arbitration clauses were deemed to violate state public policy and, thus, were unenforceable . Id. at 343. As of 2018, at least half of U.S. households and 25 million employees were subject to mandatory arbitration clauses prohibiting class actions.

You have the power to change the lives of seniors in poverty

Make a Gift

The importance of arbitration clauses in civil litigation, thus, continues undiminished, and two cert petitions pending before the Court provide further opportunities for the Court to clarify the reach of arbitration. Both cases, Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (No. 20-1573) , and HRB Tax Group v. Snarr (No. 20-1570) , challenge judicial decisions holding that California laws authorizing plaintiffs to proceed in representative capacities are not preempted by the FAA.

AARP Foundation Highlights

Thanks to the support of our donors and partners in 2022, we helped older adults with low income secure more than $726 million in new income, benefits, refunds, and credits.

In Moriana , a plaintiff whose employment contract required her to waive her right to bring a private attorney general action sued her employer under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) for allegedly violating California labor law. Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, Inc ., No. B297327, 2020 WL 5584508, at *1 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 18, 2020) . Under PAGA, a plaintiff can seek damages against her employer on behalf of herself and other employees if the State declines to intervene in the case. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 8, Moriana (20-1573). Those employees receive a quarter of any monetary recovery, with the remaining three-quarters going to the State. Id. at 9. The California Supreme Court has held that Concepcion does not require arbitration of a PAGA claim because such claims represent a dispute between an employer and the State, whereas the aim of the FAA is to ensure efficient resolution of disputes over a litigant’s private rights. Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC , 59 Cal. 4th 348, 384 (Cal. 2014) . (The Ninth Circuit has also rejected a challenge to Iskanian , though on the grounds that PAGA actions do not raise the same efficiency concerns as class actions.) The Viking Cruises cert. petition argues that Iskanian is nearly identical to Concepcion , in that both involved the State declining to enforce an arbitration agreement pursuant to an important public interest and asks the Supreme Court to overrule Iskanian . Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 2-3, Moriana (20-1573).

The second case, HRB Tax Group v. Snarr , involves a California rule governing “public injunctions,” which are defined as injunctions that have “‘the primary purpose and effect of’ prohibiting unlawful acts that threaten future injury to the general public.’” Snarr v. HRB Tax Group, Inc. , 839 Fed.Appx. 53, 54 (9th Cir. 2020) (quoting McGill v. Citibank, N.A. , 393 P.3d 85, 90 (Cal. 2017)). California case law makes unenforceable a contract that waives the right to seek public injunctive relief in all forums. Snarr , 389 Fed. Appx. at 54. In Snarr , the plaintiff sought a public injunction against HRB, claiming the tax preparation company misleadingly steered tax filers away from a free service and toward a paid one, in violation of California consumer protection laws. Id. at 55. The plaintiff’s arbitration agreement with HRB forbids public injunctions and so is unenforceable under California law, and the Ninth Circuit refused to compel arbitration of the plaintiff’s claim. Id. at 54

In so doing, the court relied on Blair v. Rent-A-Center, Inc. , 928 F.3d 819 (9th Cir. 2019) , a prior circuit case holding that the FAA does not preempt the public-injunction rule. Blair rests on the premises that, unlike the ban on class-action waivers at issue in Concepcion , the public-injunction rule does not single out arbitration and does not undermine the purported efficiency and informality of bilateral arbitration, given that a plaintiff can seek a public injunction in a bilateral arbitration without resort to class-certification procedures. Id .  at 827-29

In its petition seeking review of Snarr , HRB rejects these arguments, contending that the rule’s focus on the general public and the higher stakes and complexity at issue undermine the traditional benefits of bilateral arbitration. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 16-17, Snarr (No. 20-1573). HRB also argues that, in practice, the public-injunction rule allows plaintiffs to avoid arbitration by seeking public injunctions. Id. at 5. In opposing Supreme Court review, Snarr distinguishes substantively complex claims (like those for a public injunctions) from the procedural complexity at the heart of the Court’s arbitration jurisprudence and notes that the evasion HRB raises can occur only in the particular cases of arbitration provisions drafted as HRB’s is. Respondent’s Brief in Opposition, at 26-27, Snarr (No. 20-1573). Snarr additionally argues that, under Supreme Court precedent, the “FAA does not require enforcement of arbitration provisions that expressly waive statutory claims and remedies,” as HRB’s contract does, and that the public-injunction rule applies equally to all contracts, whether or not they contain arbitration clauses. Id. at 5-6.

If the Supreme Court takes up Viking Cruises or Snarr , we will learn how far the Court is willing to extend its arbitration jurisprudence. Any decisions will have important consequences for consumer litigation in California and other states authorizing private-attorney-general suits and public injunctions.

Ali Naini [email protected]

View the Full Supreme Court Preview

Unlock Access to AARP Members Edition

Already a Member? Login

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Latest Consumer Protection Cases in 2021 – Part 1

The bombay dyeing and … vs ashok narang and anr.

In this case, the Appellant, The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Ltd was the builder-promoter whereas Mr. Ashok Narang and others were the allotees/buyers of the flats. It was agreed by the Parties that the possession would be delivered by 2017 at a 20:80 scheme consideration (20% initially and 80% at the time of delivery), in which the Respondents had already made payment of 20% in 2012-13 inclusive of tax and premium. The appellants failed to deliver the flats for possession on the stipulated time and extended it by 2 years. Thus, the Respondents filed a complaint u/s 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“2016 Act”) before the Authority citing breach u/s 12 read with S. 18 of the 2016 Act seeking cancellation of the allotment and also a refund of the amount they had paid. The Authority did not pass any order regarding the refund stating that S. 12 did not apply retrospectively, and also that the cancellation should be done as per the allotment agreement. Further when appealed before the Appellate authority, it found that S. 12 of the 2016 Act had a retroactive operation and directed the respondent to refund with due interest and also ordered cancellation of the allotments. Consequently, the Appellants approached the Bombay High Court wherein the Appellant-counsel submitted that the provisions of the 2016 Act were prospective in operation and that the written agreement for sale was also absent due to which no liabilities could be imposed upon it as u/s 18. To this, the Respondent-counsel contended that the application of the 2016 Act to an ongoing project itself indicated that the provisions were quasi-retroactive in nature. Also, regarding the absence of a written agreement, it was argued that the Appellant could not be permitted to raise a new contention for the first time in the second appeal, thus it had waived the right to raise any such claims and that could not be allowed to approbate and then reprobate later on. The Court pointed out that no one should be made to wait indefinitely for delivery of possession and thereby held that there was a deficiency of service and disposed of the appeals with no order as to costs.

Citation : The Bombay Dyeing and … vs Ashok Narang and Anr., Decided by Bombay High Court on 30th August, 2021, available at : The Bombay Dyeing and … vs Ashok Narang and Anr , visited on 9th September 2021.

PUNIT JAIN VS M/S. IREO GRACE REALTECH PVT. LTD.

Mr. Punit Jain, the Complainant, filed a consumer complaint against Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. for making him sign a one-sided agreement concerning the sale of a 1483.28 sq. ft. apartment at 9200/ – per sq. ft. instead of the previously agreed rate of 8750/ – per sq. ft on 16.03.2013. The company also agreed to make the apartment available to the Complainant within 42 months of execution of the agreement 03.04.2014. The Agreement also mentioned a 180 days’ grace period. The Complainant made full payment of the agreed amount of 1,55,17,716/ – Rupees before filing the present complaint against the builder when it failed to complete the construction within the stipulated time period. The Counsel for the builder contended that the Complainant would not be considered as a ‘Consumer’ under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as he had bought the apartment for a commercial purpose and had also made a similar booking in another project by the builder. It was also argued that there was an arbitration clause in the agreement signed by the complainant. The builder’s counsel further contended that the Complainant was bound by the terms of the agreement on the Basic Sale Price. The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum held that the present agreement was a one-sided agreement and was an unfair contract. It was stated that the Developer could not compel the apartment buyers to be bound by the one-sided contractual terms contained in the Buyer’s Agreement. The court also directed the builder to pay interest @ 9% S.I. per annum from 27.11.2018 till the date of payment of the entire amount. The court also directed interest @ 12% S.I. p.a. should be paid in case of a default.

Citation: Punit Jain vs M/S. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd., Decided by The Consumer Disputes Redressal on 31st August, 2021, available at: Punit Jain vs M/S. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. , visited on 9th September, 2021.

KHATEMA FIBRES LTD. V. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

The Appellant, Khatema Fibres Ltd., took out a “Standard Fire and Social Perils” insurance policy from Respondent-Insurance Company New Assurance Co. Ltd. for a sum of approx. 42 crores from 7/5/2007 to 6/5/2008, but a fire broke out on its factory premises on 15/11/2007. The firm, M/s Adarsh Associates, appointed by the Respondent ascertained the value of loss as approx. 2 crores upon their investigation. The Appellants felt the assessment of was loss was approx. 13 crores, but the Insurance Company stated that it could give a maximum claim only up to the amount quoted by the firm. The Appellant filed a consumer complaint under Section 21 (a)(i) of the CPA, 1986 before the NCDRC seeking various types of compensation from the insurance company, for loss caused due to fire, financial stress, legal fees, and so on. The Commission allowed payment to the Appellant for 2 crores, which was original amount assessed by Respondents. The present case was an appeal under Section 23, where the Appellant contended that the net weight of the damaged material was not correct. The Respondents made the counter-argument that the surveyor was an expert at his field and did the assessment in a scientific manner. The Supreme Court observed that there were many discrepancies found by the surveyor with respect to documents submitted, wherein one document showed a certain amount of waste paper stock, and the other showed a huge increase in the stock. The Court agreed with the National Commission’s finding that the Appellant was not able to establish deficiency in service under Section 2(1)(g). Thus, the Court upheld the previous judgement because there was no arbitrariness or unjustness exercised by the Commission in granting claim to the extent of 2 crores.

Citation: Khatema Fibres Ltd. vs New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr. , Decided by The Supreme Court on 28th September, 2021, available at:  Khatema Fibres Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2021) /, last visited on 4th October, 2021.

This post is brought to you by BananaIP’s IP Consulting & Strategy Department.

About BananaIP’s IP Consulting & Strategy Department

BananaIP’s IP Consulting & Strategy Department has the experience of helping companies use IP for business and competitive advantage. Companies regularly seek their assistance, advise and opinions on identifying/mining inventions and creations, conducting IP audits, protecting IP assets appropriately, launching risk free products, managing litigation for business benefit, resolving disputes out of Court, making money out of IP, enforcing IP, and licensing transactions.

Updates on recent orders and judgments are brought to you jointly by the Entertainment Law and Consulting/Strategy Divisions of BananaIP Counsels, a Top ranked IP Firm in India. If you have any questions, or need any clarifications, please write to [email protected]   with the subject: Trademark Judgements

Please note that these case updates have been put together from different sources, primary and secondary, and BananaIP’s reporters may not have verified all the decisions published in the bulletin. You may write to [email protected]   for corrections and take down.

You May Also Like

Value of IP for Small and Medium Enterprises

Choosing the Right IP Name/Business Representation

Leave a comment cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This website uses cookies to ensure the best user experience. Privacy & Cookies Notice Accept Cookies

Manage My Cookies

Manage Cookie Preferences

Confirm My Selections

• Monetary Policy
• Health Care
• Climate Change
• Artificial Intelligence
• All Chicago Booth Review Topics

How Online Harassment Led to a Historic Court Case

• April 02, 2021
• CBR - Strategy
• Share This Page

As a law student, Brittan Heller was the target of a campaign of online harassment that created enormous stress for her personal and professional lives, led her to fear for her safety, and ultimately prompted her to file a landmark lawsuit. In the course of her legal career, she has helped other victims of online harassment and today advises tech companies on what they can do to help moderate the content on their websites. For this edition of “One Leader, One Story, One Lesson,” presented by Chicago Booth Review and Booth’s Harry L. Davis Center for Leadership , Heller talks to Booth’s John Paul Rollert about her experience and how she was able to use it as the foundation for a thriving career.

Note: The following includes a description of severe online harassment, including graphic language.

Video Transcript

John Paul Rollert : As we’ve recently all gone through this collective COVID experience, I’ve been increasingly thinking about what it means to live your life online. Now, for most of us over the last year, that’s meant spending all of your work hours on Zoom, an experience that can expose you to a lot of trivial considerations, such as: Will the cat run into my picture when I’m talking to my boss? Or, when will I get an honest to god haircut? But of course, as we all know, when you spend your waking hours online, when you have that kind of increased online presence, it can expose you to far more serious and grave concerns, in part because you create this online identity, and that identity is subject to forces that are often far beyond your control that give rise to considerations that can lead you certainly to lose sleep at night.

Because I’ve been thinking a lot about these matters, I was really excited to speak to an old friend, Brittan Heller. Brittan works at the intersection of law, technology, and human rights. She’s an expert in content moderation and the movement from online conduct to offline violence. She previously founded the Anti-Defamation League Center for Technology and Society, is an affiliate of Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, and is counsel at Foley Hoag in global business and human rights and heads up their A.I. practice. Brittan, thank you so much for joining us.

Brittan Heller: Thank you for having me.

John Paul Rollert: This interest in the intersection of law, technology, and human rights was initially one that you didn’t so much pursue as unfortunately pursued you. Can you take us back about 15 years and tell us the harrowing story of how you initially got pulled into this particular area of interest?

Brittan Heller: Everybody always asks how it started, and it kind of started like most things do. There was a young man when I was in college at Stanford who really liked me, and I didn’t return the sentiment. He was in my LSAT study group, and eventually I got into his dream school, Yale Law, and he did not. Immediately after that, “A Stupid Bitch to Attend Yale Law” showed up as a posting on a website, and I’m not gonna name the website because I prefer not to give them more traffic. I looked at it, and it was rather bizarre. The claims were really weird: that I pretended to be a minority, that I pretended to be Black, that I was a Muslim terrorist, that I bribed my way into school with family connections, or money, or sexual favors, that I’d had a lesbian affair with the dean of admissions— just really bizarre stuff. Somebody also pretended to be me and responded back to the allegations, which was actually more damaging because they didn’t paint a very flattering portrait.

I contacted the people who ran the website and I asked them if they’d take it down, and they ignored me. I then decided to just move on and ignore it. When I went to law school, I was trying to get a summer associate job and was told that I needed to clean up my online presence. So I googled myself and saw that it had started with one person’s post and it had expanded to hundreds.

John Paul Rollert: So Brittan, it sounds like you’re in this position where you’re just about to go to law school, and you find yourself the subject of this online bulletin board. You ask the people who run the bulletin board to take down your information. They refuse to do so. And for a while, it’s just something that leaves your mind to a degree, until a year later when you begin applying for law jobs, it boomerangs. And what you quickly find is that the subject of this malicious online discussion begins confusing who you are with this, kind of, created online identity. And it begins to have, for you, real professional repercussions.

Brittan Heller: I think that’s exactly right. I had gone to law school to do human-rights law, specifically international criminal law, and found that this was actually getting in the way of me getting jobs in the American system. And if you can’t get experience in the American system, you can’t get other experience. It progressed. It got worse as time went on. I contacted the people who ran the website again. I asked them if they would take it down, and gave them one line of code and said, if you put in this one line of code, it will de-index it from Google. And you can keep saying whatever you want, what do you say? And their response was, “Freedom of speech. You’re gonna have to sue us.” So I did.

At around the same time, they had started this “Girls of the Top 14 Law Schools” contest. And with that, they encouraged people to follow around female students and take pictures of them so they’d own the copyright and they could do whatever they wanted. My picture ended up on crime-scene photos because they were quite angry at me for filing suit and annoying them. But other people weren’t as lucky. I got pro bono counsel from Stanford and Yale. I had a public-relations firm volunteer to help. I had a cybersecurity researcher volunteer to help with attribution. He later became the CSO of Facebook. And we announced the suit on the front page of the Washington Post . So it was very, very public for about two and a half years.

John Paul Rollert: So you’re at law school. And now you find yourself in the middle of a high-profile court case that seems to bring up the tension between, on the one hand, the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech, and on the other hand, this desire that we all have to control our personal identities. And that’s, of course, a very academic way of putting things. But I’m curious, for you personally, how did this experience affect you? It’s clearly something that took up a lot of time, money, effort, energy, mental bandwidth. And on a day-to-day basis, how did being in the middle of this actually affect you in your life at law school?

Brittan Heller: It was one of the hardest things I’ve done. I started off being very, very social and very involved in student life at Yale. I think I was on . . . I was an elected representative for the class. I would go out to parties and dinners. And I was very, very active in my classes. I participated, and that all ground to a halt. Some of the people who were doing the harassment were classmates. There would be a running commentary on the website of everything I said in class, what I was wearing, what I had done the night before sometimes, or what they had assumed I had done the night before. It wasn’t true most of the time. And it felt like, it felt like living in a panopticon.

It also got worse before it got better. People started making threats of physical and sexual violence, to the point where law enforcement had to get involved. They also put my personal information, my phone, my email, my class schedule, where I lived, all of that information online and encouraged people to teach me a lesson and make me pay. I ended up having, I remember having the FBI escort me in a finals one time.

You don’t want to read the comments. And everyone said, “Turn off the comments.” And the school even said, “Turn off your computer screen.” And that’s how you deal with this. The fact that it had kind of crossed the line into real-world threats I think changes the conversation because the First Amendment does not protect threats of violence. That is an exception in every legal system that has freedom of expression–based laws.

John Paul Rollert: It sounds like you’re clearly in this situation that starts out bad and at some point begins ratcheting up to something far worse. And of course, at the same time, because of this sense of being under surveillance, that anything you say or do at the law school, or that people might assume that you would say or do, will quickly find its way online. And honestly, I can’t imagine the kind of personal claustrophobia that leads to, but clearly at some point you decided that you had enough, that you had to do something, that contrary to what some people were telling you to do— “Just forget about it.” “Turn your computer off."— you felt you had to fight back. Can you tell us a little bit about that moment, and what for you brought you to that decision that you couldn’t just stand back and take it anymore, but that you had to move forward and try to attempt to find a way affirmatively to stop what was happening?

Brittan Heller: Filing the case was almost like a distancing exercise, where it gave me the ability to use an emphatic no. And most of the time, when people would talk about leadership or social-justice work, it was about using your yes, being affirmative and going out there. And that’s how leadership was defined. And I learned the power of saying no. It was scary.

It also meant legally that we were kind of on untested ground with this case. It was “Jane Doe” versus pseudonymous defendants “Hitler, Hitler, Hitler” and “Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkey.” That really hadn’t been done either. Lots of interesting constitutional issues. The First Amendment didn’t really . . . it didn’t really concern me as much because I was bringing the suit to test whether or not an individual who was experiencing this type of harassment could get redress under the current structure of the law. And the answer was immediately no because I had all of those resources and access to and the interest of the media. Most people who go through this, it’s a very private, painful experience.

I think I got over $1 million of pro bono legal services as well. And people don’t have access to that when it normally happens to them. So everyone assumed I was challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which provides intermediary liability. That means that Google, to a blogger, are not responsible for the content that other people post on their website. It actually wasn’t designed to test that. We had good legal theories behind what we did. The people at Harvard called me “the girl who wanted to kill the internet,” so it wasn’t just personally painful; it was a little professionally harrowing as well.

John Paul Rollert: Brittan, when you began thinking about filing a lawsuit, which of course is somewhat of an extreme measure, I’m curious, did you weigh out the pros and the cons of taking that action? And how did you figure out that ultimately this is precisely what you had to do, notwithstanding the downsides of such aggressive measures?

Brittan Heller: I was a law student and I knew that there would be hurdles in a case. I also understood that it was gonna get worse before it got better if I went public with it. And I decided that I had an obligation to file because most people, when this happens to them, will not have legal standing to file a case because they won’t have the type of damages that you need to prove to a court. And I did. It felt like if I didn’t do it, who would? It felt like something that needed to be done.

I knew I could handle it. I was in a position of privilege being a Yale Law student. So people would listen to me and would follow the case in a way that they wouldn’t if it was an average person who didn’t have that sort of connection. I’m very proud of it, but at the time I was very uncertain. America’s Most Wanted came to my house and disguised the apartment to have me look anonymous. And just with the voice and the hair and the backdrops, and eventually people figured out who I was. At the beginning, there’s a bit of a security blanket being a Jane Doe. But once it was known that it was me, that’s when I felt I had to be quite brave about it because I knew it was going to define me and my work and potentially the way that the tech industry deals with this type of situation.

John Paul Rollert: So essentially we’re talking at this point about 15 years ago, long before any of us had ever heard of Twitter trolls or had good reason to worry about them. In this case, you are being harassed and even stalked by people who are participating in an online message board. And they’re writing under these ridiculous pseudonyms like “Hitler, Hitler, Hitler.” And they’re saying things about you that are creating an online identity around Brittan Heller that doesn’t reflect the actual person whatsoever. So finally you decide to take matters into your own hands and you pursue this novel litigation strategy. And I was hoping you could tell us a little bit about the experience of going into litigation, and to the degree that you can, what exactly came of it.

Brittan Heller: When you file a lawsuit, nobody really wins. It was constantly covered by the Wall Street Journal law blog and papers all over the country. Filing the lawsuit meant that there was another microscope to this experiment.

I ended up settling the case after about two and a half years. The answer to the original impact litigation questions was no. Normal people could not get redress under the current structure of the law.

Thankfully, this was before Twitter trolls, but it doesn’t mean that these trolls were any less virulent. When I settled with the people, we were able to identify them—not all of them, but a good amount. As part of settlement negotiations, I met with them. So we would communicate. I remember this one kid. He was a kid. I think he was 17. And his parents were paying for his legal defense with their homeowners insurance. And it was very surly. So I remember that I said to him, “Hello, my name is Brittan. I see here that you, you wrote that you wanted to gouge out my eyes and skull fuck my corpse. I think we should be introduced first.”

The people that we identified were very surprising because they made such personal comments. I assumed that most of them would be people that I knew who had sort of a personal vendetta. They ranged in age from 17 to retired. And it was men and women, all different professional backgrounds. And from a high-school student to a postdoctoral scholar in pediatric AIDS medicine.

They all said the same thing. They said, “I didn’t realize what I was writing was impacting you in your real life. I didn’t think about that. It was a game. It seemed like a game. I didn’t realize what I was doing was impacting somebody on the other side of the screen. And I’m so, so sorry.”

John Paul Rollert: So for them, it was basically like you weren’t a real person, almost as if what they were maligning on the website was not an actual person with this fictional identity they created, but someone who didn’t even exist in the first place, as if they couldn’t imagine that there was actually a human being on the other end of everything that they were saying.

Brittan Heller: It crossed from online to offline antics as well. I remember that there was a law firm that gave me a summer job and took a chance on me. And somebody penned a, what I like to refer to as a poison-pen letter, describing my crimes against men. And they sent this to every professor at Yale whose email address they could get in the law school, and all of the managing, hiring partners at the firm that I was working at. It was bizarre and scary, but it made me feel like I couldn’t be safe anywhere I went. They copied me on it. So I knew exactly what was happening. It just emphasized for me how out of control I was in the situation. And so it felt, it felt like, like being . . . It felt like being in a horror movie, actually.

John Paul Rollert: Now, Brittan, insofar as your litigation efforts were ultimately successful, and you had a chance to confront these online trolls, it’s quite clear in hindsight that this particular experience had a profound impact on the professional choices you made after law school. And I was hoping you could draw a through line for us between this litigation experience and the remarkable career you carved out for yourself afterward.

Brittan Heller: I was worried that this was going to take me away from human-rights law and be a big distraction in the same way that it had disrupted my education. But it ended up meaning that I was the first person in human rights to be thinking about these issues related to online activity. And it ended up . . . I was worried that it was gonna be a professional mar, and it ended up putting me on the vanguard.

Immediately after law school, I worked at the International Criminal Court and then did a series of human-rights fellowships overseas and found myself focusing on the impact of technology on people’s lives. When I came back to the US, I became a prosecutor and I worked in the human rights and special prosecution section at the DOJ, which is the Nazi-hunting section. And I ended up taking a special role as the computer hacking and IP specialist, CHIP, in the office to learn about electronic evidence and to basically spearhead all of the online investigations that we were doing.

I started the Center for Technology and Society. I had a focus explicitly on these type of activities. I took pro bono clients who were experiencing harassment and used my knowledge of how this works to get them the best solution possible. Danielle Citron wrote a book about the case called Hate Crimes in Cyberspace . And when I started meeting with tech companies professionally, I remember I went to one of the major tech companies, and they all have to read the book before they start working in trust and safety. So they knew who I was and what had happened, but it also gave me credibility.

I’ve worked on these issues as an attorney, as a government official, on the domestic and the international front, as a victim, and as an advocate. So it is very comprehensive. Now in my practice, I haven’t met anyone who has a similar legal practice to mine, that is centered around freedom of expression but integrates freedom of expression and public safety. In my practice now, I work with technology companies—some of the largest ones down to startups. And I help them develop content moderation systems and think about policies and procedures before there’s a problem. It also has led me to think a lot about virtual reality, the specific features of that medium that make online harassment feel real. It feels like it’s really happening to you. It implants in your head like a memory. So I’m looking at how emergent technology is going to be another turn of the screw.

John Paul Rollert: I’m curious, Brittan. You obviously had this incredibly traumatizing experience. And yet you ultimately turned it into an anchor for a broader and highly successful professional practice. And I’m curious if there is something empowering about that, both for you but also for the people that you work with. I mean, in many respects, you have a special credibility having been subject to online harassment long before anyone had ever heard of, again, Twitter trolls. This is an area which you have a kind of special experience with. And I’m curious when working with clients when counseling people, is there a special power that comes with that?

Brittan Heller: I think there is power in it. I can go to people and say, “I understand exactly what you’re going through.” Very few people do. Very few people understand what it’s like to open up a screen and read every comment you’ve made in class and have people responding to it, basically trying to use your own words against you in everyday life. Or when you’re walking home, and they’ve put your address, to wonder if someone will be waiting for you there. The experience of going through something like that changes you. I try my best to convey that to the companies and get them to be proactive about it. And I think that’s also a very unique angle on it because most lawyers will focus on litigation. But what I do now is almost like it’s on the preventative end of the spectrum.

John Paul Rollert: For those of us who have spent the last year living online in a way that we could have never imagined before COVID, but who are also sensitive to these developments in information technology like artificial intelligence or augmented reality, is there some lesson that you take from your experience that you could share with us, as we look ahead to these developments, regardless of if we’ve had the kind of traumatic experience you’ve shared here, is there some kind of central lesson you would have us keep in mind looking ahead?

Brittan Heller: Absolutely. The most important thing that I learned, and I strongly believe is still relevant today . . . This taught me the need to rehumanize technology. The distance that people described—"I didn’t conceive that there was someone on the other side of the screen"—that touches basic human empathy. But I think it can also be addressed through smart design choices and smart policies and flexible policies. I advise companies on the things that you can do to remind people that there is a person on the other side of the screen. My practice is a mix of social psychology, design, and breaking people’s toys, in addition to the law. It’s very fulfilling but it also touches back to the core of why I became a lawyer in the first place. It’s centered around human dignity. I view everything that happened as being a spectrum, where I started off looking at human-rights abuses, and then through this experience, really take a proactive and predictive viewpoint of it. I like to think that I’m the Cassandra of the internet.

John Paul Rollert: Well, of course it was the fate of Cassandra never to be listened to by the ancient Trojans. But I think the lessons that you’ve shared with us today, and particularly the reminder that we need to remember that human face on the other end of any of our online activity, are lessons that we should take to heart. And I’m grateful to you for sharing them. Brittan Heller, thank you for joining us today.

Brittan Heller: Thank you for having me. This was really great.

More from Chicago Booth Review

Bosses, check your political bias when hiring.

Companies with greater uniformity may not do as well.

• CBR - Politics

How Will COVID-19 Change Management and Leadership?

Chicago Booth faculty field questions from Booth students and alumni about how COVID-19 has changed, and will change, various aspects of management and leadership.

CBR Briefing #7

Related topics, more from chicago booth.

Your Privacy We want to demonstrate our commitment to your privacy. Please review Chicago Booth's privacy notice , which provides information explaining how and why we collect particular information when you visit our website.

• UK & Ireland

How is this helpful for me?

• Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
• Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
• Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
• The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

• ON OFF Text Highlighter

Report a problem

• Jaskaran Singh v. Amazon India District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Oct 18, 2016
• Subsequent References
• CaseIQ (AI Recommendations)

The complainant has filed the present complaint seeking a direction to the opposite parties to refund `22,791/- i.e. the cost of LED TV.

The price of the LED TV was `22,791/-. Per the complainant, when the package was opened, he found that the product was faulty. The grievance of the complainant is that the opposite party No.1 failed to refund the price of the television.

However, the product is yet to be received; therefore, the refund towards the product has not been initiated. Hence, it has been prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

The opposite party No.2 failed to appear before the Forum on 24.5.2016.

It is not in dispute that the complainant placed an order to purchased Micromax LED on the website of the opposite party No.1.

The plea of the opposite party No.1 is that the name of the opposite party No.1 is not correctly mentioned in the complaint.

The same was returned to the opposite party No.1, who assured to return back the amount, but was not done so by the opposite party No.1.

Failure to refund `22,791/- to the complainant in our considered opinion amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1.

The opposite party No.1 is directed to refund `22,791/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of complaint till payment. The complainant is also held entitled to `5,000/- for mental harassment etc. A copy of this order be sent to the parties as per the Rules and the file after its due completion consigned to the record-room.

• ORIGINAL PDF

Jaskaran Singh v. Amazon India

2. In nut-shell, the case of the complainant is that he placed an order for purchase of a LED TV (Micromax) online from the opposite party No.1 on February, 2015. The same was dispatched by the opposite party No.1 on February, 2015. The price of the LED TV was `22,791/-. Per the complainant, when the package was opened, he found that the product was faulty. When the television was set on, half of its screen was working. The said issue was reported to the opposite party No.1. Despite various telephones and follow ups, the opposite parties failed to resolve the issue. After numerous calls and subsequent e-mails, a return was finally initiated by the opposite party by admitting their mistake. On their suggestion the product was returned through Trackon Couriers. Receipt of `726/- issued by the opposite party No.2 was sent to the opposite party No.1, who is refund of `726/- in his favour. The grievance of the complainant is that the opposite party No.1 failed to refund the price of the television. He has been harassed. There is deficiency in service. Hence, this complaint.

3. The complaint is contested by the opposite party No.1 by filing reply taking preliminary objections regarding the complainant not being a consumer and that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties. On merits, it is contended that the complainant has impleaded M/S Amazon India as opposite party to the instant complaint, whereas the entity operating the URL:www.amazon.in is Amazon Seller Services private Limited. He has filed the complaint without verifying the facts and exercising due diligence. It is further contended that the role of the opposite party No.1 is limited to that of a facilitator and not the seller/manufacturer and is neither liable nor responsible for any actions or inactions of sellers nor any breach of conditions, representations or warranties by the sellers or manufacturers of the products. The complaint is bad for non-joinder of parties. The complainant failed to implead the Seller of the produce i.e. Cloud tail and the manufacturer of the product i.e. Micromax as parties to the complaint. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. It is contended that the produce was delivered to the complainant in a sealed box. It is denied that defective product was delivered. It is admitted that the complainant had contacted the executives at Amazon. The complainant was clearly told that the refund of the amount paid for the product will be made subject to receipt of the same by the fulfillment department of the company. However, the product is yet to be received; therefore, the refund towards the product has not been initiated. The product was returned via opposite party No.2 and the refund of the amount spent on shipping services was successfully initiated in the account of the complainant. It was the responsibility of the opposite party No.2 to ship the product to the opposite party No.1. The complainant had himself chosen opposite party No.2 for the delivery. It is admitted that the refund of the amount was to be initiated within 7-14 days. However, since the product is yet to be received, therefore, no refund can be issued to the complainant. There is no deficiency in service as alleged. Hence, it has been prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

4. The opposite party No.2 failed to appear before the Forum on 24.5.2016. Hence, it was proceeded against exparte on that date.

5. A rejoinder denying the contents of the reply filed by the opposite party No.1 and reiterating those of the complaint has been filed.

6. The parties were called upon to produce the evidence. The complainant filed his affidavit (Ex. CW-1), and the documents Annexure C1 to C10. The opposite party No.1 filed affidavit Ex. OPW1 of Sh. Rahul Sundaram Ex. OPW1-1

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant, opposite party No.1 and have carefully gone through the case file.

8. It is not in dispute that the complainant placed an order to purchased Micromax LED on the website of the opposite party No.1.

9. The plea of the opposite party No.1 is that the name of the opposite party No.1 is not correctly mentioned in the complaint. It is not denied by the opposite party No.1 that the registered cover containing the notice was delivered at its address and AD Card was signed by one of its representatives. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the opposite party No.1 was well aware of the filing of the complaint. Hence, this plea of the opposite party No.1 is rejected being devoid of any force.

10. The complainant in his affidavit Ex. CW1 has stated that on receiving the LED, he noticed that half of its screen was working. The same was returned to the opposite party No.1, who assured to return back the amount, but was not done so by the opposite party No.1.

11. It has been argued on behalf of the opposite party No.1 that the opposite party No.1 is not the manufacturer of the product. It only acts as a facilitator. It is true that the manufacturer of the produce is Micromax and that it was sold by Cloud tail, but when the complainant put his grievances regarding non-functioning of the LED before the opposite party No.1, it asked him to return the product. Initially it suggested two couriers, by which the LED could be returned, but none of them was available in the vicinity of the complainant and lastly the opposite party No.1 asked him to send the product through any of the courier service available in his vicinity. This is evident from the copies of E-mails exchanged between the complainant and the representative (s) of the opposite party No.1 placed on record. It is admitted by the opposite party No.1 that the courier charges were paid to the complainant. This clearly shows that the opposite party No.1 took upon itself the responsibility of accepting the return of LED and to ensure the refund of price. Thus, it can safely be inferred that the opposite party No.1 took upon itself the responsibility for accepting the return of defective LED. Therefore, the plea of the opposite party No.1 that complainant had no reason to mount a liability on it cannot be accepted as correct.

12. Admittedly, the LED was not received by the opposite party No.1, as opposite party No.2 failed to deliver the same. Even the opposite party No.2 failed to appear before the Forum and therefore was proceeded exparte. The fact that the LED was not received by the opposite party No.2 goes un-rebutted on record. Therefore, the opposite party No.1 is left at liberty to take action against the opposite party No.2 as per law. However, the opposite party No.1 was under legal obligation to refund the price of the LED i.e. `22,791/- to the complainant as undertaken by it. Failure to refund `22,791/- to the complainant in our considered opinion amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1. Hence, the complaint deserves to be partly allowed.

13. Accordingly, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party No.1 is directed to refund `22,791/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of complaint till payment. The complainant is also held entitled to `5,000/- for mental harassment etc. A copy of this order be sent to the parties as per the Rules and the file after its due completion consigned to the record-room. Announced at Dharamshala on 18.10.2016 (Mukesh Bansal) President (Sangita Gautam) (Dinesh Sharma) Member Member

Edit Citation

• Distinguished
• Referencing
• Uncategorized

Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Citation.

Get 2 points on providing a valid reason for the above change.

Add Equivalent Citation

Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment.

Select Preference

Share the Judgment

Are you sure?

By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us. Leave your message here.

Click here to remove this judgment from your profile.

Nike’s #MeToo moment shows how ‘legal’ harassment can lead to illegal discrimination

Associate Professor, School of Law, University of Oregon

Disclosure statement

Elizabeth C. Tippett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

View all partners

Nike’s having its #MeToo moment – and it illustrates plainly what’s still missing from our discussion of sexual harassment in the workplace.

Women at Nike, fed up with the status quo, recently undertook a covert survey asking about sexual harassment and gender discrimination, which eventually reached the CEO of the world’s largest sports brand. Six top executives have resigned or announced their departure.

Nike employees interviewed by The New York Times described being marginalized and passed over for promotion. One recounted a supervisor that called her “stupid bitch.” Another reported an email from a manager about an employee’s breasts. There was the manager who bragged about condoms in his bag and racy magazines on his desk. Oh, and of course there were trips to strip clubs, tacked on to the end of staff outings.

This happened over a period of years. All the while, human resources sat on its hands. The managers kept their jobs. The complaints piled on.

In some ways, it’s the familiar story of how companies have long turned a blind eye to harassment. But it also illustrates, perhaps better than any other example from the #MeToo era, how harassment can be a symptom – and precursor – of workplace discrimination.

And, as I explain in a forthcoming article in the Minnesota Law Review, understanding that link is critical for companies hoping to improve upon past mistakes.

Easy vs. hard

The #MeToo movement has rightly brought attention to questions of sexual harassment and assault. The types of cases that result could be divided into two buckets – what in law school we would label “easy cases” and “hard cases.”

One of the first thing students learn in law school is that “easy cases” refer to those in which the facts are really extreme – where a rule clearly applies or it doesn’t. Here, that would mean egregious examples of sexual harassment, such as allegations of Matt Lauer’s lewd and aggressive behavior toward subordinates.

“Hard cases” refer to situations where it’s harder to figure out whether the parties involved have violated the rule. There might be arguments on both sides, and it might be hard to predict how a court would rule. Or – a favored trap on the bar exam – the conduct might seem really bad as a matter of common sense but doesn’t meet the technical requirements of the legal rule.

The stories coming out of Nike are the hard cases. They do not clearly meet the legal standard for workplace harassment.

The problem of not-quite harassment

The law governing workplace harassment is quite unforgiving. The offensive conduct must be so severe or frequent that it creates an abusive working environment. The conduct must also be motivated by the victim’s membership in a protected category, like their gender or race.

Some legal scholars have argued courts have been too unforgiving in applying this test and that it should be brought closer to commonsense understandings of harassment.

Lawyers and human resources experts have long known that the legal standard for harassment is incredibly high. So companies worked around it by defining harassment very broadly in their policies. This gave companies the power (but not the obligation) to punish employees for violations of the policy. But pre-#MeToo, it seemed companies chose not to act , even when they had the power to do so.

As we now know, this just-do-nothing ethos was a terrible judgment from a moral and public relations standpoint. And while companies may have been correct that a claim may not have been harassment, legally speaking, they completely overlooked their potential liability for future discrimination claims.

Here’s why. A supervisor’s derogatory comments about an employee’s gender, race or religion may not amount to a harassment claim. But they are a smoking gun in a later discrimination claim.

The discrimination blind spot

Discrimination claims are all about the supervisor’s frame of mind when he or she made a decision about an employee promotion, compensation or firing. But since we can’t read someone’s mind, the only thing we have to go on is their comments and behavior.

If a supervisor makes objectifying comments about a woman’s body and then later denies her a promotion, those comments may later be used to show his decision was biased.

The Nike story offers a great illustration of this principle. A manager who views women primarily in terms of condom consumption is probably not also thinking of them as a potential vice president candidate. Nevertheless, it is unsurprising to me that Nike’s human resources department seemingly failed to identify the problem as discrimination when employees complained.

And that’s because, in all likelihood, the discrimination had not yet happened. When the woman complained, it probably wasn’t yet about a lost promotion, unfair compensation or a termination. It was “just” a comment.

Of course, to the employee, it was never just a comment. She would have been keenly aware that her career was in her supervisor’s hands. And that he could no longer be trusted.

This is not really a rare occurrence for women in the U.S. In representative samples, around 25 percent to 40 percent of women report having experienced unwanted sexually based behaviors at work, and 60 percent said they encountered hostile behaviors or comments based on their gender.

It’s as though the employee can see the gun and anticipates the bullet to come. But all human resources sees is a weak harassment complaint unworthy of intervention.

A better way

The #MeToo movement has generated discussion around “zero tolerance” harassment policies , containing perhaps the implied threat that even minor transgressions of the policy will be met with strong punishment.

But because harassment policies already cover the waterfront, they don’t really provide meaningful behavioral guidance. A Pew Research study published in March found that half of all adults surveyed thought that #MeToo made it harder for “men to know how to interact with women in the workplace.”

I actually think a more sustainable approach – which actually better aligns with a company’s true legal risks – would be to beef up anti-discrimination policies.

These policies would explain that supervisors are placed in a special position of trust regarding their subordinates’ careers and that supervisors act as the company’s proxy in carrying out the employer’s duty to provide equal employment opportunities.

When a supervisor engages in low-level harassing behaviors or makes derogatory comments based on a employee’s gender, race or religion, it is a breach of that trust.

And it is the company’s duty to make it right.

• Sexual harassment
• Gender discrimination
• Workplace harassment

University Relations Manager

2024 Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellowships

Head of Research Computing & Data Solutions

Community member RANZCO Education Committee (Volunteer)

Director of STEM

877-757-8189

Student Login

Can Customer Misconduct Be the Basis for a Workplace Harassment Claim?

“The customer is always right.”

It’s an age-old slogan in business, encouraging staff to make customer service a priority and take complaints seriously. However, it can be bad legal advice when it comes to customer misconduct that rises to the level of harassment.

Every company has to deal with difficult customers, creating headaches for customer-facing staff. But if customer behavior crosses the line into inappropriate conduct, the employer may be held liable for creating a hostile work environment.

Consider the case of Vincent Fried, a manicurist with a salon at the Wynn Hotel in Las Vegas. Fried had worked at the salon for more than 12 years and received excellent performance reviews. In June 2017, a customer made an explicit sexual proposition, which Fried reported to the salon manager. Fried said he did not feel comfortable interacting with the customer, but the manager instructed him to complete the customer’s pedicure. During the 35- to 45-minute pedicure, the customer continued to make sexual references.

The manager never addressed the issue, despite Fried’s frequent requests, and other employees made inappropriate comments about the incident. Fried filed suit for sex discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment. The district court  granted summary judgment to Wynn , but on November 18, 2021, the Ninth Circuit court of appeals  reversed  Fried’s hostile work environment claim and remanded the case.

Significant Legal Risk

The  Fried  case is hardly unique. On September 1, 2021, the Fifth Circuit court of appeals  reversed and remanded  the hostile work environment claim of an employee at Harrah’s Casino in New Orleans. Christina Sansone, a dealer for the casino, complained multiple times to her supervisors about a customer she alleged had sexually harassed her at least twice a week. Sansone’s supervisors told her to ignore the behavior and failed to file a written report until months after her initial complaint.

The  Fried  and  Sansone  cases have yet to be tried before a jury. However, a 2014  case  made headlines when a jury awarded a plaintiff more than $2.5 million in damages for a similar claim.

Delise Diaz was an employee of AutoZoners, an affiliate of AutoZone in Kansas City, Missouri. A commercial customer commented on her appearance in ways that made her uncomfortable and touched her lower back. Diaz reported the customer’s unwelcome behavior to her supervisor, who told her to go back to work because he did not want to lose the customer’s business. In later incidents, the customer grabbed her and brushed up against her. She reported this inappropriate conduct, but her supervisor and the store manager called her a “crybaby.” The customer’s behavior continued to escalate. Diaz contacted the human resources manager, who took no action for several months.

Diaz sued both AutoZoners and AutoZone. A jury found that the companies created a hostile work environment and retaliated against Diaz when she complained.

What Is a Hostile Work Environment?

A hostile work environment is one in which an employee is subjected to unwelcome verbal or physical conduct that is severe or pervasive, and the employee must submit to such conduct as an explicit or implicit condition of employment. If an employee proves that the employer is responsible for creating the hostile work environment, the employer may be liable for  sexual discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act .

It takes more than an offensive comment to create a hostile work environment, although one severe action may be sufficient. Courts must consider the severity of the behavior and whether it unreasonably interferes with the employee’s work. The harasser’s conduct should be evaluated objectively, from the perspective of a “reasonable person.”

The employee’s contemporaneous protest or complaint can help establish that the conduct was unwelcome, but it is not required. Courts should consider whether the employee feared repercussions for complaining.

Naturally, an employer can violate Title VII by its own acts. However, federal courts have agreed that an employer can be liable for a third party's sexual harassment or racial discrimination if the employer knew or should have known about the third party’s actions. Third parties might include contractors, suppliers, and vendors as well as customers.

What Should Employers Do?

Harassment by customers creates challenges for employers. Customers are not subject to company policies or clear expectations of appropriate conduct. As customers, they cannot be “fired,” although they can be asked to leave. Employees may be reluctant to complain due to embarrassment, fear of reprisal, or concerns that the employer will not take action.

However, companies can take steps to reduce the risk of a hostile work environment complaint based upon third-party actions. Companies should train employees to recognize harassment regardless of the source and encourage them to report it. Supervisors should also be vigilant for harassment, even if it’s not reported.

Managers and supervisors should recognize the importance of promptly investigating such reports and taking appropriate action. For example, a customer could be asked to leave the premises or get assigned to another employee. A company could cease doing business with a vendor whose representative acts inappropriately.

Customer misconduct is on the rise. Throughout the pandemic, some customers have become hostile, even abusive, toward employees enforcing mask mandates and other rules. Social media and shifting norms have helped create a climate in which some customers act inappropriately.

Companies must remember that the customer isn’t always right. Misconduct that rises to the level of harassment must be dealt with swiftly.

Earn a Law Degree Online

There’s a growing need for legal professionals who understand complex employment law. Purdue Global Law School offers an  online Executive Juris Doctor  for those who wish to further their career by earning an advanced legal education but do not intend to become a practicing attorney. We also offer an  online Juris Doctor  for those who wish to become an attorney licensed in California.

Single law courses  are also available.

Would you like to learn more?  Request more information  today.

Purdue Global Law School

Established in 1998, Purdue Global Law School (formerly Concord Law School) is Purdue University's fully online law school for working adults.

EJD Program: Except as provided in rule 4.30 of the Admissions Rules (Legal education in a foreign state or country), completion of a professional law degree program at this law school other than for the Juris Doctor degree does not qualify a student to take the California Bar Examination or satisfy the requirements for admission to practice law in California. It may not qualify a student to take the bar examination or to satisfy requirements for admission to the practice of law in any other jurisdiction. A student who intends to seek admission to practice law should visit Purdue Global’s  State Licensure and Certifications  page for state-specific requirements. Students are highly encouraged to confirm state requirements from the appropriate bar admissions office for their state of residence.

JD Program: Study at, or graduation from, this law school does not qualify graduates to take the bar examination or to satisfy the requirements for admission to practice in jurisdictions other than California or — with an approved petition — in Indiana. After receiving a law license in California or Indiana, graduates may also apply to sit for the state bar in North Carolina and Wisconsin. Purdue Global Law School cannot guarantee that any individual’s waiver petition will be granted. There will be additional eligibility requirements to be admitted to the California or Indiana bar. For more information, visit https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions or https://myble.courts.in.gov/admission-information . Refer to Purdue Global’s State Licensure and Certifications page for state-specific requirements.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

© 2024, Purdue Global, a public, nonprofit institution.

• Cookie Preferences
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

The Top 10 Consumer Court cases and Trails in India – Complete List

Buying goods and services is an inevitable part of our daily lives and problems might occur from the vendors who deliver these goods and services. Below are the top 10 consumer court cases curated for the readers:

Top 10 Consumer Court Cases and Trials in India

1. Dipika Pallikal , a squash champion, and an Arjuna awardee found used her Axis Bank Debit Card in a hotel at Netherlands’ Rotterdam which failed. She had 10 times the bill amount in her account at that time. The bank said the incident was a case of ‘Force Majeure’ (an act of God/ something beyond the control) and returned a cheque of ₹1 lakh issued to her by the government of. Dipika approached the consumer court in Chennai against Axis Bank

Court judgment:

The court found that there was a deficiency of service on the part of the Axis Bank and directed the bank to pay a compensation of ₹5 lakh and ₹5000 as expenses.

2. Poonam Verma v Ashwin Patel & Ors: In this case, the respondent who is a homeopathic doctor, prescribed allopathic medicines for the treatment of a patient who did not respond to the medicine well and subsequently died. Based on the fact that the respondent was qualified and registered to practice under Homeopathy only,

It was found to be in violation of the statutory duty not to practice Allopathy under section 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Respondent’s act was held to be actionable negligence was ordered to pay a compensation of three lakhs.

3. A tea vendor, Rajesh Sakre , is an example of this who had ₹20,000 in his State Bank of India account and he withdrew ₹10,800. On his next visit to the ATM, he realized all his money was gone. When he asked the bank authorities they blamed it on him for the fault.

So, he went to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum with his grievance and as he couldn’t afford a lawyer he argued the case himself.

Court Judgement:

The forum ruled in his favor and ordered the State Bank of India to return the ₹9,200 with 6% interest also to pay ₹10,000 as compensation for mental anguish and ₹2,000 for the legal expenses.

4. Baglekar Akash Kumar who was a 19-year-old got a book online and when it was delivered, he noticed that there was no MRP printed on it. He browsed the internet and saw that the book was sold at different prices at different places after which he went to the consumer forum and filed a case against Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd and the paper company.

The court held non-publishing MRP on the product without a valid reason is ‘unfair trade practice’. MRP ensures that a consumer is not overcharged for the product. So, it is mandatory for companies to print MRP and the publishers were asked to print the retail price on the book Akash was awarded ₹10,000 as compensation and ₹2,500 as costs.

In any consumer court case, the bills and similar legal paperwork are the most powerful and useful weapons for lawsuits. This is why it’s important that you keep hold of the bills carefully. For this you can ask for our agents’ help who are experts in preparing, managing, and overtaking legal paperwork. At DailyFiling, we have consultants who are experienced with all sorts of lawsuits like income tax consultants , GST consultants , company registration agents, and more.

5. Mr. Kondaiah from Andhra Pradesh noticed that Sarvi Food Court charged him ₹40 for a water bottle where the MRP was actually ₹20. He filed his case against them in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum for ‘unfair trade practice’. He supported his claim by producing the bill of the bottle.

The court decided in favor of Mr. Kondaiah and said that the practice is unjustified and Mr. Kondaiah was paid a compensation of ₹20,000, ₹20, and ₹5,000 for the costs.

6. Rajesh Rajan from Ahmedabad bought a Pepsi from a local store and found a gutka floating in it. He sent a legal notice to the Pepsi company immediately and approached a Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum and demanded compensation of ₹5 lakh for the same.

Court Decision

The consumer forum passed an order in favor of Rajesh Rajan and directed the company to pay a total of ₹4008 which on being low was later paid ₹20,000 as compensation and ₹2000 towards costs.

7. In the year 2015, K Chaathu complained against Indulekha (beauty product manufacturers) and Mammootty (an actor who was the brand ambassador of the company) for displaying misleading ads. The ads claimed that people using the soap will become ‘fair’ and ‘beautiful but the 67-year-old didn’t become fair or beautiful.

Indulekha paid Chaathu ₹30,000 in an out-of-the-court settlement while the initial claim of Chaathu was ₹50,000.

8. A person bought a house after researching and pooling hard-earned money and paid to the developer who promised to deliver within 42 months but even after 4 years the construction wasn’t started. So the two people decided to move the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for it.

The real estate developer was asked to refund the money with a simple interest of 9% per annum. They were awarded a compensation of ₹50,000 each.

You might also read “ How to have a mutual divorce in India ?”

9. 10 iPhone 5S Gold for ₹68 + ₹10,000 LIn 2014, Nikhil Bansal (a student) saw this unbelievable offer on the Snapdeal on iPhone which was quoted for Rs68000 (a discount of ₹46,651) and ordered it immediately. Upon receiving an order confirmation later the order was canceled stating it to be a technical glitch.

The court ruled in his favor and asked Snapdeal to deliver him the iPhone for ₹68 and asked to pay a compensation of ₹2,000 and when Snapdeal appealed this order, the compensation got raised to ₹10,000.

10. Om Prakash’s truck was stolen , and he filed a claim for compensation. The truck was taken on March 23, 2010, the police report was submitted on March 24, 2010, and the insurance claim was filed on March 31, 2010.

The insurance investigator was dispatched to verify the authenticity. The claim for Rs. 7,85,000/- was approved, however the money was never provided to Om Prakash. When he inquired about it, the insurance company responded that there had been a breach of terms and conditions:

“immediate notification of the vehicle’s loss or theft to the insurer”

While the consumer courts rejected his claim, the Supreme Court ruled in his favour. It was decided that insurance companies cannot avoid paying claimants if they have a valid justification for doing so, and the company was ordered to pay the Appellant a payment of Rs. 8,35,000/- plus interest at 8% per annum, as well as a compensation of Rs. 50,000.

These were a few cases to educate us to get rid away of the hesitation of approaching the court for a wrongful act and avail for our right as informed consumers.

Related Post

How Do I Register a Trademark or Service Mark Internationally?

A Complete Guide Documents Required for GST Registration of Proprietorship

Business Tax Returns Easy with a Simple Online Compliance Service

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

8 Important Cases of Consumer Disputes

The article '8 important cases of consumer disputes' delves into eight pivotal legal cases that have played a crucial role in shaping consumer rights..

The article '8 Important Cases of Consumer Disputes' delves into eight pivotal legal cases that have played a crucial role in shaping consumer rights within India's legal framework governed by the Consumer Protection Act.

Click Here and Read about the History and Development of Consumer Protection Laws in India

Introduction

The buying or hiring of goods & services is a vital facet of our daily lives, depending heavily on trust. Deteriorating this trust can outcome in various significances for consumers, extending from monetary loss to physical harm. The Consumer Protection Act, of 1986, is intended to punctually address such breaking of trust or negligence. To ease this, a hierarchy of 3 tribunals is established:

• the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF),
• the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (SCDRC), and
• the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC).

These tribunals have gained an understanding of the Consumer Protection Act, safeguarding a stable approach that reflects the needs of both consumers as well as service providers.

A "consumer" is any individual who purchases goods or uses services for individual consumption. This description includes all individuals except one acquiring such goods/ services for commercial/ resale purposes.

A complaint from consumers can be filed by:

• an individual or group of consumers,
• the Central or State Government,
• any duly listed volunteer consumer association,
• or the legal representative of the consumer.
• For a consumer being a minor, the complaint can be made by their legal guardian/ parents.

Click Here to Take a closer look at the Judgment: National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Harsolia Motors and Ors., (2023) | | Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Let’s discuss some relevant case laws of Consumer Dispute:

1. national insurance company ltd. v. hindustan safety glass works ltd. & anr. [1].

In this case, the insurance company rejected compensation to the respondent for loss caused by heavy rain during a stated period. The refusal was grounded on a policy term stating that the company would not pay for losses or damages happening 12 months post the event. Disgruntled with this renunciation, the insured filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 , with the National Commission .

The National Commission believed that the insured claim was valid, stating that the goods were protected at the time of the incident and the claim was duly filed the next day. It terminated all arguments stated by National Insurance and ordered the company to compensate for Rs. 21,05,803.89 with 9% interest per annum.

2. Manjeet Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr [2]

In this case, the appellant took a 2nd hand truck by executing a Hire Purchase agreement, with the vehicle insured by the respondent’s insurance company. Once while driving, the appellant stopped the truck at the demand of a passenger who then assaulted the driver and stole the said vehicle. He filed an FIR and notified the finance company, but the insurance claim was disallowed for an alleged policy breach. The appellant requested compensation from various consumer dispute forums and eventually reached the Supreme Court.

The Apex Court stated that there was no fault of the appellant, and acknowledged a breach of policy but it was not noteworthy enough to terminate it. The 2-judge bench ordered the insurance company to give 75% of the insured amount with 9% annual interest from the entitlement filing date. Moreover, the court directed the insurance company to recompense a compensation sum of Rs. 1 Lakh.

3. Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha and Others [3]

The Indian Medical Association issued a writ petition requesting the Apex Court to pronounce that the Consumer Protection Act does not spread to the medical profession. They contended that the medical professional obeys to distinct Code of Ethics, resulting in medical negligence a matter for medical specialists in their jurisdiction rather than coming under the CPA. The petition raised 2 important questions:

1. Whether a medical practitioner be suitable for giving 'service' under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?

2. That if medical services are given free of cost, would they still come under the purview of the Act?

The Court observed that the District, the State, and the National Consumer Forums have the power to call medical experts, evaluate evidence, and protect consumer interests. Services provided by doctors and hospitals without due charges will not come within the scope of "service." The Act does not extend to government hospitals which offer free services.

However, if services are given free to the poor, they will fall under the Act. If an insurance company provides the treatment cost for the customer, it also lies under the purview of the Act.

4. Arvind Shah (Dr.) v. Kamlaben Kushwaha [4]

The complainant's son's death was caused by the doctor's incorrect treatment, which led to the State Commission to give a compensation of Rupees 5 lakh for negligence.

On the appeal, the National Commission stated that the existing prescriptions required essential patient information as delegated by medical rules. The Commission, mentioning the case of Samira Kohli v. Dr Prabha Manchanda [5] , believed the absenteeism of dynamic details in the prescription slip was medical negligence. While recognizing the crucialness of such information, the Commission also emphasized that their occurrence specifies the doctor's care and conscientiousness, symbolising evidence against unsupported claims. But, due to an absence of direct evidence connecting the patient's demise to negligence, the National Commission abridged the compensation to 2.5 lakhs, along with applicable interest.

5. Sehgal School of Competition v. Dalbir Singh [6]

The petitioner, looking for admission at a medical coaching centre, was asked to deposit a lump sum fee for a 2-year course within the first 6 months. However, upon ending the course due to insufficient services, the coaching centre declined to refund the existing remaining amount.

The State Tribunal brought into line with the Supreme Court and National Commission, held that educational institutions in no case can collect lump sum fees for the whole course. If such fees are collected, they must be repaid in case of a student's withdrawal due to insufficiencies. The court observed any contract clause which is contrary to this ruling is considered invalid due to unsatisfactory bargaining power and abuse of natural justice principles.

The court also stated that additional compensation for mental torture should be granted, but it couldn't be bestowed because it had not been asked in the petition.

6. Spring Meadows Hospital & Anr v. Harjol Ahluwalia [7]

This appeal to the Supreme Court , involved a hospital shielding negligence by its nurses and a doctor, leading to a minor in an enduring vegetative state because of a brain haemorrhage. The main issue was whether parents,(not including the patients themselves), could pursue compensation for the mental torture caused. The court held that the service defined under the Consumer Protection Act includes paying parents and the child who are being benefited by the services . The National Commission was believed correct in giving compensation to the child for apparatus costs and the expenses which led to the vegetative state.

7. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation v. Ashok Iron Works Private Limited [8]

The Supreme Court elucidated that a corporate body comes within the definition of 'person' under section 2(1)(m) of the Consumer Protection Act. The Court highlighted that the use of the word ‘includes’ in the Act is explanatory and can be thorough. The understanding depends on the text, the context, and the objective of the Act. It was avowed that juristic persons were never envisioned to be omitted from the Act's scope, and the definition is comprehensive.

8. Sapient Corporation Employees Provident Fund Trust v. HDFC & Ors. [9]

In a complaint, HDFC was accused of illegal debit, the National Commission stated that the payment was executed in harmony with a statutory authority's order and the complainant was duly informed. Identifying the potential for frolicsome complaints due to the absenteeism of court fees, the Commission, thinking the complaint missing in seriousness and adequate grounds, levied a fine of 25,000 Rs. on the complainant by Section 26 of the Act.

9. Nizam Institute of Medical Sciences v. Prasanth S. Dhananka & Ors. [10]

In the instant case, the complainant pursued compensation for medical negligence happening during the entire medical procedure which resulted in partial paralysis. The National Tribunal gave judgment in favour of medical negligence, stating that the patient's consent was gained only for the tumour examination and not its removal.

On further appeal to the Supreme Court, the court avowed the Commission's findings, highlighting that the tumour removal was delayed through recorded debate, and thus, implied consent could not be incidental. The court recognized the necessity to strike a balance between the victim's genuine requirements and the opposition party's irrational claims concerning compensation. While identifying that compassion for the victim should not affect compensation decisions, the court highlighted the duty to provide suitable compensation.

As per the circumstances, the court raised the compensation to 25 lakhs each for ongoing medical expenditures and the petitioner's loss of occupation . Additionally, 10 lakhs were given for the appellant's pain and misery, 7,20,000 for the attendant over 30 years, 14,40,000 for nursing care, and 10,80,000 for the physiotherapy expenses over 30 years, additionally with 6% interest.

For further in-depth notes on various subjects visit Oxbridge Notes .

10. V.N.Shrikhande v. Anita Sena Fernandes [11]

The Petitioner was alleged of medical negligence. It was contended that a gauge mass was left in her abdomen during a gallbladder operation by a medical practitioner. But this petition was filed after 9 years, subsequently, a 2nd operation at a different hospital was done by the petitioner to remove the mass.

The Apex Court recognized the absenteeism of a straightforward formula to regulate the accumulation of cause of action in medical negligence cases . By applying the Discovery Rule, practised in the United States, the court observed that when the result of negligence is evident, the cause of action arises at the very time of negligence. But if the effect is dormant, the cause of action ascends when the patient becomes conscious of the negligence. However, in the instant case, the petitioner had been feeling pain since the operation, which continued for nine years, for which she took painkillers without doctor consultation.

Therefore, the court, considering her profession as a nurse and her skill to have more knowledge than a layman, discarded and set aside the order of the Commission and further dismissed the complaint.

Click Here to Read about the Major Amendments to the Consumer Protection Act of 2019

[1] Civil Appeal No. 3883 of 2007

[2] Revision Petition No. 4419 of 2014

[3] AIR 1996 SC 550

[4] 2009(3) C.P.C.24; III (2009) CPJ121(NC)

[5] [I (2008) CPJ 56 (SC)]

[6] Appeal No.FA-08/1043

[7] Civil Appeal No. 7858 of 1997

[8] Civil Appeal No 1879 of 2003

[9] Consumer Complaint No.123 of 2012

[10] Civil Appeal No. 4119 of 1999

[11] Civil Appeal No. 8983 of 2010

Important Links

Law Library: Notes and Study Material for LLB, LLM, Judiciary, and Entrance Exams

Law Aspirants: Ultimate Test Prep Destination

Anjali is a passionate graduate from Ramaiah College of Law, Bengaluru, seeking opportunities to learn and grow in the field of law.

Related News

Online Harassment Case Studies

Below you’ll find case studies of people in the U.S. who pursued legal action in an effort to defend themselves from online abuse.

Harassment/Threats

In 2016, Andrew Anglin, publisher of the neo-Nazi site The Daily Stormer, called on his readers to engage in a “ troll storm ” against a Jewish woman in Montana named Tanya Gersh and her family. Confronted with a barrage of threats and hateful messages, she and her family fled their home. With the assistance of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Gersh filed suit against Anglin for “invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress and violation of the Montana Anti-Intimidation Act.” A federal magistrate judge ruled against Anglin in 2019 after he failed to appear in court, ordering him to pay over $14 million in damages to Gersh.

In the landmark case of Elonis v. United States , a man in the process of divorcing his wife posted seemingly threatening song lyrics on Facebook. Anthony Elonis included disclaimers that the violent lyrics were “fictitious” and “therapeutic.” Elonis was prosecuted under federal law (18 U.S.C. § 875(c)) which prohibits making threats over the internet. The Supreme Court ruled that this provision of federal law required that prosecutors allege and prove that the defendant had the “intent” to commit a crime. The court determined that it did not matter whether a reasonable person would have been threatened by the statement. What mattered is whether the actual defendant had the subjective intent to threaten. In effect, this decision significantly increased the difficulty of prosecuting the posting of threats on social media.

Leonard Pozner, the father of a victim of the Sandy Hook school shooting, was being harassed by Wolfgang Halbig, a far-right conspiracy theorist and Infowars contributor who claimed that the shooting was a government-sponsored hoax. Starting in 2014, Halbig released sensitive personal information on Pozner, including a 100-page background report with Pozner’s home address. Halbig also continually emailed Pozner’s Social Security Number, birthday, and other identifying information to news outlets and police departments. Pozner currently lives in hiding after being subjected to a barrage of threats from Infowars-fueled extremists. In 2020, after Pozner filed a complaint against Halbig for unlawful possession of personal identification information, a crime under Florida law , Halbig was arrested .

In 2018, Jackson Cosko, a former aide to U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan, illegally accessed congressional computers and shared personal information about five Republican senators, including home addresses and phone numbers. Cosko admitted to doing so after being upset by the confirmation proceedings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Cosko was charged with multiple felonies under federal law ( including making public restricted personal information, threats in interstate communications, unauthorized access of a government computer, and identity theft). He pled guilty and was ultimately sentenced to four years in prison. The judge was particularly concerned by the political motivations of the perpetrator, stating, “It was a rather vicious offense. That was totally unjustified… We need to send a message out there. We need to have some deterrent and community understanding.”

Nonconsensual Intimate Imagery

In 2014, a woman (referred to as Jane Doe in court filings) filed a civil suit against her ex-boyfriend (David Elam II) when he shared nude photos and videos of her following their breakup. Elam, however, went further than posting the images online; he also sent links to Doe’s mother and a law school classmate, and impersonated Doe on dating and pornographic websites. This continued even after Doe had secured a restraining order against him. Doe’s lawsuit claims included “copyright infringement, online impersonation with intent to harm, stalking and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.” Because Doe had originally transmitted the photos to Elam consensually, she ultimately had no choice but to copyright her breasts in order to successfully get the images taken down. In 2018, a federal district judge ruled in favor of Doe, ordering Elam to pay $6.45 million in damages and destroy the photos and videos.

In 2019, Representative Katie Hill resigned from Congress after nude photos of her were published by conservative media outlets Red State and The Daily Mail. Hill sued the news sites under California’s civil nonconsensual intimate imagery law . The defendants filed Anti-SLAPP motions to dismiss the lawsuits, claiming that the lawsuit infringed upon their constitutionally protected speech and the case lacked merit because the images were an issue of public interest. In 2021, a judge ruled against Hill, dismissing the case under California’s Anti-SLAPP statute. Because the images showed Hill with a campaign worker and using drugs, the judge opined that the photos reflected on Hill’s “character, judgment and qualifications for her Congressional position,” information which the judge deemed to be of public interest. Carrie Goldberg, Hill’s attorney and a pioneer in online abuse law, stated: “Anybody who dares enter the public eye should now have legitimate concern that old nude and sexual images can be shared widely and published by any person or media purporting to have journalistic intentions.”

Cyberstalking/Violating Restraining Orders

After multiple instances of physical abuse over several years, a woman was granted a protective order (aka, a restraining order) against her abuser, Parris Deshaunte Evitt, in 2017. Evitt then turned his harassment and threats to the virtual realm, using texts, phone calls, emails, and Facebook messages to contact the victim over the course of two years. In 2020, Evitt was found guilty of violating the protective order and sentenced to nearly four years in prison. He was also ordered to pay compensation for the victim’s hotel costs after she fled her home in the face of his threats.

Therese Bottomly, the editor of The Oregonian , repeatedly received calls and emails from a local man denying that mass shootings, including the Sandy Hook massacre, had ever taken place. Bottomly told him to cease these communications; in response, he sent her a message with her home address and symbols of death. At the urging of the police, Bottomly successfully filed for a protective order (aka, a restraining order) against him. Before the order could be served, he was indicted by a grand jury for stalking and harassing Bottomly and promptly arrested.

Further Reading

• Documenting Online Abuse
• Assessing Online Threats
• Involving Law Enforcement
• Legal Basics 101
• Federal Laws
• Restraining Orders
• Legal Resources for Writers & Journalists

PEN America is deeply grateful to Covington & Burling LLP and C.A. Goldberg, PLLC Victims’ Rights Law Firm for providing pro bono feedback and insights on legal considerations for people facing online abuse. We are also grateful to TrustLaw, Thomson Reuters Foundation for facilitating this pro bono legal support.  

IMPORTANT: THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEBPAGE IS OFFERED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THE INFORMATION DOES NOT, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO, CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE, NOR IS IT INTENDED TO REPLACE THE ASSISTANCE OF A LAWYER OR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect open expression in the United States and worldwide. We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Learn more at pen.org . This website was made possible with support from the New York Community Trust and Craig Newmark Philanthropies.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Case Study: Is It Teasing or Harassment?

• Dianne Bevelander,
• Jacqueline Nolan,
• Michael Page

A manager wonders whether to complain about her boss’s insensitive comments.

“My, my, how tiny you are! You must be the smallest woman on earth. Hello, Dot!”

• DB Dianne Bevelander is a professor at Erasmus University’s Rotterdam School of Management and the executive director of the Erasmus Centre for Women and Organisations .
• JN Jacqueline Nolan is a freelance case writer at the Rotterdam School’s Case Development Centre.
• MP Michael Page is a professor at Bentley University and its provost and vice president for academic affairs.

Partner Center

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• The State of Online Harassment
• 1. Personal experiences with online harassment

Table of Contents

• 2. Characterizing people’s most recent online harassment experience
• 3. Americans’ views on how online harassment should be addressed
• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

Online harassment is a nuanced and complex topic that can involve a multitude of behaviors. This chapter explores Americans’ experiences with six broad types of harassing behaviors, ranging from being called a bad name or purposefully embarrassed to being physically threatened or stalked, in order to capture a broad range of experiences. Overall, the survey shows that the share of U.S. adults who report experiencing any form of online harassment is similar to that found in the Center’s 2017 study. But there are differences when it comes to the shares of adults who have experienced each of the individual harassing behaviors and the shares who have experienced more severe forms of harassment. This chapter also explores the reasons why people think they were targeted for this online abuse. Political views are the most common reason cited overall, but notable demographic differences underlie the reasons people named.

Roughly four-in-ten Americans have personally experienced online harassment

Overall, 41% of Americans have experienced some form of online harassment measured in the latest survey, which is identical to the share who had been the target of online abuse in 2017 and a slight uptick from the 35% in 2014 when the Center first polled on this topic.

As was true in previous surveys, less severe forms of online abuse – name-calling and purposeful embarrassment – are the most common types of negative experiences reported. Some 31% say they have been called an offensive name online, while 26% report having had someone try to purposefully embarrass them.

At the same time, about one-in-ten or more say they have experienced more severe forms of harassment online, such as being physically threatened (14%), stalked (11%), sexually harassed (11%) or harassed for a sustained period of time (11%).

The share of Americans who say they have experienced at least one of the more severe forms of harassment has been on the rise. One-quarter of adults say they’ve been the target of at least one of these severe forms of online abuse, a share that has increased in each of the Center’s surveys on the issue (from 18% in 2017 and 15% in 2014). Conversely, the share who have experienced either of the less severe behaviors is largely on par with that of 2017 (37% in 2020 vs. 36% in 2017).

Experience with certain types of online abuse varies by age, gender, race or ethnicity

Younger adults are more likely to report having experienced harassment in general as well as more severe forms of harassment. Roughly two-thirds of adults under 30 (64%) say they have experienced any form of online harassment, and 48% say they have faced at least one type of more severe harassment. Roughly half of 30- to 49-year-olds report that they have faced harassment online, while about a third (32%) say they have experienced at least one of the more severe types of harassment. By comparison, much smaller shares of adults 50 and older say the same (26% and 12%, respectively).

Across all six types of online harassment measured in the survey, younger adults are more likely to have been the target of these behaviors online. Fully 51% of adults ages 18 to 29 say they have been called an offensive name online, compared with 37% of those 30 to 49 and 18% of those 50 and older. While very small shares of adults ages 50 and older say they have been physically threatened, sexually harassed, stalked or harassed for a sustained period of time, one-in-five or more adults under 30 and roughly one-in-ten or more adults 30 to 49 have been the target of these behaviors online.

Gender also plays a role in the types of harassment people are likely to encounter online. Overall, men are somewhat more likely than women to say they have experienced any form of harassment online (43% vs. 38%). There are also differences across individual types of negative incidents they have personally encountered online.

To begin with, more men than women say they were called an offensive name (35% vs. 26%) or physically threatened (16% vs. 11%). Women, on the other hand, are more likely than men to report having been sexually harassed online (16% vs. 5%), with young women being particularly likely to have experienced sexual harassment. A third of women under 35 (33%) report having been sexually harassed online, compared with 11% of men under 35. The percentage of women who report having been sexually harassed online has doubled since the Center last asked in early 2017, from 8% to 16%. However, this data cannot parse the reasons as to why this increase has occurred.

Women are more likely than men to report being stalked online (13% vs. 9%), but this difference is more modest in comparison to the difference seen for sexual harassment.

Regardless of differences on individual behaviors, there are no gender differences overall when it comes to having experienced any more severe behaviors.

There are also racial and ethnic differences in people’s experiences with online harassment. About half of Hispanic adults say they have been harassed online, compared with 40% of White adults and 37% of Black adults. (There are no statistical differences between Asian and Hispanic adults.) 3

Moreover, Hispanic Americans experience many types of harassment at higher rates than other racial or ethnic groups. In general, Hispanics (33%) are more likely to say they have faced more severe harassment online compared with White (23%), Black (25%) or Asian adults (24%). Specifically, the share of Hispanic adults who report that they have been sexually harassed online is greater than any other racial or ethnic group. They are also more likely to experience being stalked or purposefully embarrassed online compared with Black or White adults. In addition, Hispanic adults are at a somewhat greater likelihood of reporting having been physically threatened than their White or Asian counterparts. About a third of Hispanic (33%) and White adults (31%) say they have been called an offensive name, whereas 23% of Asian adults say the same. The share of Black adults who were called an offensive name did not differ from any of the other racial or ethnic groups.

But in the case of sustained harassment, people’s experiences are somewhat similar across groups. Roughly one-in-ten from each racial or ethnic group say they have undergone harassment for a sustained period of time.

Half of online harassment targets – or one-in-five Americans overall – think the experience was due to their political views

Americans cite a variety of reasons why they encountered harassment online. Half of people who have experienced online harassment (equaling 20% of Americans overall) think they were harassed because of their political views – making this the most common reason cited among the five characteristics asked about in this survey.

At the same time, one-third of those who have been the target of online harassment (14% of all adults) say they have been harassed based on their gender, while 29% say this occurred because of their race or ethnicity (12% of all adults). Smaller shares point to their religion (19% of online harassment targets, representing 8% of U.S. adults overall) or their sexual orientation as a reason for their harassment (16% of online harassment targets, or 7% of all adults).

Each of these reasons has grown more common since the Center last asked these questions in 2017. There has been a 15 percentage point increase in the share of online harassment targets attributing their harassment to their political views; gender has seen a similar rise of 14 points. Race or ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion also rose since 2017.

There are some demographic differences in who points to politics as the reason they were harassed. Indeed, men who have been harassed online are 15 points more likely than women who have been targeted to say this was a result of their political views (57% vs. 42%). There are also large racial and ethnic gaps in citing politics as a perceived catalyst for their abuse: 56% of White adults who have been harassed online say this, compared with 38% each of Black or Hispanic targets.

And while there are some partisan differences, these differences do not hold when accounting for race and ethnicity. For example, White Democrats and Republicans (including independents who lean toward each party) who have been harassed are about equally likely to say their political views were the reason they were harassed (55% vs. 57%). Harassed non-White Democrats and Republicans differ little in believing their harassment experiences were due to politics (39% vs. 43%).

Despite politics being the top-cited reason overall, male (57%) and White online harassment targets (56%) are particularly likely to think their political views were the reason for their online harassment – especially White men (61%). Other groups commonly point to other elements of their identity as the reason they faced harassment online. Roughly half of women who have been harassed online say it was due to their gender, compared with 18% of their male counterparts. Among those who’ve been harassed online, Black (54%) or Hispanic adults (47%) are far more likely than White adults (17%) to identify their race or ethnicity as a reason they were harassed. 4

While small shares overall say their harassment was due to their sexual orientation, 50% of online harassment targets who are lesbian, gay or bisexual say they have been harassed online because of their sexual orientation. By comparison, only 12% of straight online harassment targets say the same.

The reason people give for why they were harassed also differs based on the types of harassing behaviors they have experienced. For example, two-thirds (67%) of targets who were sexually harassed say it was due to their gender. Similarly, 53% of people who have been stalked online report gender as a reason they were harassed.

In general, 45% of people who have experienced any of the more severe forms of harassment say their gender contributed to their harassment, while 14% of those who have experienced only less severe behaviors say the same. People who have undergone more severe forms of harassment are also more likely to attribute their experiences to their race or ethnicity (34%) or their sexual orientation (22%), compared with people who have faced only less severe forms of harassment (22% and 7%, respectively). Conversely, people who have dealt only with less severe forms of harassment are more likely to say their experiences were a result of their political views, compared with those who had gone through more severe harassment (58% vs. 44%).

• This survey includes a total sample size of 303 Asian Americans. The sample includes English-speaking Asian Americans only and, therefore, may not be representative of the overall Asian American population (72% of our weighted Asian American sample was born in another country, compared with 77% of the Asian American adult population overall). Despite this limitation, it is important to report the views of Asian Americans on the topics in this study. As always, Asian Americans’ responses are incorporated into the general population figures throughout this report. Asian Americans are shown as a separate group when the question was asked of the full sample. Because of the relatively small sample size and a reduction in precision due to weighting, we are not able to analyze Asian American respondents by demographic categories, such as gender, age or education. ↩
• Because of the relatively small sample size and a reduction in precision due to weighting, results are not shown separately for Asian Americans for questions that are filtered based on experiencing online harassment. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Online Harassment & Bullying
• Political Discourse
• Politics Online
• Sexual Misconduct & Harassment
• Social Media
• Stresses & Distraction Online

Teens and Video Games Today

9 facts about bullying in the u.s., life on social media platforms, in users’ own words, after musk’s takeover, big shifts in how republican and democratic twitter users view the platform, teens and cyberbullying 2022, most popular, report materials.

• American Trends Panel Wave 74

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

© 2024 Pew Research Center

McCombs School of Business

• Español ( Spanish )

Videos Concepts Unwrapped View All 36 short illustrated videos explain behavioral ethics concepts and basic ethics principles. Concepts Unwrapped: Sports Edition View All 10 short videos introduce athletes to behavioral ethics concepts. Ethics Defined (Glossary) View All 58 animated videos - 1 to 2 minutes each - define key ethics terms and concepts. Ethics in Focus View All One-of-a-kind videos highlight the ethical aspects of current and historical subjects. Giving Voice To Values View All Eight short videos present the 7 principles of values-driven leadership from Gentile's Giving Voice to Values. In It To Win View All A documentary and six short videos reveal the behavioral ethics biases in super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff's story. Scandals Illustrated View All 30 videos - one minute each - introduce newsworthy scandals with ethical insights and case studies. Video Series

Case Study UT Star Icon

Cyber Harassment

After a student defames a middle school teacher on social media, the teacher confronts the student in class and posts a video of the confrontation online.

In many ways, social media platforms have created great benefits for our societies by expanding and diversifying the ways people communicate with each other, and yet these platforms also have the power to cause harm. Posting hurtful messages about other people is a form of harassment known as cyberbullying. Some acts of cyberbullying may not only be considered slanderous, but also lead to serious consequences. In 2010, Rutgers University student Tyler Clementi jumped to his death a few days after his roommate used a webcam to observe and tweet about Tyler’s sexual encounter with another man. Jane Clementi, Tyler’s mother, stated:

“In this digital world, we need to teach our youngsters that their actions have consequences, that their words have real power to hurt or to help. They must be encouraged to choose to build people up and not tear them down.”

In 2013, Idalia Hernández Ramos, a middle school teacher in Mexico, was a victim of cyber harassment. After discovering that one of her students tweeted that the teacher was a “bitch” and a “whore,” Hernández confronted the girl during a lesson on social media etiquette. Inquiring why the girl would post such hurtful messages that could harm the teacher’s reputation, the student meekly replied that she was upset at the time. The teacher responded that she was very upset by the student’s actions. Demanding a public apology in front of the class, Hernández stated that she would not allow “young brats” to call her those names. Hernández uploaded a video of this confrontation online, attracting much attention.

While Hernández was subject to cyber harassment, some felt she went too far by confronting the student in the classroom and posting the video for the public to see, raising concerns over the privacy and rights of the student. Sameer Hinduja, who writes for the Cyberbullying Research Center, notes, “We do need to remain gracious and understanding towards teens when they demonstrate immaturity.” Confronting instances of a teenager venting her anger may infringe upon her basic rights to freedom of speech and expression. Yet, as Hinduja explains, teacher and student were both perpetrators and victims of cyber harassment. All the concerns of both parties must be considered and, as Hinduja wrote, “The worth of one’s dignity should not be on a sliding scale depending on how old you are.”

Discussion Questions

1. In trying to teach the student a lesson about taking responsibility for her actions, did the teacher go too far and become a bully? Why or why not? Does she deserve to be fired for her actions?

2. What punishment does the student deserve? Why?

3. Who is the victim in this case? The teacher or the student? Was one victimized more than the other? Explain.

4. Do victims have the right to defend themselves against bullies? What if they go through the proper channels to report bullying and it doesn’t stop?

5. How should compassion play a role in judging other’s actions?

6. How are factors like age and gender used to “excuse” unethical behavior? (ie. “Boys will be boys” or “She’s too young/old to understand that what she did is wrong”) Can you think of any other factors that are sometimes used to excuse unethical behavior?

7. How is cyberbullying similar or different from face-to-face bullying? Is one more harmful than the other? Explain.

8. Do you know anyone who has been the victim of cyber-bullying? What types of harm did this person experience? Why or why not? Does she deserve to be fired for her actions?

Related Videos

Causing Harm

Causing harm explores the types of harm that may be caused to people or groups and the potential reasons we may have for justifying these harms.

Bibliography

Teacher suspended after giving student a twitter lesson http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/world/americas/mexico-teacher-twitter/index.html

Pros and Cons of Social Media in the Classroom http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2012/01/19/Pros-and-Cons-of-Social-Media-in-the-Classroom.aspx?Page=1

How to Use Twitter in the Classroom http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2011/06/23/how-to-use-twitter-in-the-classroom/

Twitter is Turning Into a Cyberbullying Playground http://www.takepart.com/article/2012/08/08/twitter-turning-cyberbullying-playground

Can Social Media and School Policies be “Friends”? http://www.ascd.org/publications/newsletters/policy-priorities/vol17/num04/Can-Social-Media-and-School-Policies-be-%C2%A3Friends%C2%A3%C2%A2.aspx

What Are the Free Expression Rights of Students In Public Schools Under the First Amendment? http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=12991

Teacher Shames Student in Classroom After Student Bullies Teacher on Twitter http://cyberbullying.us/teacher-shames-student-in-classroom-after-student-bullies-teacher-on-twitter/

Stay Informed

Support our work.

Case Study Questions Class 10 Social Science Economics Chapter 5 Consumer Rights

CBSE Class 10 Case Study Questions Social Science Economics Consumer Rights. Important Case Study Questions for Class 10 Board Exam Students. Here we have arranged some Important Case Base Questions for students who are searching for Paragraph Based Questions Consumer Rights.

Case Study 1:

The consumer is the focal point of all business activities. In contemporary times, it is widely acknowledged that the consumer is the sovereign of the market. The primary objective of business activities is to cater to the needs and desires of consumers. A commercial entity is entirely reliant on its customers not only for its survival but also for its expansion. Currently, the customer is accorded utmost importance, and every effort is made to satisfy their requirements. However, in reality, the position of the consumer is different. They are akin to slaves who are exploited by well-organized and well-informed sellers through exorbitant pricing, provision of substandard goods, supply of adulterated products, short weight, misleading advertising, and so on. Customers remain unorganized and are unaware of their fundamental rights, such as the right to safety, the right to choose, the right to be heard, and so forth. The term “Consumerism” refers to the user or customer, and “ism” denotes a movement. Therefore, the consumer movement is commonly referred to as “Consumerism.” It is a collective and organized movement of consumers. The primary objective of this movement is to educate and unite consumers and to fight for the protection of their rights.

Answer Consumer groups can take several steps to protect consumers, including advocating for stronger consumer rights and protection laws, raising awareness about product safety, promoting ethical business practices, and engaging in campaigns against unfair pricing and fraudulent advertising. They may also provide information and support to affected consumers.

Case Study 2:

Prior to making a purchase, consumers should insist on the quality of the products and the assurance of their reliability. It is advisable to opt for products that bear quality marks such as ISI, AGMARK, and others.

Q2) What do you understand by Right to informed in consumer protection act? 1

Case Study 3:

Q1) What is the difference between consumer protection council and Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission? Mark 2

Answer Consumer Protection Council is a voluntary organization that educates and raises awareness about consumer rights. In contrast, Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is a government body that legally resolves consumer disputes and complaints, providing a platform for grievance resolution and compensation.

Case Study 4:

Furthermore, the Act mandates that e-commerce companies have a return policy in place and provide more detailed information about the product and the seller in their listings.

 Q1) Mention a few factors which cause exploitation of consumers. Mark 1

Case Study 5:

Q1) What do you understand by the term ”right to repair”? Mark 2

Answer  The “right to repair” is a concept that advocates for consumers’ ability to repair and modify their own purchased products, from electronics to appliances, without facing legal or technical barriers imposed by manufacturers. It aims to promote sustainability, reduce electronic waste, and empower consumers to extend the lifespan of their possessions.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

We have a strong team of experienced teachers who are here to solve all your exam preparation doubts, ncert class 6 extra questions social science – landforms and life, pseb class 6 agriculture chapter 6 farm machinery and equipment solution, dav class 5 math solution chapter 16 triangles, up scert solutions class 6 english chapter 14 – netaji chandra bose.