sBEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SRI.  P.V. JAYARAJAN                               : PRESIDENT

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR                           : MEMBER

SRI. VIJU  V.R.                                             : MEMBER

C.C.No. 147/2021  Filed on 17/04/2021

ORDER DATED: 31-08-2021

 (Party in person)

ORDER

SRI.P.V. JAYARAJAN, PRESIDENT:

This is a complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 and the matter stood over to this date for consideration.After hearing the matter the commission passed an order as follows:

1. The complainant is a subscriber to Norton 360 Deluxe, India, allegedly part and parcel of the Symantec Software Solutions Private Limited, in three Indian cities at Delhi, Mumbai and Bangalore.  The Complainant has a fully paid subscriptions for Norton 360 Deluxe until his next renewal date in December 3, 2021 with a Product Key number ending with xxxxR448Tc as fully described in the attachment P3 below. The above License is valid for usage on complainant’s three separate home computers which are two desktops and the third one on a “lap top” computer provided by Dell computers, which is being used at his residence as well as when travelling in India or going abroad.  On or about February 27/2020 complaint had to go to USA in connection with a litigation, but due to Corona and non-availability of flights back to India, the complainant was held up in USA until July 4, 2020. During the period of his stay there in New York and later on in New Jersey complainant used to get online solicitation from a company namely “Norton Life Lock” asking to the opposite party to enroll in their program with a guarantee of $1 million US dollars for damages is there is any breach and Cyber-attack occurred by using their products and services. Based on the above unfair and false and misleading advertisements, complainant also paid Norton Life Lick a monthly subscription fee for joining the said Norton Life Lock, in addition to what he was paying in India for the Norton 360 Deluxe.  Based on the Norton Life Lock’s instructions the said Norton Life Lock programme was installed on his lap top also while in USA, but unknown to him what was offered to him was not “Norton Life Lock” solicited and promoted but turned out to be something else which was not disclosed to him before paying for the same.  According to his bank records with the Bank of America, Norton Life Lick has taken from his bank account on 07/03/2020 (3^rd July 2020) a subscription for $4.25 under reference No.AP1315248783 07/02 Purchase 877-294-5265 AZ” and another subscription for US $4.25 *NP1312912365 06/02 for Purchase Norton Com/NS/AZ” as per copy of his Bank Statement attached as Exhibit P1.  
2. Complainant came back to India on July 5, 2020 and landed at Delhi and reached his residence at Shangumughom Beach, Thiruvananthapuram in the State of Kerala on July 6, 2020 by 6pm but the lap top started with all kinds of unexplained technical problems and he has to expend too many hours with the “Norton 360 Deluxe” people in India to take care of the problem, but nothing worked.  While working one day, he noticed that his new “Log Tech” assembled computer was hacked during the night by disabling the “Norton 360 Deluxe” by unauthorized and unknown hackers and it was reported to the Cyber Police, Thiruvananthapruam, who after examining the site addresses stated the hackers were from California where AT&T (the complainant’s former employer) operated their then Headquarters in California and against whom complainant is having a major litigation going since 1982.  Complainant was not then aware of any special “VPN” exists in the Norton 360 Deluxe that did not work, but when attempted to activate it, it automatically shut down the whole computer giving error messages and providing no protection what so ever from intruders and other hackers. The Norton 360 Deluxe has not been able to resolve these issues to fix the VPN as of this day and his computer remained vulnerable to attack at all times and the hackers used his private information such as who he was contacting and what he was searching etc.   Though the complainant contacted through the number given to contact Norton 360 Deluxe, several occasions, there was no proper response and finally the complainant spoke with a person in India named “Nipin” who registered his complaint as Case No.619954162 and attempted in vain to fix the problem for 2 ½ hours and was unable to resolve the issues.    The next day on March 29, 2021 complainant tried again but the Opposite Party could not resolve the issue and hence the complainant terminated the  session on March 30. 2021 without any success saying that they are researching and will get back to complainant soon.  Nobody has contacted him since March 30, 2021.  Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party, the complainant approached this Commission for redressal of his grievances. 
3. In the original complaint there were two Opposite Parties and after admitting the case, this Commission issued notice to the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 to appear before this Commission on 28^th May 2021.  Notice to Opposite Party No:1 returned with an endorsement that the addressee left and the notice to 2^nd Opposite Party was seen accepted but not entered appearance on the date fixed for their appearance and hence Opposite Party No:2 was called absent and set exparte on 15^th July 2021.  Subsequently, on 16^th August 2021, the complainant filed IA No: 263/21 with a prayer to struck off the name of the 1^st Opposite Party from the Party array restricting his claim only against Opposite Party No:2 i.e Norton Life Lock Inc. That application was allowed and in pursuant to that order the name of the 1^st Opposite Party was struck off and at present  the 2^nd Opposite Party alone is in the party array.
4. The evidence in this case consists of Ext. P1 to P3 on the side of the complainant.   The opposite party has not entered appearance or filed any written version or adduced any evidence before this Commission.
5. Issues to be considered:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the

     part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the complainant is entitle to the relief claimed in the      complaint?
3. Order as to cost?

6. Heard the complainant. Perused the records.  The issue Nos.1&2 are considered together for the sake of convenience.  To establish the case of the complainant, the complainant produced three documents and were marked as Ext.P1 to P3.  Ext.P1 is the Bank of America payment for Norton Life Lock in USA.  Ext.P2 is the Instruction how to correct errors on VPN last modified on 01/11/2021.  Ext.P3 is the Norton subscription Status with product key details.   The documents produced by the complainant before this Commission and marked as Ext.P1 to P3 reveals that the Complainant has availed the service of Opposite Party by paying consideration.  Ext.P3 shows that the subscription is valid till 3^rd December 2021 and the same will be automatically renewed on that date.  The complainant’s case is that though the complainant contacted through the number given to contact Norton 360 Deluxe several occasions, there was no proper response and the Opposite Party was unable to resolve the issue and hence he approached this Commission for redressal of his grievance.  By producing Ext.P1 to P3 the complainant has established that he has availed service from the Opposite Party on payment of consideration and that he was having some issues which were not resolved by the Opposite Party.   The Opposite Party has not entered appearance or adduced any contra evidence to discredit the case put forward by the complainant.  In the absence of any contra evidence, we find that the complainant has established his case.   From the records before this Commission it is clear that the complainant had some grievance with regard to the service rendered by the Opposite Party and in spite of repeated requests and demand made by the complainant, the Opposite Party failed to resolve the issues.  Hence in the absence of any contra evidence from the side of the Opposite Party, we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.  Considering the grievances of the complainant, we also find that the complainant has suffered financial loss as well as mental agony due to the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party is liable to compensate the complainant.      
7. In the result the complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is directed to refund the amount collected from the complainant by way of subscription i.e. $ 4.25 each on 3^rd June 2020 and 3^rd July 2020 respectively as shown in Ext.P1(Average rate of Dollar to Indian Rupee conversion during June 2020 and July 2020 was Rs.75 per $ 1 and hence the amount to be repaid is 75x8.5=Rs.637.50/-) and also to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation along with Rs.2500/- towards cost of this proceedings within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount except cost shall carry interest @ 9% p.a from the date of order till the date of realization/remittance.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 31^st  day of August,  2021.

C.C. No. 147/2021

APPENDIX

1. COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

2. COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

3. OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

4. OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:
   9008.  

                                                                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                                                                              PRESIDENT