O R D E R
PER SHRI. S.S. PATIL - HON’BLE MEMBER :
1) This is the complaint regarding deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party as the Opposite Party did not provide proper service when the Complainant was on tour to USA and by recovering extra amount towards the tour charges.
2) The facts of this complaint as stated by the Complainant are that the Complainant was looking for 2 or 3 days visit to a town Bloomington in U.S.A. and 10 to 12 day guided tour of USA & Canada. The Opposite Party is a tour operator. The Opposite Party had advertized its group package tour named “USA for all” tour from 06-05-12 to 17/05/2012 on its website.
3) The Complainant has further stated that he and his wife wanted to join the said tour in New York from 06/05/2012. They had to reach Bloomington before 04/05/2012. The Complainant averred that the Opposite Party offered two alternative plans.
4) Under plant 1, the Complainant and his wife were to join the tour in New York on 06/05/2012 and leave the tour in Los Angels on 17/05/2012. In this plan the cost of traveling from Mumbai to Bloomington and from Bloomington to New York and from Las Angels to Mumbai was to be borne by the Complainant and he was told that transfers from Airport to hotel and vice a versa would not be covered. Per person charges quoted were Rs.19,100/- and Rs.1,700/- US Dollars (E-mail 10/02/2012).
5) Under 2nd plan, Opposite Party promised to cover travel costs from Mumbai to Bloomington, From Bloomington to New York and from Los Angels to Mumbai and transfers from Airport to hotel and vise a versa. Per person charges quoted were Rs.90,000/- + Rs.12,000/- deviation charges Less Rs.18,000/- discount i.e. Rs.84,000/- and 1700 USD.
6) It is further stated by the Complainant that he was told by Opposite Party that the difference in airfare for the trip to Bloomington would have to be born by the Complainant and the total cost per person would not exceed Rs.1 Lac + (and) 1700 USD. The Complainant could not understand what the deviation charges were meant for if the difference in airfare was to be born by him. The Complainant has further stated that he was given to understand that the same was meant for receiving the Complainant’s at airport and taking them to hotel etc. in US even when the Complainant was not travelling with the group.
7) Opposite Party promised that under plan 2 the rupee portion of tour including deviation, additional airfare, transfer to hotel etc. would not cost more than Rs.1 Lac. The USD portion remaining the same (USD 1700). The Complainant accepted plan 2 believing that the charges per person would not be more than 1 Lac and 1700 USD which included transfer from Airport to hotel and vise a versa. He paid Rs.50,000/- per person for two persons (for himself and for his wife) by cheque. (Total amount being 1 Lac) on 15/02/2012.
8) Then a cheque amount of Rs.1,81,154/- was paid by the Complainant to Opposite Party on 28/04/2012 (equivalent to 3400 USD).
9) The Complainant also paid a cheque payment of Rs. 1 Lac on 27/04/2012 and Rs.93,788/- on 02/05/2012. The cheque payment was made before the dates as debits entries.
10) The Complainant has further stated that after deduction the visa charges (Canada visa) the Opposite Party recovered from the Complainant and amount of Rs.1,42,174/- and 1700 USD per person.
11) The Complainant has alleged that the Opposite Party did not issue proper receipts for the entire amount paid by the Complainant. This amounts to deficiency in service.
12) The Complainant has further alleged that the Opposite Party received Rs.1,42,174/- against promised amount of Rs.1 Lac only. Thus, excess of Rs.42,174/-.
13) The Opposite Party charged Rs.12,000/- towards deviation charges for which no service was provided by the Opposite Party.
14) It is also alleged that air tickets were not booked in time though he aid the charges in advance in Feb., 2012.
15) It is further alleged that they (Complainant & his wife) were not received at Indianapolis Airport on 02/05/2012 and at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York on 06/05/2012. They had to pay travel cost by bus and taxi from Indianapolis to Bloomington and back. This cost was 100 USD. The cost of travelling from JFK to hotel was Rs.160 USD for taxi. As the Opposite Party did not receive the Complainant they were subject to mental tension and agony in reaching to their destination. The Complainant reached at JFK at about 3.50 p.m. on 06/05/2012. The Complainant was informed by the other members of the group that some of them had also reached JFK at the same time and they were received at the airport. It is the contention of the Complainant that he could have also been picked up alongwith others and his 160 USD would have been saved and his mental agony and harassment could have been avoided.
16) During the tour also, the Complainant and others were made to wait more than an hour in San Francisco airport for another group to join. There was no co-ordination. Neither his cell phone was used nor tour operator phone was given to the Complainant for coordination.
17) Return journey was not booked alongwith other group members. Complainants’ flight was at 2.00 p.m. on 17/05/2012 from Los Angels and flight of other group was at 3.00 p.m. on same day. He was informed that the bus would leave the hotel at 11.00 a.m. and there would be no difficulty to catch his flight. As airlines ask for reporting 3 hours before departure time for international flights and the Opposite Party has informed to leave hotel at 11.00 a.m. Complainant did not take risk of missing the flight and he instead of going by bus he requested his relative to drop him well before the departure at airport. So, as per the Complainant it is deficiency in service by not booking the flight for the Complainant and his wife alongwith other group.
18) The Complainant has further alleged that, journey from Buffalo to San Francisco was undertaken by air but the Opposite Party did not pay for check-in luggage. As the fare for international travel covered one check-in luggage and the tour operator is expected to imagine that passengers travelling for 12 days would have at least one check-in luggage, the all inclusive tour cost ought to have included the charges for one cheque in luggage per passenger from Buffalo to San Francisco. The Complainant was required to pay 25 USD per cheque in luggage though Complainant and his wife did not have any additional check-in baggage. This turned out to be a hidden cost. The Complainant had to pay 50 USD for two.
19) On arrival at San Francisco the Complainant was required to wait for more than an hour for other group to arrive.
20) The Complainant has submitted that he had no time. He had to pay the money demanded by the Opposite Party for getting travel papers to join the group tour. However, vide e-mail dtd.27/04/2012, the Complainant made it clear that he was not satisfied with the discount of Rs.3,000/- only.
21) The Complainant has finally prayed that -
a) The Opposite Party be directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,25,298/- being excess
amount recovered from the Complainant and additional expenses incurred
by the Complainant during the tour with interest
b) Opposite Party be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.1 Lac each to the
Complainant and his wife with interest for mental agony, etc.
c) Cost of this complaint be paid to the Complainant
22) The Complainant has attached the xerox copies following documents in support of his complaint –
i) E-mail dtd.10/02/2012.
ii) E-mail dtd.09/02/2012, 10/02/2012.
iii) E-mail dtd.11/02/2012.
iv) E-mail dtd.28/04/2012.
v) E-mail dtd.24/04/2012.
vi) E-mail dtd.27/04/2012.
vii) E-mail dtd.26/04/2012.
23) The complaint was admitted and show-cause notice was served on the Opposite Party but Opposite Party did not appear before this Forum. Hence, the matter proceeded ex-parte. The Complainant then filed his affidavit of evidence and written argument, wherein he reiterated the facts mentioned in his complaint. We heard the Complainant in person and minutely scrutinized the papers submitted by him and our findings are as follows.
24) According to the Complainant he wanted to visit the town Bloomington in USA for 2 to 3 days and interested in 10 to 12 days guided tour to USA& Canada in the year 2012. The Opposite Party has announced his tour package “USA for all” from 06/05/2012 to 17/05/2012 days package. In this respect the Complainant has attached a xerox copy of e-mail dtd.09/02/2012 from Opposite Party to the Complainant. As per this e-mail the Opposite Party has given the tour cost. The relevant e-mail reads as follows –
“Tour cost
Adult on twin sharing basis INR 90,000 + 1700 USD
Departure date : TCU13 2nd May, 12 16 May, 12
Current offer : cash discount Rs.18,000/- P. adult” Ex.B1.
25) By this e-mail, the Complainant seemed to be confused and had sent e-mail on the same day saying he is confused as the tour is not on 6th May which is suitable to him. Ex.B2.
26) The Opposite Party has replied to the above e-mail of the Complainant on 10/02/2012 stating “departure for 6th May is operational with discount of Rs.18,000/- per person. You can book the same as the seats are available as now.
27) There is again an e-mail dtd.10/02/2012 (Ex. B2) attached by the Complainant addressed to him by the Opposite Party stating that cost for directly joining the (leaving) tour. The other sentence is that “Also air quotes I will send you in my second mail.” Therefore this is not a complete e-mail. In this e-mail dtd.10/02/2012, the cost and details of the tour are mentioned as below. Tour cost INR 25100 + USD 1700
“Departure date : TCU B 06/05/2012
Current offer : Cash discount of Rs.6,000/- per adult.
Note : J.D. cost does not include Airfare, Ticket taxes, Visa charges, Medical Insurance and arrival departure transfers. It however, includes cost of internal tickets required to participate in the tour.”
28) As per the Complainant himself, the Opposite Party has given him two options and he chose 2nd option according to which the Opposite Party has to bear travel cost from Mumbai to Bloomington, from Bloomington to New York and from Los Angels and transfers from airport to hotel and vice a versa. Per person charges quoted were Rs.90,000/- deviation charges + 1700 USD less 1800 discount. For this averment the Complainant has attached Ex. B1 and B2. We peruse the Ex.B1 and B2 but there is no provision in respect of transfers from airport to hotel and vice a versa. The Complainant has further admitted in the same paragraph that “the Complainant was told that the difference in airfare for trip to Bloomington would be born by him and the total cost per person would not exceed Rs.1,00,000/- + 1700 USD per person.”
29) We have examined the e-mails submitted by the Complainant. From the papers and evidence it is seen that the Opposite Party has promised the Complainant that the minimum tour cost for “USA for all” was Rs.1,00,000/- and 1700 USD per person. Therefore, the Complainant was supposed to pay to the Opposite Party Rs.2,00,000/- + Rs.1,81,154/- = Rs.3,81,154/-. However, the Opposite Party compelled the Complainant to pay total amount of Rs.4,74,942/-. The Opposite Party has subsequently deducted Rs.4,720/- per person i.e. Rs.9,440/- towards their Canada Visa and thus, collected Rs.84,348/- from the Complainant more than what was promised and this is certainly a deficiency on the part of Opposite Party.
30) However, as stated earlier and from the papers also there is nothing on record or in the e-mails of the Opposite Party that the Opposite Party has undertaken the transfers from airport to hotel particularly when the Complainant was to join the regular tour group from New York. Therefore, the allegations of expenditure incurred by the Complainant because of bus & tax travel are not substantiated. As such, the amount of Rs.17,050/- claimed by the Complainant towards this end cannot be granted in absence of any document moreover the Complainant has also not submitted any documents to show that he had paid these expenses to the bus & taxi operators.
31) The Complainant also cannot claim the amount of Rs.12,000/- per person as the Opposite Party has promised him that the maximum tour cost would be Rs.1 Lac and 1700 USD. The same was accepted by the Complainant and believing this promise he had paid the advance and booked the tour. This cost was considered by us while coming to the conclusion that the Opposite Party has recovered the excess amount of Rs.84,348/-. Therefore, Complainant cannot claim Rs.24,000/- from the Opposite Party.
32) Regarding the other allegations made by the Complainant in respect of transfer from airport to hotel and not receiving at the airport we perused the e-mail of the Opposite Party dtd.31/07/2012 wherein it has been clarified by the Opposite Party that “no commitment was given to the Complainant regarding pickup and drop transfer services to airport and back. Post your arrival and departure from USA. This is more relevant when the Complainant was not a regular member of the group which toured with the Opposite Party. The Complainant was the person who was to join the tour group later in New York. Therefore, he was informed by the Opposite Party that only if the flight of the Complainant coincided the flight of the group then only these transfer services would be given to the Complainant. The Opposite Party has further clarified in this e-mail that the group arrived at 14-15 hours in New York. The Complainant’s flight arrived at 15.50 hrs. since there was time difference, the coach carrying the group had left for the hotel. It is further vehemently stated by the Opposite Party that no transfer services were committed to deviating customer. At the same time it was also clarified that the deviation charges does not include transfer and the deviation charges does not include transfer costs.
33) The Complainant has also alleged that the Opposite Party did not book the air tickets in time when the amount was paid well in advance i.e. in Feb., 2012. However, the Complainant has not mentioned in the complaint as to when the Opposite Party has booked his air ticket. Therefore, in absence of this pleading, this allegation is also not substantiated.
34) It is further alleged by the Complainant that they were not received at Indianapolis on 02/05/2012 and at New York on 06/05/2012 by the Opposite Party. Therefore, they had to bear extra cost and face mental agony. In this respect also the Complainant is the person who was to join the group later from Bloomington. And this query has been answered by the Opposite Party in its e-mail dtd.31/07/2012 as the timings of the Complainant and the group was not matching. Similarly the Complainant has also not filed any document to show the terms and conditions or the itinerary showing what was the protocol of the tour and what were the obligations of the Opposite Party to receive the Complainant at these air ports. Therefore, under such circumstances the Complainant has failed to substantiate the allegations mentioned above. (The Complainant has also not produced any document to show that he expended $ 100 towards the Bus charges Rs.160/- towards tax charges and other expenses.
35) It is also alleged that the Complainant and others were made to wait for more than hours at San Francisco Airport for another group to join. In this respect the Complainant has not given any itinerary. He has not mentioned at what time they came on the airport ? What was the flight schedule time ? Therefore, this is a vague statement. Therefore, it is not substantiated.
36) It is further alleged that his return journey was not booked alongwith the other group members. In this respect also the Complainant & his wife was not the part of the entire group from the beginning at the tour as per the averments of the Complainant himself. He has not filed anything on record to show how his journey was scheduled by the Opposite Party and how it should be planned, what was the itinerary. Therefore it is not possible to conclude that the Opposite Party was deficient in his service particularly when the Complainant has not produced any record (itinerary) in this respect.
37) It is also alleged by the Complainant that during air journey from Buffalo to San Francisco, the check-in baggage charges were not paid by the Opposite Party as the Opposite Party has to pay the same. In this connection the Opposite Party in his e-mail dtd.31/07/2012 has amply clarified that the tour document clearly shows that during tour the customer was to pay these charges. However, the Complainant has not produced this tour document issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant stating all the terms and conditions of the tour programme “USA for All”. The Opposite Party has stated in the e-mail “Airlines in USA have announced a revised check-in bag policy wherein they will implement a minimum 25 $, Service fee for the 1st checked bag and minimum 35 $ service fee for the 2nd checked bag per sector. Customers will have to pay directly to the airline for check-in baggage at airport with a credit card or cash. However, airlines policies keep changing hence, pl. confirm the same prior to departure.” In view of this explanation by the Opposite Party in the e-mail the allegation of the Complainant is not substantiated.
38) Therefore, in our candid view, the Opposite Party is deficient only in recovering the excess tour cost as mentioned in para 29 above. Hence, the Complainant is entitled for the reimbursement of the said amount from Opposite Party with interest. There is a deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party as they recovered more amount than what was promised to the Complainant before booking the tour. The Opposite Party is also deficient in service as he has not issued proper receipt of the amounts collected from the Complainant. Therefore, the Opposite Parties have caused mental agony to the Complainant & his wife by indulging in the above said deficiency in service. Therefore, the Complainant& his wife are also entitled for the compensation for the mental agony they faced due to the deficiency in service. They are entitled for the cost of this complaint. The compensation and cost prayed by the Complainant is exorbitant. Other allegations are not substantiated. In view of the above facts and circumstances a compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony caused to the Complainant and of Rs.3,000/- towards the cost of this complaint would be just and proper to meet the end of the justice. Therefore, we pass the order as follows –
O R D E R
1. Complaint No.164/2012 is partly allowed.
2. The Opposite Party is directed to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs.84,348/- (Rs. Eighty Four Thousand Three Hundred Forty Eight Only) alongwith interest @ 9 % p.a. from 01/05/2012 till its payment.
3. The Opposite Party is also directed to pay to the Complainant a compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only) towards the mental agony caused to the Complainant and his wife due to deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party for recovery of extra cost than what was promised as well as not issuing receipts of the amounts collected from the Complainant.
4. The Opposite Party is also directed to pay Rs.3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand Only) to the Complainant towards the cost of this complaint.
5. Opposite Party is directed to comply with the above said order within 30 days of the receipt of this order.
6. Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.
