Bengaluru: What was meant to be a wedding anniversary gift for wife turned into a 16-month ordeal for a CV Raman Nagar resident after the electric scooter he bought broke down five times in as many months leading to a legal battle.The saga began on Jan 25, 2024, when Jeyaram NS, wanting to gift his wife an eco-friendly ride for her daily commute, walked into the Ola showroom in Indiranagar and paid Rs 98,702 for the S1 X Plus. The scooter was delivered five days later, complete with its registration, chassis and engine numbers.But trouble started on the 24th day after delivery when the scooter simply refused to power on, showing no display, with the app listing its status as ‘sleeping’. A technician eventually got it running by opening the seat and reconnecting a loose wire, but that was only the beginning of the couple’s ordeal.The scooter went into dead-mode on March 5, forcing the owner to tow it to its service centre, where it stayed for over 23 days before being returned with an assurance that a ‘firmware upgrade’ had fixed the issue for good. But it didn’t.On May 14 while Jeyaram was travelling to Manyata Tech Park, the scooter died a fourth time, leaving him stranded for over an hour before a passerby helped revive it by reconnecting a wire. Hours after he got home the same evening, it broke down a fifth time and was towed away again on May 17 — at which point Jeyaram lost patience and began insisting on a written service report.Beyond these five major breakdowns, he also complained of near-constant, everyday glitches — Bluetooth connectivity dropping or the app freezing — that meant the digital key routinely failed to start the scooter, costing him 10-15 minutes each time just to get it moving. Despite repeated calls, emails and even a complaint on the national consumer helpline and on social media, the firm never furnished a service report, with one customer care executive claiming the power controller board needed to be replaced while a technician at the service centre insisted no such replacement had been made.With his wife having stopped using the scooter altogether after the third breakdown, Jeyaram filed a consumer complaint seeking full refund with interest.In their defence, Ola Electric and its two co-respondents denied any deficiency in service, telling the commission that the scooter had been repaired properly and was fully ready for delivery, and that it was Jeyaram who was unreasonably refusing to take it back. The company insisted it had complied with every obligation under the sale agreement and accused Jeyaram of trying to extort money from a reputed brand.After hearing both sides, the commission observed that Ola’s own defence confirmed the scooter had an unresolved defect, supporting the complainant’s case. It noted the company failed to submit affidavit evidence or contest the court-appointed commissioner’s findings that the vehicle was unroadworthy, had missing spare parts and remained at the service centre for over 18 months. Holding that Ola sold a defective vehicle and failed to rectify it, the commission said its refusal to provide the service report despite repeated requests amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.The commission, presided over by president V Anuradha and member Savitha Airani, on June 11, ordered Ola Electric Technologies to refund Rs 98,702 with 6% annual interest from the date of purchase till realisation and Rs 10,000 for mental agony and litigation costs.
