Blue Bird Architects, Interiors ordered to pay Rs. 30,000 to Hyderabad customer for poor service
BANJARA HILLS: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered Blue Bird Architects & Interiors to compensate a Hyderabad customer with Rs. 30,000 for deficient service.
Bhargavi Phanikiran Yeri (40), owner of a 3BHK flat in a Banjara Hills apartment, had engaged Ratna Prabhakar, operating under the name Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, for the renovation and interior works of her flat. Initially estimated at Rs. 5 lakhs, the project’s cost was later revised to Rs. 7,48,830.
The complainant entrusted the renovation work to Ratna Prabhakar, with a clear understanding of the job requirements, during site visits from November 2021 to December 2021.
The project commenced on January 29, 2022, with an advance payment of Rs. 30,000 made on the same day. On the first day of the project, the complainant was dismayed to find her belongings inadequately protected from dust and debris, despite assurances from the opposite party.
The complainant alleged in her complaint that the opposite party’s casual attitude was evident, as they failed to be present on-site and provided insufficient wrapping materials for the complainant’s household equipment.
Suspicions arose regarding the intentions of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, as they seemed to prioritize cost-saving over providing satisfactory service.
Despite repeated promises of improvement, the workmanship of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors remained subpar, leading to irreparable damage to the complainant’s valuable curtains due to mishandling by their team.
Bhargavi Phanikiran Yeri alleged that Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors team ignored her instructions regarding the use of waterproof materials, opting for PVC installations instead of Marine Green Ply. These PVC installations quickly deteriorated within a month, despite assurances of a 20-year guarantee, she alleged.
The workforce of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, deployed inexperienced laborers, further exacerbated the situation by disregarding the complainant’s directives and failing to convey instructions to Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors effectively.
The supervisor of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, Kartik, demonstrated a lack of competence and often neglected his responsibilities and allowed workers to slack off during working hours, according to Bhargavi.
Bhargavi repeatedly brought issues to the notice of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors about the substandard quality of work and the unprofessionalism displayed by them. Despite assurances of addressing defects, Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors failed to take substantial corrective actions or provide a replacement for the incompetent supervisor. Bhargavi was coerced into making additional payments for items and designs not included in the original quotation.
Additionally, the refusal of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors to provide purchase bills in Bhargavi’s name prevented her from availing warranties and guarantees for the purchased items. The negligent and substandard work of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors on the renovation project has resulted in numerous issues for Bhargavi.
The lack of attention to detail and poor craftsmanship of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors was evident, from loose handles in kitchen shelves to improper installation of requested baskets, detachment of doors from shelves, and inadequate tiling in bathrooms leading to water stagnation and tile breakage.
The improper fixing of false ceilings in bathrooms and accidents caused by shabby work in the Puja Room, such as the ‘Om’ board falling on oil lamps, illustrated the substandard quality of workmanship by Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors. Additionally, the use of poor-quality materials and subpar electrical fittings, inadequate painting resulting in peeling and blotches on the walls, electrical issues, deteriorating vanity cabinets, and failure to fulfill promised waterproofing and deep cleaning further highlight a pattern of incompetence and disregard for contractual obligations.
These deficiencies not only caused inconvenience to Bhargavi but also necessitated incurring additional expenses and posed long-term durability concerns.
Due to the negligence and deceitful practices of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, the complainant has endured substantial financial losses and mental anguish.
Given these circumstances, the complainant approached the forum for redressal, including a refund of the total amount paid, with interest, and compensation for the additional expenses incurred due to the subpar workmanship of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, estimated at Rs. 7,16,000.
Despite spending over Rs. 7 lakhs, Bhargavi has received substandard work and poor-quality materials from Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, resulting in numerous defects and safety hazards in her flat.
Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors failed to meet the 65-day completion timeline, causing inconvenience and embarrassment to the complainant who was forced to host a housewarming ceremony in an incomplete home. Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors abandoned the project despite multiple requests for rectification and completion, leaving behind the debris and unfinished work.
Bhargavi incurred further expenses as she was forced to engage local craftsmen to rectify the errors of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, with most refusing the job due to the poor quality of workmanship. The refusal of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors to provide receipts and original purchase bills, along with their evasion of legal notices, alleges dishonest intentions to exploit the complainant’s vulnerability.
Bhargavi approached the Hyderabad consumer forum demanding a refund of the Rs. 7,16,000 paid, compensation for additional expenses incurred, and redress for the fraudulent practices of Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, totaling the amount paid with interest.
The court found Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors non-responsive to legal notice and did not refute the complainant’s allegations, indicating a negligent attitude from the opposing party.
Bhargavi claimed that Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors refused to provide purchase bills and prevented the complainant from obtaining warranties and guarantees for the purchased items. The court ruled that Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors, despite receiving substantial payments, failed to deliver satisfactory services, failed to adhere to specifications, and ignored the complainant’s instructions.
The court ruled that Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors is liable to pay compensation due to their inability to provide adequate services to the complainant.
The commission has ordered Blue Bird Constructions and Interiors to pay Rs. 30,000 compensation and Rs. 5,000 for litigation costs within 45 days, with non-compliance resulting in 12 percent interest.
