Delay in providing account statement: A Consumer Triumphs Over UTI Mutual Fund

Introduction:
In a recent case heard by the Consumer Court, a complainant emerged victorious against UTI Mutual Fund after facing unsettling discrepancies in his investment account. The case sheds light on issues of delayed information and the subsequent mental distress caused to the investor.

Background:
The complainant, holding a Unit Linked Insurance Plan (ULIP) with UTI Mutual Fund, sought a detailed account statement to assess the status of his investment. However, to his shock, the statement received showed a ‘zero’ value, contrary to his actual holdings of Rs. 18,75,781/-. Despite his attempts to seek clarification, the complainant received no satisfactory response from UTI Mutual Fund.

Allegations and Response:
The complainant alleged negligence and deficiency in service, leading to mental agony and panic. UTI Mutual Fund, in its defense, claimed that it promptly responded to the complainant’s request and provided the correct information. The company argued that there was no deficiency in service on its part.

Consumer Court Verdict:
After examining the evidence, the Consumer Court acknowledged a delay in providing the correct account statement, considering it an unfair trade practice on the part of UTI Mutual Fund. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of the complainant.

Court’s Decision:

1. UTI Mutual Fund is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 15,000 to the complainant with 10% interest per annum within two months.
2. UTI Mutual Fund is obligated to cover the complainant’s legal costs. Failure to pay within the specified time will result in the costs accruing interest at 10% per annum.
3. Both parties are instructed to receive a copy of the court’s order free of cost.

Conclusion:
This case highlights the importance of transparency and timely communication in the financial services sector. Investors are encouraged to be vigilant about their investment statements and seek recourse in case of discrepancies. The Consumer Court’s decision serves as a reminder that financial institutions must uphold the highest standards of service to maintain trust and credibility.

See the detailed copy of the case here