An e-commerce nightmare: how a Snapdeal customer became a victim of third-party fraud

The agent promptly arrived at Tiwari's residence, handed over the package, took the 'cash on delivery' and left. The unsuspecting customer only checked if the product was indeed a dress and the amount he was supposed to pay was the same as he had placed the order for originally. What he didn't check was: had the product been sent by Snapdeal?

After opening the package and examining the product, Tiwari quickly realised that this was not the dress he had ordered. It was only then that it struck him that there was something odd about the invoice pasted on the package, but he had overlooked it in haste.

The entire package had no Snapdeal branding. The name of the e-retailer was missing from the invoice too. The invoice was in the name of a seller called Ladysera, based in Amroli, Surat district, Gujarat.

Tiwari also did not get any email, phone call or text message from Snapdeal confirming the delivery. So had Snapdeal not sent this package?

If not, then how did this seller know what Tiwari had ordered and how much he was supposed to pay for it? Only Snapdeal had this information and any third party could have got access to it only through Snapdeal.

This is the point at which Tiwari made a mistake. He panicked at the prospect of loss of his money and in haste, cancelled the order on Snapdeal's app. This made it very convenient for the e-retailer to deny his claim for refund, citing order cancellation.

Tiwari is in a fix now. The 'Ladysera' invoice has no contact number. Only a Surat address at which the package can be returned. There is no information about exchange or refund. A search for 'Ladysera' on Snapdeal's website does not throw up any results.

A search with keywords matching the product Tiwari had originally ordered throws up many results, with three products looking exactly like what he had ordered.

All three listings are of the same product but two of these are now priced at Rs 799 and the third one costs Rs 732. Among the Rs 799 ones, one has 6 ratings and no reviews while the other has 58 ratings and four reviews.

The seller in all the three listings is the same – Chamunda silk mill. Google the company and guess which city it throws up – Surat.

Snapdeal has turned down Tiwari's request for refund saying he has failed to produce a Snapdeal invoice.

Technically, the retailer is right. However, Snapdeal's innocence doesn't explain how did 'Ladysera' get details of Tiwari's order, his address and his mobile phone number.

An email sent to Snapdeal on the email id for media enquiries mentioned on its website bounced back because that email id doesn't exist. Another red flag there.

This is either a case of data-theft or data-leak, besides fraud. Are e-commerce companies like Snapdeal willingly or unwittingly helping rogue sellers like 'Ladysera' dupe unsuspecting customers online?

Tiwari has now decided to lodge an FIR and let the police find out.