An Indian labourer fights Facebook over fake shoe ad

BENGALURU - A daily-wage worker from the western Indian state of Maharashtra is fighting Facebook over a pair of shoes he paid for but never received. 

He also lost his savings in a phishing scam afterwards.

Mr Tribhuvan Lalchand Bhongade, 30, a farmhand in Umri, a village in Gondia district, won the first legal round, with a consumer court directing Facebook India, the Indian arm of social media giant Meta, to pay him 25,000 rupees (S$410) as compensation.

But the company got the order stayed in a higher court, and the labourer is now preparing for a longer battle.

Mr Bhongade does seasonal farm work like driving a tractor and herding goats, but was unemployed during the nationwide lockdown to battle the Covid-19 pandemic. 

In September 2020, he noticed an advertisement on Facebook for a heavily discounted pair of Nike shoes.

“I am not a big shopper, but my one pair of shoes was worn out,” the regular social media user told The Straits Times on the phone.

Using his debit card, he bought the shoes on Facebook, sold by a vendor named Marya Studios, for 599 rupees – a steal. 

Over a month passed, but he received neither the shoes nor any messages about shipping. 

“Facebook did not have any contact details of Marya Studio, so I Googled the name, found five customer care numbers and called one,” said Mr Bhongade.

A person who claimed to be Marya Studio’s customer care executive sent him a link with which to fill in bank details for a refund.

Mr Bhongade followed the steps and ended up downloading a phishing app. His entire bank balance – 7,568 rupees – was debited later that day.

“I panicked and called my friend,” he said. The friend was lawyer Sagar Chavan, 27, who usually handled High Court cases in Mumbai but was back in his native village during the pandemic.

Mr Chavan complained to the police and informed Facebook about the fraud via Twitter and e-mail.

When there was no reply, he filed a complaint against Facebook on Oct 12, 2020, with the local District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

“Marya Studio was uncontactable. It was clearly a scam company. We felt Facebook had to take some responsibility as the platform that hosted and earned revenue from a fraud ad,” said Mr Chavan. 

Facebook India objected to the complaint, saying Mr Bhongade was not its “consumer” as it was not the seller.

It also asserted that as an intermediary of the American company, it had no obligation under Indian technology laws to monitor the ads it ran. 

On June 30, 2022, the consumer commission ruled in Mr Bhongade’s favour, directing Facebook to pay him compensation of 25,000 rupees. 

Facebook was not held liable for the second transaction.

The commission ordered Facebook to run corrective advertisements in the media and online to create scam awareness and neutralise the impact of misleading advertisements. 

Facebook also has to submit quarterly compliance reports to the commission for two years.

The company appealed in the Bombay High Court, which stayed the consumer commission’s order in September but ordered Facebook to submit the compensatory amount to the court. 

Mr Chavan said the next hearing was slated for January and he was “prepared to help a poor man fight a rich company”, however long it took. He will continue to represent Mr Bhongade for free.

Facebook India declined to respond to ST’s queries on this case or say whether there have been similar cases.

Facebook India’s ad revenue grew 74 per cent in 2022 to cross the US$2 billion mark (S$2.69 billion) – one of Meta’s biggest revenue streams in Asia.

India is among the fastest growing digital ad markets in the world, with Meta and Google dominating the space in 2021. 

Countries like Australia and Britain have demanded more accountability from Facebook’s parent company Meta for hosting advertisements from businesses that defraud their citizens.

It may take longer for the Indian authorities to do the same, as there are no specific laws in the country governing buying and selling on social media platforms.

Mr Bongade sent ST a video of himself on a tractor. He was wearing his frayed old shoes.

“I earn just enough to eat,” he said. “But my principle is this: I was wronged, and I want to prevent others from getting cheated.”