Highlighting Sectors Lacking ‘Quality of Service’ Benchmarks and the Path Forward

When you buy a product online or invest in a property, you expect a certain standard of service. But what happens when the sector you’re dealing with has no regulatory body setting those standards? In India, several high-impact sectors still lack formal “Quality of Service” (QoS) benchmarks – and this gap is one of the biggest reasons behind the flood of consumer complaints recorded every year. While sectors like telecom and banking have dedicated regulators, others like real estate and e-commerce have historically operated without standardised service benchmarks, leaving millions of consumers vulnerable.

What are “Quality of Service” benchmarks and why do they matter? 🔗

Quality of Service benchmarks are measurable standards set by a regulatory authority to ensure that service providers meet a minimum level of performance. In India’s telecom sector, for example, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) prescribes benchmarks for call drop rates, network availability, and grievance redressal timelines. Similarly, the Reserve Bank of India sets service quality norms for the banking sector.

These benchmarks serve two critical purposes. First, they give consumers a clear basis to hold service providers accountable. Second, they provide regulators with enforceable metrics to penalise non-compliance. Without such benchmarks, consumers are left with vague promises and no formal standard against which to measure performance.

Sectors that still lack established QoS benchmarks 🔗

Despite India’s growing consumer economy, several major sectors continue to function without well-defined QoS benchmarks. This absence directly contributes to a high volume of unresolved grievances.

Real estate 🔗

For decades, India’s real estate sector was one of the most unregulated industries in the country. Homebuyers routinely faced delayed project deliveries, misleading advertisements, arbitrary pricing based on inflated “super built-up” areas, and poor construction quality – all without any dedicated regulatory body to turn to.

One of the primary reasons for the eventual introduction of regulation was to safeguard the interests of homebuyers, who often faced challenges such as project delays, unfulfilled promises, and lack of transparency from developers. Before the introduction of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, consumers had no sector-specific QoS framework. The only recourse was approaching consumer forums under the general Consumer Protection Act, which was neither fast nor sector-specific enough to address the scale of grievances in this industry.

E-commerce 🔗

E-commerce is another sector where QoS benchmarks remain underdeveloped. Between April 2017 and February 2021, India’s grievance redressal system registered over 5.23 lakh complaints related to e-commerce alone, making it the sector with the highest number of consumer complaints. Common issues include misrepresented products, delayed deliveries, refund disputes, and poor after-sales service.

While the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020 introduced some obligations, these regulations cover clauses pertaining to data protection, transparency, product quality, and dispute settlement, working to ensure that e-commerce platforms uphold fairness and accountability. However, there is still no independent regulatory authority dedicated to the e-commerce sector that can set and enforce measurable QoS benchmarks the way TRAI does for telecom or RBI does for banking.

Healthcare services 🔗

Healthcare is another sector where consumers face significant challenges without uniform QoS benchmarks. While the National Medical Commission regulates medical practitioners, there is no standardised framework that prescribes service delivery benchmarks for hospitals, diagnostic centres, or clinics. Overcharging, poor treatment outcomes, and inadequate grievance redressal are widespread issues that consumers regularly face.

Education and coaching services 🔗

Private educational institutions and coaching centres operate largely without QoS benchmarks. As of February 2025, the Department of Consumer Affairs secured refunds worth ₹1.56 crore for more than 600 students after coaching centres failed to honour their refund commitments. Despite the growing scale of the education industry, there is no dedicated regulator that sets service quality standards for private coaching or ed-tech platforms.

Travel and tourism 🔗

Travel agencies, tour operators, and online travel platforms generate a large number of consumer complaints, yet the sector lacks a unified regulatory framework with enforceable QoS standards. In 2025, the top five sectors contributing to NCH’s ₹45 crore in refunds included e-commerce, travel and tourism, agency services, electronic products, and airlines – together accounting for over 85 per cent of the total amount recovered.

The impact of missing QoS benchmarks on consumers 🔗

The absence of QoS benchmarks creates several problems for consumers. Without a defined standard, consumers cannot clearly establish that a service was “deficient.” Under the Consumer Protection Act, deficiency in service refers to any fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature, or manner of performance of services. But proving this becomes difficult when there is no benchmark to compare against.

Additionally, without a dedicated regulatory authority, consumers in these sectors must rely entirely on the National Consumer Helpline (NCH) or consumer courts – both of which can be slow for sector-specific technical disputes. The result is a system where grievances pile up without efficient resolution.

The role of the National Consumer Helpline 🔗

The NCH, operated by the Department of Consumer Affairs under the Government of India, serves as the primary pre-litigation grievance redressal platform. In 2024, the average disposal time for consumer grievances was reduced to 48 days, down from 66.26 days in 2023. The helpline has expanded significantly in recent years.

Call volumes have grown more than tenfold, rising from 12,553 in December 2015 to 1,55,138 in December 2024, and the platform currently receives over one lakh complaints per month. The NCH’s convergence programme – where companies partner directly with the helpline to resolve complaints – has also expanded. Convergence partners have grown from 263 companies in 2017 to over 1,000 in 2024, covering sectors including e-commerce, travel, banking, automobiles, FMCG, and education.

While the NCH is effective for straightforward complaints, it has limitations when dealing with sectors that lack regulatory oversight. Without QoS benchmarks, the helpline can facilitate complaint resolution but cannot enforce standardised service levels.

Regulatory steps in the right direction 🔗

RERA: a model for other sectors 🔗

The introduction of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is widely regarded as a landmark step towards addressing the regulatory void in real estate. The Act establishes a Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) in each state for regulation of the real estate sector and also acts as an adjudicating body for speedy dispute resolution.

Key consumer-centric provisions of RERA include mandatory project registration before sale or advertising, the requirement for developers to deposit at least 70% of project funds in an escrow account, a requirement that builders quote prices based on carpet area rather than super built-up area, and a defect liability period during which developers must fix structural defects at no extra cost.

However, RERA’s implementation has been uneven. As of July 2019, several states had not implemented the law fully, and some had failed to notify a permanent regulator, appellate authority, or dedicated website. This inconsistency dilutes the effectiveness of the law and highlights the challenge of translating legislation into functioning QoS frameworks at the ground level.

Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020 🔗

The Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020 were framed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, to regulate e-commerce entities and protect consumers transacting online. These rules impose specific obligations on platforms: platforms must disclose critical business information including their legal name, registered office address, contact details, PAN, and GSTIN. They must also appoint a grievance officer who acknowledges complaints within 48 hours and resolves them within one month.

Despite these obligations, the e-commerce sector still does not have a standalone regulatory authority. The rules are enforced through the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) and consumer courts, not through a dedicated sectoral regulator. This means there are no ongoing, measurable QoS benchmarks equivalent to what TRAI provides for telecom.

The path forward: what needs to change 🔗

Addressing the QoS gap across sectors requires action on multiple fronts.

Sector-specific regulators: Sectors like e-commerce, healthcare, and education need dedicated regulatory authorities with the mandate and power to set, monitor, and enforce QoS benchmarks. RERA has demonstrated that sector-specific regulation can bring transparency and accountability – the same model needs replication.

Uniform complaint redressal mechanisms: Strengthening consumer grievance redressal mechanisms, both online and offline, is crucial to ensure that individuals have accessible channels to report issues and seek resolution. Every sector should have a standardised complaint resolution process with defined timelines.

Technology-driven monitoring: The NCH has adopted AI-based speech recognition, translation systems, and a multilingual chatbot to streamline grievance filing. Similar technology can be deployed by sector-specific regulators to monitor compliance with QoS benchmarks in real time.

Consumer awareness and education: Many consumers are unaware of their rights or the redressal mechanisms available to them. According to reports, over seventy-four per cent of homebuyers in India were uninformed about the online process for checking RERA project registration status. Increasing awareness is just as important as strengthening regulation.

Legislative updates: The legal framework governing consumer protection must evolve to address contemporary challenges effectively, with regular updates, consideration of international best practices, and strict enforcement.

A look at the bigger picture 🔗

India has made notable progress in consumer protection over the past decade. The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 modernised the legal framework. RERA brought much-needed regulation to real estate. The E-Commerce Rules of 2020 imposed baseline obligations on online platforms. And the NCH has scaled into a platform that resolved over 67,000 complaints and recovered ₹45 crore in refunds in 2025 alone.

But these are still patchwork solutions. The fundamental challenge remains: several high-volume consumer sectors operate without formal QoS benchmarks, leaving millions of consumers without a clear standard of service to expect – or demand. Until comprehensive regulatory oversight is extended to every consumer-facing sector, the grievance pipeline will continue to grow faster than the resolution infrastructure can handle.

What do you think? Should India establish dedicated regulatory authorities for sectors like e-commerce and healthcare, similar to how RERA was set up for real estate? And in the meantime, how can consumers better protect themselves in sectors where QoS benchmarks simply don’t exist yet?

References

1. https://tdsat.gov.in/
2. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2158
3. https://consumeraffairs.nic.in/theconsumerprotection/consumer-protection-e-commerce-rules-2020
4. https://consumerhelpline.gov.in/public/about
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Estate_(Regulation_and_Development)_Act,_2016
6. https://www.teamleaseregtech.com/blogs/134/e-commerce-compliance-in-india-understanding-the-consumer-protection-e-commerce-rules-2020/