PRESENTED BY:•DIWAKAR CHATURVEDI
1
CONSUMERISM IS A MOVEMENT DIRECTED TO PROTECT THE CONSUMER AND ENSURE THAT THE CONSUMER GETS BEST RETURN IN EXCHANGE FOR THE MONEY HE SPENDS
2
EVER INCREASING COMPLEXITY OF LEGISTATIVE CONTROLS AND GOODS. ALTERED PATTERNS OF COMMUNICATION. VEED FOR INFORMED PARTICIPATION. FUNDAMENTAL INNOVATIONS. PROBLEMS OF DEVELOPMENT.
3
CONSUMER INFORMATION GAP. PATTERN OF COMMUNICATION. PERFORMANCE GAP. ABSENCE OF INFORMED PARTICIPATION. BUDGET SQUEEZE AND INFLATION. POVERTY OF CONSUMERS.
4
CREATION OF CRITICAL AWARENESS. ACTIVE CONSUMER INVOLVEMENT. IMBIBING SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. REALISING ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIBILITY. CONSUMER SOLIDARITY.
5
RIGHTS TO SAFETY. RIGHTS TO BE INFORMED. RIGHTS TO CHOOSE. RIGHTS TO BE HEARD. RIGHTS TO REDRESS. RIGHTS TO HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT. RIGHTS TO CONSUMER EDUCATION.
6
THE FAKE DRIVING LICENCE RACKET IS TOO ACTIVE IN THE COUNTRY THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO VARIFY THE VALIDITY OF THE LICENCE . THERE IS NO WAY TO RECOGNISE THE FAKE DRIVING LICENCE. DIFFERENT STATES HAVE DIFFERENT WAYS OF MAKING THE LICENCES. SOME TAG THE LOGO, HOLOGRAMS BUT SOME DO NOT BOTHER FOR IT. 7
IT BECOMES MORE DIFFICULT TO KNOW THE VALIDITY OF THE LICENCE MADE IN OTHER STATE AND BEING USED IN OTHER. THE SUPREME COURT HAS ALSO ACCEPTED THAT IT IS DIFFICULT AND ABOUT IMPOSSIBLE TO VERIFY THE FAKE LICENCE. IN SOME CASES RTO HAS RENEWED THE FAKE LICENCE ITSELF AND THE LICENCE WAS MADE UNDER THEIR OWN BRANCH. 8
THE SUPREME COURT HAS DENIED TO PAY THE CLAIM BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY WHEN THE D.L. IS FAKE. THE CONSUMER i.e. THE MOTOR OWNER IS INNOCENT BUT HELPLESS BECAUSE HE IS GETTING NOTHING WHILE HIS INSTALMENTS WERE REGULAR.
9
THE LICENCE PORCESS SHOULD BE MADE ONLINE SO THAT THE VERIFICATION MAY BE MADE EASY. THE HOLO GRAMS AND OTHER SIGNS MUST BE MADE SO THAT THE ORIGINAL AND FAKE LICENCES MIGHT BE RECOGNISED EASILY.
10