Prayan Media Network’s investigation into Jaipur-based fashion brand Aachho has uncovered a troubling consumer dispute that raises serious questions about the company’s post-purchase practices, particularly when a customer is dissatisfied with a product and seeks a refund. What began as a purchase for a Rakshabandhan gift eventually turned into a public complaint, a video, alleged communication from the company, questions over the refund process and, ultimately, an attempt by Prayan Media Network to seek answers directly from Aachho. The company, however, did not attend the call arranged with Prayan Media Network, leaving several important questions unanswered at the time of publication.
The investigation began with a basic consumer question: what happens when a customer pays for an online fashion product, receives it, finds the quality unacceptable and then attempts to obtain a satisfactory resolution? For an e-commerce customer, the purchase is completed at the moment of payment, but the real test of a company’s customer service begins afterwards. When the product does not meet expectations and the customer wants a refund or other remedy, the company’s policies, communication and willingness to address the complaint become critical.
WATCH THE VIDEO
View this post on Instagram
The Complaint That Brought the Matter to Prayan Media Network
The matter came to Prayan Media Network after Pratishtha Agnihotri, a Kanpur-based influencer and journalist, approached the network with her experience involving Aachho. According to the account shared with Prayan Media Network, her sister had ordered a dress from Aachho as a Rakshabandhan gift for Pratishtha. What was intended to be a personal gift instead became the subject of a serious consumer complaint when Pratishtha received the product.
According to Pratishtha, the quality of the dress was extremely poor and fell far below what she had expected from the purchase. The experience prompted her to record and publish a video explaining what had happened. The matter subsequently came to the attention of Prayan Media Network, which began examining the complaint and the company’s publicly available policies surrounding purchases, cancellations, returns, exchanges and refunds.
What Happened After the Video?
According to Pratishtha’s account, the situation escalated after she published the video. She says Aachho contacted her and asked her to remove the video. The allegation is significant because the central issue was not simply the existence of a critical video; it was the underlying consumer complaint about the product and the remedy available to the customer.
Pratishtha further told Prayan Media Network that when she began questioning Aachho about the refund and its refund policy, the conversation allegedly ended with the call being disconnected. The allegation raises an obvious question: if a customer is questioning the company’s refund mechanism after receiving a product she considers unacceptable, why was the matter not brought to a clear resolution? The company has not provided Prayan Media Network with an explanation addressing this specific allegation.
A Refund Question That Cannot Be Ignored
The refund issue becomes particularly important when Aachho’s own publicly available policies are examined. The company’s shipping policy states that cancellations are permitted within 24 hours and also provides that sale items are final and non-returnable. It further refers to credit notes and certain refund or store-credit possibilities in cases involving significant delays.
For a customer who believes that a product received is unacceptable, the distinction between a monetary refund and store credit can become crucial. A customer seeking to recover money paid for a disputed purchase may not consider being given credit for another purchase to be an adequate resolution. This is precisely why the practical operation of a refund policy matters as much as the policy’s wording.
Aachho’s terms of service also contain a particularly significant provision stating that the company does not warrant that the quality of products, services, information or other material purchased or obtained by a customer will meet the customer’s expectations. That language raises further questions in the context of a consumer complaint centred on product quality. The issue is not merely whether a customer was personally disappointed; it is whether the company provides an effective mechanism for dealing with customers who believe the product delivered does not correspond with what they purchased or were led to expect.
The Customer Was Not Silent
Pratishtha’s case is significant because she chose not to keep the experience private. As an influencer and journalist, she used her public platform to speak about the issue and document her experience. Instead of simply accepting the situation, she questioned the company and sought clarity about the refund process.
According to her account, the subsequent request to remove the video and the alleged disconnection of the call when refund-related questions were raised became an important part of the dispute. These allegations deserve a direct response from Aachho because they concern not merely the quality of a product but the company’s conduct after the complaint became public.
The consumer’s account also raises a broader question for online shoppers: what happens when a customer refuses to accept an unsatisfactory post-sale outcome and starts asking detailed questions? A company’s reputation is not tested only by advertising, product photographs or promotional claims. It is tested when a dissatisfied customer demands an answer.
Prayan Media Network Tried to Get Aachho’s Side
Prayan Media Network did not proceed without attempting to obtain Aachho’s response. The network sought to speak with the company and provided an opportunity for Aachho to address the allegations and explain its position. However, Aachho did not attend the call with Prayan Media Network, and the questions raised by the investigation remained unanswered at the time of publication.
This absence of a response is important because the allegations are serious. The company has been given an opportunity to explain what happened with the disputed order, what remedy was offered to the customer, whether the customer was asked to remove the video and what occurred during the conversation concerning the refund. Until Aachho provides its version, these questions remain unresolved.
The Company’s Published Grievance Mechanism Raises Another Question
Aachho’s website identifies a customer-support number, support email address and a dedicated grievance officer. The company also states that complaints are acknowledged within 48 hours and resolved within 30 days in accordance with the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020.
That commitment makes the unanswered questions surrounding Pratishtha’s complaint even more relevant. If a formal grievance mechanism exists, a customer should be able to use it when there is a dispute over product quality and refund. India’s Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules also require e-commerce entities to maintain a grievance redressal mechanism, acknowledge consumer complaints within 48 hours and endeavour to redress them within one month.
The question, therefore, is not whether Aachho has published a grievance mechanism on its website. The question is whether that mechanism actually delivers an effective resolution when a dissatisfied customer uses it.
The Problem With Making the Consumer Chase the Answer
Online shopping already places consumers at a disadvantage in one important respect: they cannot physically inspect the product before paying for it. They rely on photographs, descriptions, branding and representations made through the seller’s platform. Once the product arrives, the customer may discover that the actual experience is substantially different from what was expected.
At that point, the burden should not effectively shift onto the consumer to become an investigator simply to understand how a complaint will be resolved. Customers should not have to repeatedly contact a seller, search through lengthy policies, publicly raise their complaints and approach media organisations merely to get clarity about a refund or other remedy.
Pratishtha’s case brings this concern into sharp focus. She questioned the product, made her experience public, sought an explanation from the company and then approached Prayan Media Network. The fact that the matter ultimately reached a news organisation demonstrates how quickly a routine online purchase can become a much larger consumer dispute when the post-sale process fails to provide satisfactory answers.
The Questions Aachho Has Left Unanswered
At the centre of this investigation are questions that Aachho has yet to answer to Prayan Media Network. Why was Pratishtha allegedly asked to remove her video? What was the company’s specific response to her complaint about the quality of the dress? What refund or other remedy was actually offered to her? Why did the conversation allegedly end when she questioned the refund policy? Was her complaint formally registered through Aachho’s grievance mechanism? And if it was, what action was taken on it?
There is another question that is equally important: does Aachho believe that a customer who receives a product she considers unacceptably poor in quality should have a practical route to obtain an appropriate remedy? If the answer is yes, the company should explain exactly what that route was in this case.
This Is Not Merely About One Dress
It would be easy to dismiss this matter as an isolated disagreement between one customer and one fashion brand. But that would miss the larger issue. The growth of online fashion commerce depends heavily on consumer trust, and that trust is tested most severely when the product does not satisfy the buyer.
A customer can accept a reasonable difference in colour, fit or personal preference. But when a consumer alleges that the quality of a product is extremely poor and then encounters difficulty obtaining clarity about a refund, the issue becomes one of accountability. The consumer wants a straightforward answer: what can be done now?
That is the question Prayan Media Network attempted to take to Aachho. The company was given an opportunity to respond, but did not attend the call. As a result, the consumer’s allegations and the company’s publicly available policies remain the principal material available for examining the dispute at the time of publication.
