Quick Summary
Arvind Kapoor (name changed) paid 88,500 for a premium research package and received no reports, no calls, and no updates of any kind. His claim reached 1,10,000. He did not need to argue the advice was bad, since there was no advice to argue about. Our team recovered 78,200, a 71.1 percent share.
Arvind signed up for a premium research subscription in early 2025 after a sales call that promised daily market analysis, weekly reports, and direct calls whenever needed.
He paid the full 88,500 upfront, expecting the service to begin within days. Nothing arrived. No report, no call, no market update reached him in the following weeks.
He messaged the assigned relationship manager repeatedly, asking when the promised research would start. The replies grew shorter and less frequent, then stopped entirely once his messages became more insistent.
A SEBI registered research analyst who accepts payment for a defined service is obligated to deliver it. Accepting a full year’s fee and providing nothing at all is a plain failure to perform, separate from any question about advice quality.
Arvind’s claim did not rest on whether the research would have been good or bad. It rested on the simple fact that no research was ever delivered for a payment that was fully collected.
How Our Team Developed the Winning Fighting Strategy
We began by confirming exactly what Arvind had paid for, using the original sales pitch and package description as the baseline for what should have arrived.
Step 1: Document the promised service
We listed the exact deliverables described at the point of sale: daily analysis, weekly reports, and direct calls, none of which were ever received.
Step 2: Build the non-delivery timeline
We compiled Arvind’s message history showing repeated requests for the service, with responses that grew slower and eventually stopped altogether.
Step 3: Frame the case around absence, not quality
We argued the complaint required no judgment on advice, since the firm had collected a full fee and delivered nothing measurable in return.
Step 4: File with the payment and silence evidence
Our complaint through the SEBI SCORES portal led with the bank record of payment alongside the message history showing the total absence of service.
The firm initially claimed research had been shared through a separate channel Arvind had not checked. We asked for any evidence of that channel or its content, and none was ever produced.
How We Recovered 71.1% of the Fees?
With no service delivered and no evidence to the contrary, the firm agreed to settle rather than continue disputing an unprovable claim. Arvind recovered 78,200 of his 1,10,000 claim, a 71.1 percent share.
Non-delivery cases like this one tend to settle faster than disputes over advice quality, since the central fact does not depend on anyone’s judgment call.
Register with us if you paid for research or advisory calls and received nothing at all. We will review your payment and message trail for free.
Conclusion
Sometimes the strongest complaint is not that the advice was wrong. It is that no advice arrived at all.
If you paid for a service and received nothing close to what was promised, your payment record and your unanswered messages already hold most of what a complaint needs.
Where a firm stops responding entirely, our team escalates through the SMART ODR portal to keep the case moving without the firm’s cooperation.
Report. Recover. Stay Fraud Free.
Frequently Asked Questions
A bad advice complaint requires arguing the recommendation was unsuitable. A non delivery complaint only requires showing you paid and received nothing, which is a much narrower fact to prove.
Ask them to produce it. If no evidence of delivery exists anywhere, that absence supports your claim rather than weakening it.
No. Even a handful of unanswered requests for the paid service, with clear dates, is usually enough to establish the pattern.
The failure is documented and simple, which leaves the firm with little room to argue, unlike disputes over whether specific advice was appropriate.
Add us as a preferred source on Google »
