In a recent incident that has stirred considerable online debate, a man from Bengaluru claimed he was cheated out of a high-value jackpot prize by CRED, the quick commerce platform. The user, identified as Aviral Sangal, was initially thrilled to win a substantial prize through CRED’s Friday jackpot, only to have his joy quickly overshadowed by a cancellation notification.
On the Friday jackpot, Sangal reportedly won a prize package that included a MacBook, iPad, AirPods Max, and a TUMI bag, valued at approximately Rs 3.25 lakh. Following his win, CRED requested his PAN details to process the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on the prize. This step led Sangal to believe that the jackpot would indeed be honored.
Even though I usually do not fall for the @CRED_club jackpots, but yesterday I just played the friday jackpot without having any hope of getting anything meaningful. But I scored the JACKPOT and it wasn’t a small one. It included a Macbook, Ipad, Airpods Max and a TUMI bag worth… pic.twitter.com/16SwhchMYm
— Aviral Sangal (@sangalaviral) September 7, 2024
Though, the excitement was short-lived. According to Sangal’s social media posts, CRED informed him that the jackpot had been cancelled due to a “technical glitch.” The company reportedly offered him Rs 1,000 as a “goodwill gesture” and refunded the coins used to play the jackpot. Sangal rejected the offer, expressing his dissatisfaction with the handling of the situation.
Sangal further revealed that the glitch affected around 200 users, all of whom were informed that their jackpots would not be honored. He criticized CRED for not addressing the issue more effectively and for failing to honor the jackpots for all affected users.
Sangal’s posts on X (formerly known as Twitter) quickly went viral, amassing over 3.3 million views. The post included a call for CRED to publicly acknowledge the error and fulfill the promised rewards. Many users echoed Sangal’s sentiments, urging him to pursue legal action against the company. Comments on the post ranged from suggestions to file a case to critiques of CRED’s customer service.
One user commented, “File a case please, it’ll be fun to see the judgment of the court.” Another shared a similar experience and advised Sangal to insist on the fulfillment of his prize, saying, “Stick to your ground – I need what I have won, nothing else.”
In response to the backlash, CRED has yet to issue a formal statement addressing the issue or detailing any steps to rectify the situation. The company’s handling of the jackpot error and the subsequent fallout has raised questions about its customer service and accountability.
As the situation develops, Sangal has indicated that he is exploring legal options if CRED does not address the issue to his satisfaction. The controversy highlights broader concerns about the reliability of digital promotions and the need for transparent customer service practices.
