They Called Me 50+ Times. I’m Not Even Their Customer. Here’s What You Can Do About It.

Published by Vishwas R on

A citizen’s guide to fighting back against illegal telemarketing — and why ₹500-₹1,000 is an insult you should refuse.

In March 2026, I filed a formal complaint against Bajaj Finance Limited (BFL) for repeatedly calling my DND-registered mobile number to pitch overdraft facilities. I have never been their customer. I never gave them my number. Yet the calls kept coming — daily, from multiple agencies, using private mobile numbers specifically designed to bypass regulatory filters.

By May 2026, I had recordings of 50+ calls, a live RBI Ombudsman case (Ref: N202627002001184), a written admission of guilt from BFL’s own Nodal Officer, and a ₹5,000 “compensation” offer sitting in my inbox that I refused.

This article is not just about my experience. It is a guide for every Indian citizen who has been harassed by unsolicited calls and didn’t know they had the right to fight back — or how much they could actually claim.

dnd-trai-rbi-ombudsman

The Corporate Playbook: Deny, Deflect, Bribe, Ghost

Before we talk about what you should do, you need to understand what they will do. Every major company running an illegal telemarketing ecosystem follows the same four-step playbook when you complain.

Step 1 — Deny: “Those numbers don’t belong to us. We have no record of calling you. You must be receiving calls from unknown fraudsters.”

This is the default first response. They will claim the calling numbers have no link to their organization, even when their own agents are identifying themselves as company representatives on recorded calls.

Step 2 — Deflect: “It may be a channel partner operating independently. We are not responsible for the actions of third parties outside our control.”

This is legally incorrect. Under the RBI Master Direction on Outsourcing of Financial Services, a regulated entity (RE) like a bank or NBFC is vicariously liable for the actions of its authorized partners. The moment a partner identifies themselves as calling on behalf of the company, the company owns that call.

Step 3 — Bribe: Once a regulator gets involved and denial stops working, the tone changes overnight. Suddenly they “found” the partner. Suddenly there was a “lapse.” And suddenly, they offer you ₹500, ₹1,000, or ₹5,000 as “reparation” under their internal policy.

Most people take it. The company knows this. That is the entire point.

Step 4 — Ghost: If you refuse the money and ask for more, they stop responding. They have made their offer. The Ombudsman case will hopefully close on the basis of that offer. Time to wait you out.

Knowing this playbook is the first step to beating it.

Your Legal Rights (That Most People Don’t Know They Have)

1. The National DND Registry Is Enough. You Don’t Need to Register Separately With Every Company.

Under TRAI’s Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations (TCCCPR), 2018, registering your number on the National Customer Preference Register (NCPR) — commonly known as the DND registry — is sufficient.

Every commercial entity in India is legally mandated to “scrub” its calling lists against the NCPR database before making any promotional call. The burden of compliance lies entirely with the company, not with you.

When a company tells you to “register on our internal portal to stop calls,” they are shifting their legal obligation onto you. That is an unfair trade practice. Refuse it.

→ Register or check your DND status: TRAI DND App (Available on Google Play and App Store)

2. The DPDP Act 2023 Gives You Powerful Rights Over Your Own Data

The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act 2023 came into force and gives you rights as a “Data Principal.” If a company is calling you without your consent, they are processing your personal data without a lawful basis.

Under this Act, you have the right to:

  • Know the source of your personal data (Section 11 — Right to Information)
  • Demand erasure of your data from all their systems (Section 12 — Right to Erasure)
  • File a complaint with the Data Protection Board of India for violations

When you demand to know where they got your number and they refuse to tell you, that refusal is itself a statutory violation. Document it.

3. TRAI’s 140-Series Rule: The “Shadow Number” Trick Is Illegal

You may have noticed that spam calls promoting financial products come from regular 10-digit mobile numbers — not from the 140 or 160 series that TRAI mandates for commercial communications. This is deliberate.

By using private mobile numbers, companies and their partners bypass the UCC (Unsolicited Commercial Communication) filters that would otherwise flag and block them. This is not a gray area — it is a direct violation of TCCCPR 2018. Every such call is independently punishable.

When you receive such a call, note the number. It becomes evidence.

The Numbers Most People Don’t Know: How Much Can You Actually Claim?

Under the RBI Integrated Ombudsman Scheme (RB-IOS) 2021, as updated in 2026, the compensation ceiling for complaints against regulated financial entities is significant:

  • Mental agony and harassment: Up to ₹3,00,000 (₹3 Lakhs)
  • Overall grievance compensation ceiling: Up to ₹30,00,000 (₹30 Lakhs)

When a company offers you ₹5,000, they are betting that you don’t know this. They are also betting that you haven’t documented your case well enough to demand more.

The ₹5,000 is not a settlement. It is a test of how little they can get away with paying.

The Step-by-Step Guide: What To Do and In What Order

Step 1 — Document Everything From Day One

Before you do anything else, start building your evidence file. This means:

  • Call recordings: Enable automatic call recording on your phone. Every unsolicited call is evidence.
  • Screenshots: Capture the incoming number, time, and date for every call.
  • Note the agent’s name and what they said: Company name, product pitched, their name if given.
  • Save every email response from the company, including template replies.

The company will later claim they have no record of these calls. Your recordings make that claim impossible.

Step 2 — Send a Formal Email Complaint to the Grievance Team

Do not just call their helpline. Written communication creates a paper trail. Send a formal email to the company’s Grievance Redressal Team citing:

  • Your DND registration status
  • The specific numbers that called you
  • The dates and times
  • The violation of TCCCPR 2018
  • A demand for source disclosure under DPDP Act 2023

Keep the tone formal and legal. CC their Nodal Officer and Principal Nodal Officer if you can find those email addresses (usually published on their website under “Grievance Redressal”).

Give them 30 days to resolve the matter. If they don’t, or if their response is a template that ignores your questions, proceed to Step 3.

Step 3 — File With the RBI Ombudsman

If the company is a bank or NBFC (Non-Banking Financial Company) regulated by the RBI, file a complaint with the RBI Ombudsman through the Centralised Management System.

→ RBI CMS Portal: https://cms.rbi.org.in

When filing, be specific:

  • Attach your call recordings (or reference them clearly)
  • Attach the company’s email responses showing denial
  • Cite the specific regulatory violations: TCCCPR 2018, DPDP Act 2023, RBI Fair Practices Code
  • Explicitly state the compensation you are seeking and cite the RB-IOS 2021 ceiling

The moment the Ombudsman sends a notice to the company, their behavior will change. This is when the ₹5,000 offer typically appears.

Do not accept the first offer without evaluating it against the actual harm caused.

Step 4 — File a TRAI Complaint in Parallel

The RBI complaint covers the financial services angle. But the DND violation itself falls under TRAI’s jurisdiction. File a parallel complaint with TRAI.

→ TRAI DND Complaint: https://trai.gov.in or via the TRAI DND app

Step 5 — Use Public Pressure Strategically

Companies monitor their social media reputation. A well-documented public post on X (formerly Twitter) tagging the company’s official handle, TRAI, and the RBI creates accountability they cannot ignore privately.

Keep it factual. Attach recordings or screenshots. State specific regulatory violations, not just frustration. This is not venting — it is evidence of your persistence and a public record of their non-response.

Here is an example of how this kind of public documentation looks in practice: https://x.com/VishwasR_/status/2036335779866440021

Step 6 — If the Ombudsman Closes Your Case Without Your Consent

This is the most critical and underreported part of this entire guide. Read it carefully.

Under RB-IOS 2021, Clause 14(9)(a), the OBO can close a case citing “settlement” — and closures under this specific clause are not appealable to the RBI Appellate Authority. This is the loophole companies exploit. They make a token offer, the OBO treats it as a settlement, and the case is closed before you can blink.

But the closure is only valid if there was a genuine “agreement” between both parties. Under Clause 3(1)(k) of the scheme, a settlement requires the complainant’s actual consent. If you rejected the offer in writing, no valid settlement exists.

What you should do instead of appealing:

  • Do not file an appeal — it will be rejected as non-maintainable under Clause 14(9)(a).
  • Instead, file a fresh representation directly with the CRPC (Centralised Receipt and Processing Centre) or the CEPD (Consumer Education and Protection Department) at RBI’s Central Office, challenging the procedural validity of the closure itself.
  • Your core argument: the OBO closed the case under a “settlement” clause when no settlement agreement existed, violating Clause 3(1)(k) of the scheme.
  • Attach your written rejection of the offer as proof that consent was never given.
  • Attach evidence of violations that occurred after the supposed closure date — post-closure violations are the strongest proof that the “resolution” was fictitious.

→ CRPC, RBI Central Office: https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/Complaints.aspx→ RBI CMS for fresh filing: https://cms.rbi.org.in

The Ombudsman Problem: When the Regulator Becomes a Case-Closer

The RBI Ombudsman system is genuinely useful — but it has a structural weakness. Regional OBO offices are under pressure to close cases. When a company makes any offer, however inadequate, the path of least resistance for the OBO is to treat it as a resolution, regardless of whether the complainant agreed.

In my case, OBO Ranchi closed the case based on BFL’s ₹5,000 offer — on a day when I had already rejected that offer in writing, and just hours before I received yet another unsolicited call proving the harassment had not stopped.

This side-by-side from the actual email record tells the whole story:

BFL Nodal Officer — May 2, 2026 BFL Nodal Officer — May 11, 2026
“These numbers do not belong to Bajaj Finance Limited or any of our authorized channel partners.” “We have reviewed the details and noted that one of our channel partners had contacted you… Appropriate action has been taken.”

Nine days. No new investigation. The only thing that changed was the Ombudsman’s involvement. That is not a coincidence.

If an OBO closes your case this way, the correct path is not an appeal to the Appellate Authority — closures under Clause 14(9)(a) are non-appealable by design. Instead, file a fresh representation with the CEPD (Consumer Education and Protection Department) at RBI’s Central Office, challenging the procedural validity of the closure under Clause 3(1)(k), which requires actual consent for a settlement to be valid.

The key arguments for this representation are:

  • You never consented to the settlement — attach your written rejection as proof
  • No valid “agreement” existed under Clause 3(1)(k) of RB-IOS 2021
  • Violations continued after the closure date, proving the matter was unresolved
  • The company provided misleading information to the Ombudsman during proceedings

A Note on the “Partner” Defense

One of the most common deflection tactics you will face is the company claiming that the calls came from an “independent partner” or “unauthorized freelancer” over whom they have no control.

This defense has no legal standing for the following reasons:

Under RBI Master Direction on Outsourcing: The Principal Entity (the company) is fully responsible for the conduct of its outsourced service providers. The partner relationship is not a liability shield — it is a liability transfer back to the company.

Under DPDP Act 2023: The company is the “Data Fiduciary.” Its marketing partners are “Data Processors.” If a Data Processor has your data, it is because the Data Fiduciary gave it to them. The Data Fiduciary cannot disown responsibility for how a processor it authorized uses that data.

The Termination Test: If the company fires or penalizes a partner agent in response to your complaint, they have just proven the partner worked for them. You cannot discipline someone who is “independent.”

Summary: What To Keep in Mind

  • Your DND registration is legally sufficient. You do not need to register on every company’s internal portal.
  • Document every call with recordings and screenshots from day one.
  • Written formal complaints create the paper trail that regulators need.
  • File with both RBI and TRAI — they cover different aspects of the same violation.
  • Know the compensation ceiling: up to ₹3 Lakhs for mental agony, ₹30 Lakhs overall under RB-IOS.
  • Do not accept the first offer without evaluating it against the severity and duration of harassment.
  • If the OBO closes your case without your agreement, do not appeal — instead file with CEPD at RBI Central Office challenging the procedural validity under Clause 3(1)(k) of RB-IOS 2021.
  • The “partner defense” has no legal merit under RBI Master Directions and DPDP Act 2023.

The system is imperfect and slow. But it works — if you document relentlessly, escalate correctly, and refuse to be silenced by token payments.

Useful Links

Categories: AwarenessDPDP Act 2023Spam CallsTRAI

0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *