SEBI SCORES: Complaint Workflow

Quick View

Why It Matters

Investors should generally first complain to the concerned listed company or SEBI-regulated intermediary and preserve the acknowledgement and response.

A SCORES complaint should identify the entity, transaction, date, amount, service failure and relief sought. Vague allegations and large unreadable uploads slow review.

SCORES facilitates redress within the securities-market framework. It does not guarantee compensation, decide every private contract or replace criminal reporting for cyber fraud.

Decision Framework

Action Checklist

1. Complain to the entity in writing.
2. Create a one-page chronology.
3. Identify the exact financial relief.
4. Attach readable indexed evidence.
5. Track every platform update.
6. Use ODR or other remedy where eligible.

Practical Example

Evidence to Keep

• Original entity complaint.
• Account, folio or client details.
• Contract notes and statements.
• Screenshots or correspondence.
• Entity response.
• SCORES acknowledgement and updates.

Warning Signs

How to Analyse

Separate service deficiency from market loss. A poor investment outcome is different from unauthorised trade, mis-selling, wrong charge or failure to follow instructions.

Review the platform’s current process and timelines at filing because complaint workflows can change.

The investor should record the product, entity, amount, expected return source, maximum credible loss, liquidity, cost, holding period and exit route before transferring money. A decision that cannot be explained without a price target or influencer claim is not yet an investment thesis.

Regulations, product terms, charges, taxes and complaint procedures can change. Use the latest official document and the investor’s actual statement rather than an old screenshot or generic online table.

Investor Safety Test

First verify the legal entity and regulated role. A familiar brand, app-store listing, social-media badge or celebrity does not prove that the person receiving money is the registered intermediary.

Second verify the money and asset trail. Payment should move through the appropriate regulated account, and the investment should appear in an independent contract note, depository statement, folio record or lawful product report.

Third compare return with the risk that produces it. High yield, rapid profit, leverage, illiquidity, concentration and complex valuation are not separate from return; they are often the reason the expected return looks attractive.

Fourth preserve evidence. Statements, product documents, risk disclosures, communications, ticket numbers and complaint acknowledgements should be stored outside the app or platform being disputed.

Finally, separate a disappointing market outcome from fraud, mis-selling, unauthorised activity or service failure. The correct complaint route and available relief depend on that distinction.

Deeper Review

The review should use the same transaction or holding population across all evidence. For this topic, the main areas are entity complaint, scores filing, review, next route. If the app, contract note, depository statement, factsheet and tax record describe different positions, the investor should resolve the difference before taking another action.

Suitability has two layers: product risk and household capacity. A product can be lawful and accurately disclosed yet still be unsuitable for money needed for education, emergencies, near-term housing or debt repayment.

The investor should separate price volatility from permanent loss. Temporary market movement, issuer default, fraud, forced sale, liquidity failure and excessive cost require different controls and complaint routes.

Every review should end with a written action: hold with a stated reason, reduce concentration, seek clarification, stop further transfers, preserve evidence or escalate through the regulated entity and official platform.

A grievance file should identify the duty breached and the exact remedy requested. Market loss, unauthorised trade, wrong charge, delayed transfer and mis-selling are not interchangeable allegations.

Track jurisdiction and limitation separately. Platform acknowledgement proves filing, not acceptance of facts, compensation or suspension of another legal deadline.