ODR works best when the investor arrives with a defined dispute and complete evidence rather than a collection of unanswered complaints.
Confirm that the dispute is eligible and that the entity grievance and SCORES steps have been completed where required.
Read the current ODR process.
Client agreement.
Using ODR for an ineligible product.
SEBI’s online dispute-resolution framework provides a structured route for eligible securities-market disputes after the initial grievance process.
The platform can move matters through conciliation and, where applicable, arbitration-style proceedings. Current rules on eligibility, fees, deposits, timelines and review should be checked before filing.
ODR is not the correct route for every fraud, criminal allegation, non-securities product or dispute already before another forum.
| Area | What to assess | Investor rule |
|---|---|---|
| Eligibility | Entity and dispute fall within the framework. | Check exclusions. |
| Prior steps | Entity grievance and regulatory process are completed. | Keep acknowledgements. |
| Conciliation | Parties attempt structured resolution. | Define settlement authority. |
| Adjudicatory stage | Evidence and submissions support the claim. | Observe fees and deadlines. |
Prepare the case as issue, rule or obligation, evidence, causation and relief. This format helps both settlement and adjudication.
Obtain legal advice for material disputes, complex causation or questions about other forums and limitation.
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.
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.
The review should use the same transaction or holding population across all evidence. For this topic, the main areas are eligibility, prior steps, conciliation, adjudicatory stage. 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.