Techie calls out Zomato over Bengaluru FC ad charge. Football club's goalie Gurpreet Singh Sandhu responds

A recent incident involving a techie’s online food order has sparked a debate on social media regarding extra charges imposed by food delivery platforms. The issue arose when Anand, a Bengaluru-based techie, complained about an unexpected Rs 12 "packing charge" added to his food bill by Zomato. Upon receiving his order of shawarma from Empire Restaurant, Anand noticed that the packaging had Bengaluru FC’s logo on it, leading him to question why he was being charged for an advertisement.

In a detailed post on X (formerly Twitter), Anand pointed out that the packaging charge seemed to go toward promotional material for the Bengaluru FC football team, which he felt was unfair. He questioned why he, as a paying customer, should bear the cost of a promotion for a football club. The post quickly gained traction, with many online users joining the conversation to express their opinions.

While Anand awaited a response from Zomato, a surprising reply came from Bengaluru FC goalkeeper Gurpreet Singh Sandhu. Sandhu offered to reimburse Anand for the Rs 12 charge. His offer via social media quickly went viral, drawing even more attention to the ongoing discussion.

What was X users’ reaction?

The incident triggered mixed reactions from the public. Many users agreed with Anand’s stance, pointing out that if customers were being charged for packaging, it should not be used as an advertising space for other brands. Some argued that Zomato should have clarified whether the charge was truly for packaging or for promoting a third-party advertisement. Others joked about the situation, pointing out similar instances where brands have used customer-paid products, such as shopping bags, for promotional purposes.

While some defended Zomato by suggesting that the Empire restaurant might be responsible for the promotional packaging, others questioned the practice of charging for packaging while using it for marketing. A few even pointed out that consumer rights organizations have previously ruled against charging for promotional products, reinforcing the importance of fair business practices.