39Trust
Unreliable
🔍 Web Verified
omkar._.mishraonThreads1d ago
Shocking extortion and mental harassment by PuranikBuilders! Confirmed our booking cancellation on Nov 6 after violating RERA norms (demanded 30–50% upfront payment before registration).
When we canceled, we explicitly asked for a deduction calculation in writing. They ignored it, shared nothing, and confirmed it. Now, 6 months later, they claim "the employee left," so we must restart the process, wait another 6 months, and accept an illegal 10% deduction!
Trust Metrics
45
35
40
28
Accuracy45%
Framing35%
Context40%
Tone28%
Analysis Summary
A buyer claims PuranikBuilders violated real estate regulations by demanding high upfront payments and refusing to issue a written refund calculation after a cancellation. The core complaint—delayed refund processing and contested deduction amounts—is a real RERA issue affecting multiple buyers, but this specific case lacks documentation, regulatory complaint numbers, or builder response. Maharashtra RERA has clarified that some deductions are legally permissible (statutory charges), meaning the 10% deduction may or may not be illegal depending on what it covers—the post presents this as categorically illegal without specifics. Without a formal complaint filing or RERA adjudication, this remains an unverified personal dispute.
Claims Analysis (3)
“PuranikBuilders violated RERA norms by demanding 30–50% upfront payment before registration”
Post claims RERA violation but provides no documentation, complaint reference, or regulatory confirmation. News search shows RERA cases exist but none matching this builder or specifics.
“Booking was canceled on Nov 6 after confirming RERA violation, but builder now claims 'the employee left' and demands restart of process after 6 months”
Specific personal transaction details cannot be independently verified. No complaint filing reference, no builder response, no regulatory case number provided.
“Builder is demanding an illegal 10% deduction on refund”
The legality of deductions is contested. News search shows MahaRERA has issued rulings on refund deductions under Section 18 — some deductions are permissible for statutory charges. A 10% deduction may or may not be illegal depending on what it covers. Post presents it as categorically illegal without citing the specific RERA ruling applicable to this case.
⚠ Flags (1)
😨 Appeal to Fear
Was this analysis helpful?
Try ClearFeed free →