Three in four food delivery app users are unhappy with prices: Survey

India’s love affair with food delivery apps is showing visible cracks. A large nationwide consumer survey has found that a majority of users believe food ordered through aggregator platforms costs more than eating at the restaurant, while complaints around food quality, unsafe packaging and poor delivery handling are nearly universal.

The LocalCircles survey, one of the largest conducted on India’s online food delivery ecosystem, received responses from over 79,000 consumers across 359 districts. It reveals that 55% of users say food prices on apps are higher than what restaurants charge for dine-in or pickup, reinforcing long-standing consumer suspicion that platform commissions and charges are being passed on to end customers.

Three in four users unhappy with food app pricing

Pricing has emerged as the biggest pain point. According to the survey, three out of four food delivery app users have issues with pricing, either due to higher menu prices, excessive taxes and delivery fees, or both.

While 10% complained that menu prices on apps are higher than restaurant prices, another 9% flagged steep taxes and delivery charges. The largest share — 55% of respondents — said they were unhappy with both inflated menu prices and additional charges.

Consumers also pointed to poor transparency, saying the final payable amount often turns out to be significantly higher than expected due to packaging fees and platform charges revealed only at checkout. Reflecting this frustration, 87% of respondents said food aggregators should be required to display dine-in, pickup and online prices clearly on their platforms.

Over 90% complain about packaging, food quality

Beyond pricing, the survey throws up worrying signals on food safety and quality. More than 95% of respondents said they had complaints related to food quality or packaging, suggesting that poor delivery experiences are far from isolated incidents.

Concerns around unsafe food packaging stood out, with 27% of users flagging risks linked to containers used for delivery. Another 25% complained of stale or poor-quality food, while 25% said food temperature was not maintained, often ruining the eating experience.

Consumer groups have repeatedly warned against the use of black plastic containers, which can contain harmful chemicals such as phthalates and heavy metals that may leach into food. The survey adds fresh weight to demands that food aggregators be made responsible not just for delivery, but also for enforcing safe packaging standards.

Spilled, damaged food a common experience

Speed-focused delivery models appear to be taking a toll on handling quality. The survey found that 56% of respondents had received damaged, spilled or distorted food due to poor handling by delivery agents more than once in the last year.

For 11% of users, such incidents occurred in more than half of their orders. Another 23% experienced damage in 10-50% of their deliveries, pointing to systemic issues rather than isolated lapses.

Consumers said that while fast delivery is valued, repeated instances of spilled or crushed food are discouraging repeat usage and brand loyalty.

Discounts patchy, refunds still a sore point

Despite aggressive marketing around discounts, only one-third of respondents said they were able to avail restaurant or bank discounts with most of their orders. In contrast, 45% said they rarely benefited from either, suggesting that promotional offers may be more selective than advertised.

Interestingly, 37% of users said they had at least one instance where the amount charged by the app was lower than the restaurant bill received with the food, though a larger share said they had never seen such a benefit.

Refunds and grievance redressal remain contentious. Government data shows that over 7,000 complaints against food delivery apps were registered in 2024–25, largely related to missing items, wrong orders and denied refunds.

Regulators step in as scrutiny intensifies

Food safety complaints are increasingly landing with regulators. The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has received 21,042 complaints over the last five financial years, Parliament was informed earlier.

Separately, a Competition Commission of India (CCI) investigation reported in 2024 found evidence of anti-competitive practices by leading platforms, including allegations of preferential treatment to select restaurants in return for lower commissions or exclusive listings.

As food delivery expands deeper into tier 2 and tier 3 markets, experts warn that weak oversight could amplify consumer risk at scale.

Gig worker protests add to platform pressure

The consumer backlash comes alongside nationwide protests by gig and platform workers, including delivery partners, over low pay, unsafe delivery targets and lack of social security. While recent labour codes formally recognise gig workers, unions argue that enforcement remains weak.

Platforms have largely avoided service disruption by offering surge incentives during peak periods, but analysts say the underlying labour and consumer trust issues remain unresolved.

Big market, bigger trust deficit

India’s online food delivery market, valued at about $31.8 billion in 2024, is projected to grow sharply by the end of the decade. However, the LocalCircles survey suggests that rapid growth has not been matched by better service, transparency or accountability.

With more than half of users unhappy with pricing, nearly all flagging quality or packaging issues, and overwhelming demand for clearer disclosures, the message from consumers is blunt: convenience alone will no longer cut it.