Last year, after the acquaintance, the Chengdu citizen Xiao Liu found Chengdu topology Education Consulting Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as: topology company), entrusted the other side to help themselves to complete the flight interview training and employment of Chengdu airlines, and signed the contract, and Xiao Liu paid 145 thousand yuan for this. However, by saying immediate training, in March 2018, Liu did not receive information on training and recruitment. She asked for a refund but was rejected. The company gave the reason for the fact that she had provided Guangxi with a training opportunity. The agreement signed by both sides was forced to sign and was an invalid agreement. In response, the lawyer pointed out that if the confirmation of the refund agreement was forced, it could be revoked, otherwise the company should give a refund. It is worth noting that the agreement between the two parties is not reasonable. If its true intention is not to provide training and employment services, but to cover illegal purposes in a legal form, the agreement may be deemed to be invalid. Signing the agreement: 145 thousand training fees have been delayed without training Nowadays, all kinds of job training classes are everywhere, the successful cases and young peoples good vision of the future attract their eyes and decide their final choice. In early October of last year, after being introduced by acquaintances, Chengdu citizen Xiao Liu (a pseudonym) signed a contract for employment of flight attendants at the company of topology. Prior to that, she just lost in Chengdu Airlines flight attendants recruitment, acquaintances told her: This is a reliable training institutions, try maybe there is still a chance. So, after some understanding, she signed a consignment agreement with the topology company, and before October 28, 2017, she settled the training fee for the job placement for air interview training, with a total of 145000 yuan. According to the agreement, after receiving the entrustment, the company will help Xiao Liu complete the flight attendant interview training in Chengdu airlines and help him complete his employment. The term of liability for the agreement is from the date of signing of the contract to the end of the date of signing the labor contract between Chengdu airlines and Party B (Xiao Liu). In the entrustment agreement, although the contents of 145 thousand yuan training fee were mentioned, there was no mention of training related conventions. Including training time, location, content and other specific training related information, not in the entrustment agreement. However, until March this year, little Liu Rengwei received any notice of flight attendants interview training, let alone employment. The agreement said this recruitment, they said Chengdu airlines recruitment in November, but it was over in November and did not receive training information or interview information. Xiao Liu said. Refusing to refunds: The signing of a refund agreement is still not refunded Until the beginning of 2018, the Chengdu Airlines official website had released a three or four round of recruitment plans, but Xiao Liu still did not receive any training notice or interview information, which made her sit on pins and needles. In March 4, 2018, Xiao Liu and his friends found the topology company again, hoping that they would refund the training fee and give a reasonable argument. The other person said the contract this time may be this time or next time , they can not give students refund. Xiao Liu regretted that if the agreement was clear, it would not be so embarrassing now. For this reason, the two sides of the scene plan to write a refund agreement. In the agreement, the time and the liability for breach of contract have been clarified: if Chengdu Airlines did not notify Party B (Xiao Liu) to take part in the pre job training of the flight attendants before April 30, 2018, the agreement on education and training signed by Party A and Party B was relieved at the same time. Party a must return the training fees paid by Party B before April 30, 2018. . However, more than a month later, the agreement has finally become a farce. Xiao Liu did not wait for the training opportunity of Chengdu airlines, and was not informed of any interview and recruitment. He received a refund agreement and received a refund. Trainers: Providing training opportunities is not accepted by the other party The refund agreement is forced to sign Subsequently, the Chengdu business daily client reporter contacted Mr. Zhang, the head of the companys business. Why do I have to pay extra money to go to Guangxi? Xiao Liu does not approve of topology company. In this regard, Mr. Zhang explained that to Guangxi training to produce an additional cost, not to the topology company, but to the actual training party, and the parties also filled out the information table to Guangxi training, I also handed in, may train after the May Day. In addition, he also said that before finding the topology company, Xiao Liu had been eliminated in the September Chengdu airline recruitment. After she failed, she needed to start from the ground, first training in the field and pre job training, so it was the civil aviation training. In response to the subsequent refund agreement with Xiao Liu, Zhang believes that it is an invalid agreement. First, how much is the cost of refund and liquidated damages in the agreement? Is that reasonable? Second, there is a clear one in the refund agreement. Is it not possible for me to pursue their responsibilities? Is this overlord clause useful? Mr. Zhang said that when the student had to sign him before he left, he had no choice but to sign the agreement. Public business information shows that topology companies are operating in educational information consulting services; sales; cultural supplies, office supplies; accounting services; computer software and hardware technology services, which do not include education and training. Chengdu commercial newspaper client-side reporter called topology company to understand that the company does not undertake the employment of flight attendants training business, and the civil aviation bureau also does not have a cooperative relationship, but if it is the customer requirements, the company can accept the entrustment to help contact. On the specific charging standards, the company staff said they did not know. Mr. Zhang also said that the specific contents of the 145 thousand yuan paid by Xiao Liu have not been clearly identified, and it is recommended to refer to the contract of entrustment. After paying 145 thousand training fee, we can guarantee the flight attendants. Xiao Liu told the Chengdu commercial daily client that 145 thousand is not a small number, but when the money was paid, the other side said, they say there is a way. The lawyer said: Concealment of illegal items in legal form Such a contract can be deemed to be ineffective Chengdu Thai and Thai lawyer Liu Xiu pointed out: first of all, the contract itself agreed content is not standardized, not reasonable, the cost of training is high, but no specific training content. If the real intention of the two parties to sign a contract is not to provide the training and employment service, but to cover the illegal purpose in a legal form, the contract may be deemed to be invalid. Secondly, according to the agreement of refund agreement, Party A shall refund the amount. As to whether it is invalid agreement, it is not supported by current evidence. At the same time, Chen Xiaohu, a lawyer for the Beijing monarch law firm, said that the agreement could be revoked if the topology company Zhang could confirm that he was forced to sign a refund agreement, according to the contract law. In principle, if the terms of the entrustment contract are unclear, the training institutions should also supplement and improve them. The training agency should make clear hints if it is issued by a training institution and used for multiple signs. The training agency should also make an explanation for the trainer in case of a dispute. As for liability identification, it depends on whether the training institutions have misled propaganda. Source: Chengdu business daily editor: Ji Xue Ying _NN6784 Chengdu Thai and Thai lawyer Liu Xiu pointed out: first of all, the contract itself agreed content is not standardized, not reasonable, the cost of training is high, but no specific training content. If the real intention of the two parties to sign a contract is not to provide the training and employment service, but to cover the illegal purpose in a legal form, the contract may be deemed to be invalid. Secondly, according to the agreement of refund agreement, Party A shall refund the amount. As to whether it is invalid agreement, it is not supported by current evidence.