In September 2015, Chongqing resident Zhang Mou bought a Mercedes-Benz car from a car dealer. After paying for the pick-up, Zhang paid the insurance premium, vehicle and ship tax, vehicle purchase tax and the annual toll of roads and bridges in the main urban area for the car. Unexpectedly, when Zhang Mou inspected the Mercedes-Benz car at the Mercedes-Benz automobile repair shop, he unexpectedly found that the ignition switch of the car had been replaced and the vehicle key had been reprogrammed.
Zhang Mou angrily asked the seller for comment. Only then did he know that in August 2015, during the pre-sale inspection process, the seller found that the ignition switch of the car had an electrical fault, and replaced the original parts, and reprogrammed the vehicle keys. However, when Zhang bought the car in September 2015, the seller did not inform him of the situation.
Zhang Mou thought that it was a fraud for the seller to deliberately conceal the fact of vehicle maintenance and sell the new car. In 2018, he sued the seller to return more than 380,000 yuan of the purchased car and compensate the seller according to the price of the car three times. At the same time, he compensated the insurance premium, vehicle purchase tax, road and bridge fee for more than 40,000 yuan.
The First Intermediate Peoples Court of Chongqing held in the final instance that there was no clear stipulation in Chinese laws and regulations on whether the relevant information about pre-sale inspection and maintenance of vehicles should be notified to consumers voluntarily, nor was there any written national or industrial standard to regulate it, nor did the seller inform the consumers voluntarily because of the influence of industry awareness. Subjective malice does not constitute fraud. Moreover, the behavior of the sellers in replacing the ignition switch of the vehicle involved does not affect the performance of the vehicle or cause the vehicle to fail to meet the quality requirements, and does not meet the statutory return conditions.
However, according to the provisions of Article 8, paragraph 1, of the Consumer Rights and Interests Protection Law of China, consumers have the right to know the real situation of the goods they buy or use or the services they receive. In this case, the seller replaced the ignition switch during the pre-sale inspection of the new vehicle. This part is not a vulnerable conventional replaceable part, such as wipers, tires and so on. To a certain extent, it will affect consumerspurchase choices. The seller should inform consumers when selling. The sellers failure to inform him truthfully infringes Zhangs right to know, and Zhang should be compensated.
Accordingly, the court decided that the seller should compensate Zhang for RMB 30,000 yuan by infringing on consumersright to know, and rejected Zhangs other claims.
Knowing deceived, no objection was raised
Next years lawsuit wont be supported
In September 2015, Xiong Mou saw a second-hand car advertisement published by a used car dealer and a company on the 58 Tongcheng website. It was heartbeat. According to the advertisement, Each car has passed 101 special tests to eliminate accident vehicles, water-soaking vehicles, passing trains and assembly vehicles; provide second-hand car replacement, low-to-two-component payment, free evaluation, cash purchase, annual car inspection, agent transfer and other services.
Therefore, Xiong Mou quickly went to the scene to check the vehicle. After checking the driving license, he signed the Vehicle Sale Agreement with Wu Mou, the legal representative of a company. Payments and transfers were subsequently completed at the end of September. However, one year after the purchase, Xiong entrusted a lawyer to the Peoples Court of Banan District, Chongqing, to sue for the cancellation of the Vehicle Sale Agreement signed by the plaintiff and the defendant, to refund the purchase of 135,000 yuan, and to ask the defendant to compensate 450,000 yuan for fraud.
After accepting the case, the court found that during the period of payment, the plaintiff, Xiong Mou, informed the insurance company by telephone that the used car had occurred four traffic accidents, but Xiong Mou still purchased compulsory insurance and commercial insurance according to the insurance companys request to increase the premium. In addition, the plaintiff Xiong Mou went to Chongqing Notary Office the next day after purchasing the car, notarized the advertisement content of the used car in the case of a company in 58 cities, and formed a notary certificate.
The new car is actually an accident vehicle.
Triple the price of the car charged
In January 2018, Yuan Mou-mou purchased a new car in Chongqing Automobile Sales Co., Ltd. and signed the Automobile Sales Contract with him on January 19, 2018. The contract stipulated: Yuan Mou-mou purchased a Great Wall Fengjun 5 black pickup truck from Chongqing Automobile Sales Co., Ltd. for 88 million yuan. After the signing of the contract, Yuanmou paid a total of 419,000 yuan in down payment, vehicle purchase tax and insurance premium to the company, and another 62,000 yuan was paid by bank loan.
On January 30 of the same year, the company delivered the contract vehicle to Yuan Mou-mou. Yuan Mou-mou drove the car to the car decoration shop on the same day to install fog lamp. After removing the bumper, he found that the bumper was not the original vehicle assembly, the bumper was bent, the lamp was damaged and the glass glue was glued. The vehicle was an accident vehicle.
After a fruitless consultation with the company about compensation, Yuan Momou sued the peoples court of Nanchuan District, Chongqing City, and asked for an order: to cancel the automobile sales contract signed by the plaintiff and the defendant; to restore the defendants purchase and related expenses totalling 1039,000 yuan; to pay the plaintiff three times the compensation totalling 317,000 yuan.
In May of the same year, the Nanchuan court ruled that the defendant, Chongqing Automobile Sales Co., Ltd., compensated the plaintiff for three times the selling price of the automobile, that is 266,400 yuan. The automobile sales company refused to accept the first instance judgment and appealed to the Third Intermediate Court of Chongqing. The second instance upheld the original judgment.
The court held that the plaintiffs claim that the defendant should return the car purchase money and related expenses totaling 1039,000 yuan was due to the fact that the plaintiff actually paid the defendant 419,000 yuan for the car purchase money and expenses, and the other 62,000 yuan was paid by bank loans, but the bank did not make a loan to the defendant. Therefore, the defendant should return the price of the defendant to 419,000 yuan. u3002
Inspection and calibration errors
Ignorance does not constitute fraud
It has been identified that the cover of the luggage compartment has been dismantled. He Mou believed that the reason for the disassembly was the accident of the vehicle. When the company sold the vehicle, it did not inform the company of the accident, which constituted fraud. He sued the peoples court of Jiangbei District, and asked the court to order the cancellation of the New Vehicle Purchase Order signed by the two parties; the company returned the purchase money; the company compensated for the purchase tax, insurance premium, appraisal fee and compensation. Three times the purchase price.
The company argues that when the company inspects a number of new vehicles of the same type, including the vehicles involved, the cover of the luggage compartment of the vehicle needs to be adjusted because there are large gaps in the cover of the luggage compartment of the vehicle, so the company dismantles and reinstalls the cover of the luggage compartment of several vehicles and incorrectly installs the cover of the luggage compartment of other vehicles into the vehicle involved in the installation process. There is no intention of fraud in case of misoperation.
Jiangbei District Court held that the company did not inform the vehicle that it had disassembled and replaced the luggage compartment cover when dealing with the vehicle involved, and failed to present sufficient evidence to prove that the salesman did not know the situation that the vehicle involved had disassembled and replaced the luggage compartment cover when dealing with the vehicle involved, which was a mistake in work and was not intentionally concealed subjectively, and synthesized the existing evidence. The court found that the company was fraudulent and supported the consumers claim.
After the judgment of the first instance was pronounced, the company refused to appeal to the First Intermediate Peoples Court of Chongqing. The court of second instance found that the company had fault in testing and debugging according to the law through on-site investigation, investigation and evidence collection, but did not know about the defect of the sold vehicle, did not intend to make a false impression or conceal the true situation, and did not constitute consumer fraud. According to the new evidence and the facts of verification, it decided what the automobile sales company was. A company returned the goods and paid back more than 260,000 yuan for the purchase of vehicles. At the same time, it compensated more than 30,000 yuan for the purchase tax, insurance premium and appraisal fee, totaling more than 290,000 yuan.
Relevant Provisions of Consumer Rights and Interests Protection Law
Article 8 A consumer shall have the right to knowledge of the true facts concerning commodities purchased and used or services received.
Article 23 Where a consumer discovers a defect within six months from the date of acceptance of a commodity or service, and disputes arise, the operator shall bear the burden of proof concerning the defect.
Article 55 Where an operator commits fraudulent acts in providing goods or services, he shall increase compensation for the losses incurred by the operator in accordance with the requirements of the consumer, and increase the amount of compensation to three times the price of the commodity purchased by the consumer or the cost of receiving the service; if the amount of increased compensation is less than 500 yuan, it shall be 500 yuan. Where there are other provisions in the law, such provisions shall prevail.
Lao Hu commented:
For the average family, buying a car is a big expense. Once defects are found in hundreds of thousands or hundreds of thousands of new cars, consumers are bound to be very upset and even angry. However, such problems are not uncommon at present. Whether in the new car market or the second-hand car market, there is a phenomenon that individual sellers conceal defects and make the best of them.
The occurrence of such cases mostly stems from the sellerslack of legal concept and honesty consciousness. They often try to fool themselves intelligently, but always end up throwing stones at their feet. When they touch the bottom line of the law, it is their duty to compensate consumers for their losses.
For the problems of fraud and infringement of consumersright to know in the automobile market, we should start from two aspects while vigorously carrying out honesty education. On the one hand, we should improve legislation and strengthen supervision. Full-time supervisors can be stationed in large-scale automobile sales markets to carry out regular inspection and rectification. On the other hand, improve the means of technical detection, enhance the ability of technical detection, timely detection and treatment of vehicles with defects and hidden dangers, dispel the idea of individual sellers trying to mix fish with fish. In addition, consumers should be more careful when buying cars and consult professionals to avoid being cheated. At the same time, once consumers find the problem, they should promptly put forward negotiations, instead of silence in order to get three times the high compensation. Just like a case in this issue, consumers still buy and use the car for one year, knowing that there is a problem, and their claim for compensation has not been supported by the court. (Original title: Compensation for concealing defects in automobile sales is unavoidable.) Source of this article: Peng Mei News Responsible Editor: Liu Song_NBJ9949
For the problems of fraud and infringement of consumersright to know in the automobile market, we should start from two aspects while vigorously carrying out honesty education. On the one hand, we should improve legislation and strengthen supervision. Full-time supervisors can be stationed in large-scale automobile sales markets to carry out regular inspection and rectification. On the other hand, improve the means of technical detection, enhance the ability of technical detection, timely detection and treatment of vehicles with defects and hidden dangers, dispel the idea of individual sellers trying to mix fish with fish.
In addition, consumers should be more careful when buying cars and consult professionals to avoid being cheated. At the same time, once consumers find the problem, they should promptly put forward negotiations, instead of silence in order to get three times the high compensation. Just like a case in this issue, consumers still buy and use the car for one year, knowing that there is a problem, and their claim for compensation has not been supported by the court.
(Original title: Compensation for concealment of defects in automobile sales is unavoidable)