Why does the court not support “seven-day return without reason” when buying masks in wechat group?
If you buy a mask from an old acquaintance in a wechat group and want to “return it for seven days without any reason”, why does the court not support it this time?Basic case zhao mou and qian mou is classmate, qian Mou manages a dress company, Sun mou is the shareholder of this dress company.In March 2020, during the epidemic period, Zhao negotiated with Qian and Sun on the quantity, model, unit price and packaging of “KN95 masks” in a wechat group chat.Later zhao remitted RMB 15,4000 to the account of the clothing company, but the clothing company sent the goods involved to Zhao through logistics, but they were rejected.Zhao believes that both parties bought masks through wechat, and he can return them for seven days without any reason. He claims that according to article 25 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests, he sues the clothing company to refund the purchase price of 15,4000 YUAN and compensate for the loss.The clothing company argues that it is not an e-commerce company’s online sales platform, and Zhao has no right to cite “seven days without reason to return” to demand the return of money.Court thinks, consumers’ rights and interests protection law regulations, business operators such as network, TV, telephone, mail order sells general merchandise, consumers have the right to within seven days from the date of receipt of the goods has no reason to return, but this case zhongyuan trading between the defendant is not the law in the sense of “shopping”, is not in conformity with the “seven days without reason return system” the application of the situation,The plaintiff’s claim that a clothing company should refund the payment for goods without any reason is untenable, and the lawsuit request of the plaintiff is rejected.In recent years, with the rapid development of China’s digital economy, new forms of consumption, such as the Internet, telephone and TELEVISION, have become the basic means of consumption.For consumers, the purchase of goods through off-site sales generally does not have the opportunity to actually inspect the goods before the transaction, and their choice of goods is largely based on the operator’s publicity rather than the real understanding and personal experience of the quality, performance and use of goods.To protect consumer’s option, consumer rights and interests protection law gives consumers the right to terminate the contract unilaterally during an appropriate period, namely “seven days without a reason to return goods” system.Not long ago, the Supreme People’s Court issued the Provisions on Several Issues concerning the Application of The Law to The Trial of Online Consumer Dispute Cases (I), which further improved the “seven-day return without reason” system and strengthened the protection of after-sale rights and interests of consumers.So as to protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers who cannot negotiate directly, fully and equally with operators on important contents such as commodity quality and price and are in a vulnerable position.Article 25 Where a business operator sells a commodity by means of the Internet, TELEVISION, telephone or mail order, a consumer shall have the right to return the commodity within seven days after receipt of the commodity without giving any reason, except for the following commodities as prescribed by a consumer;(2) fresh and perishable;(3) Digital commodities such as audio and video products and computer software downloaded online or unsealed by consumers;(4) newspapers and periodicals delivered.With the exception of the commodities listed in the preceding paragraph, no unreasonable return shall be applicable to the commodities that are not suitable for return according to the nature of the commodities and confirmed by the consumers at the time of purchase.Goods returned by consumers shall be in good condition.Business operators shall refund the price paid by consumers within seven days from the date of receipt of the returned commodities.The freight of the returned goods shall be borne by the consumer;Where there are other agreements between business operators and consumers, such agreements shall prevail.In this case, the plaintiff is quoted “seven days without reason return” system, that the defendant WeChat building group by mobile phones, WeChat and rely on mobile phones rather than negotiate business face mask, accord with “operators use the methods such as network, TV, telephone, mail order sales of goods”, it has “no reason to return seven days” system safeguard, can return the payment for goods returned to the masks and requirements.The court heard that the transaction pattern between the central plains and the defendants in this case does not conform to the “seven days without reason return” system.Although the parties reached the purchase and sale of masks through wechat group, the wechat group involved in the case was only a communication tool for both parties to negotiate and communicate the contract content, rather than a trading platform for the defendant company to unilaterally advertise and sell masks to unspecified targets through Internet or telephone.In the wechat group, both parties have repeatedly negotiated and confirmed the model, quantity, unit price, delivery time and place, payment method and other important contents of the masks. The plaintiff has a full understanding and cognition of the masks involved in the case. It is only because of the Novel Coronavirus outbreak in China at that time that both parties sold and purchased masks through the wechat group.The parties are unable to directly face to face negotiations caused by special circumstances.The wechat group transaction mode involved in the case does not fall into the situation of “operators sell goods through Internet, TV, telephone, mail order and other means”, so the “seven days without reason return” system is not applicable.It is worth mentioning that relying on mobile wechat group to sell goods in practice is no longer a special case, and the legal issues involved are worth paying attention to and studying.In the “Ten Typical Cases of Consumer Rights and Interests Protection in Jiangsu Province” released by Jiangsu High Court this year, case 6 is “wechat Group Solilong Small Program Case”. The court held that Qunsolong wechat small program is a new online commodity sales platform, and the “leader” of Qunsolong does not express his identity and continues to sell goods for the purpose of profit.Should be identified as operators and false publicity constitute consumer fraud to undertake punitive compensation liability.When relying on the mobile wechat group to sell goods, it is necessary to combine the number of wechat group and the purpose of establishment, the identity of the seller, specific transaction mode and other comprehensive judgment, so as to make an accurate identification of the transaction of relying on the wechat group to sell goods.Article: Taizhou Intermediate Hospital Editor: Zhao Fan Review: Zhang Zhiping, Sun Shuo