AutoBeta(AutoBeta.net)09/06 Report--

The seemingly normal update iteration of automobile products has caused strong dissatisfaction among new and old car owners, and ideal cars once again bear the notoriety of "sales fraud".

In recent days, a number of ideal ONE owners have gone to the ideal car store to protect their rights, because shortly after they bought the ideal ONE, they suddenly learned that the ideal ONE was on sale in the end market, and that it would be discontinued after launching a replacement model, the ideal L8, in November. These owners think they have been deceived by the ideal car, demanding compensation and providing a lifetime warranty.

According to the rights protection car owner, the ideal salesperson did not inform the car owner that the model was about to be replaced. Even if some car owner took the initiative to ask relevant questions when buying a car, the salesperson replied that "there is no replacement plan and a uniform price for the whole country." the psychological gap between before and after makes it difficult for these car owners to accept, and embark on the road of safeguarding their rights. So, if these car owners sue the ideal car to the court, can they get the compensation they deserve?

In fact, this is not the first time that an ideal car has appeared to protect its rights. May 2021, ideal car launched 2021 ideal ONE, compared with the old model, although the price of the 2021 ideal ONE has been raised by 10, 000 yuan, but the upgrade of the software, hardware and configuration of the auxiliary driving system is particularly conscientious. However, many car owners asked whether they would launch new models in the near future, but they all denied that they finally bought the old ideal ONE with an attitude of trust, but they wanted to buy the new models listed in the near future. Car owners thought that the ideal car had fraudulent sales and deliberately concealed the news of the new car's listing. At that time, many car owners took to the streets to protect their rights, and some owners even sued the ideal car directly, demanding official compensation, but failed.

According to a judgment document of the Beijing Shunyi District people's Court, the plaintiff Na sued the defendant ideal Intelligent Automobile sales Service (Dalian) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "ideal Company") and Beijing Automobile Hejia Information Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Beijing Automobile Hejia") to the court, and Na signed a purchase agreement with ideal company on March 8, 2021, buying ideal ONE 2020 models and paying 328000 yuan for the purchase. Before buying the car, Namou and the ideal company sold cars that confirmed many times whether there would be a new model this year, and the sales clearly informed that there would be no new models until 2022, but on May 25th, 2021, the ideal car released the ideal ONE 2021 model, adding more than 60 updates and upgrades to the 2020 models, and the price was only 10, 000 yuan more than the 2020 models.

The plaintiffs believe that the practice of the ideal company is actually an act of fraudulent consumers, in order to allow consumers to buy their old cars at the original price and clean up the inventory of the old cars that have been produced. Based on this, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit request: (1) an order revoking the "ideal car purchase Agreement" signed between the plaintiff and the defendant's ideal company; (2) the two defendants were ordered to refund the plaintiff's car purchase fee of 328000 yuan; (3) the two defendants were ordered to compensate the plaintiff three times the car purchase fee of 984000 yuan.

Ideal argues that we have never told the plaintiff that "no new money will be issued until 2022" and that there is no such situation as "false propaganda, infringement of consumers' right to know and fraud" stated by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's claim has no factual and legal basis and requests to reject all the plaintiff's claims in accordance with the law.

Beijing Auto and Home argued that it was a completely normal business practice for ideal car to launch a new model on May 25, 2021. In this case, the plaintiff failed to buy the new product and felt that he could not enjoy the "cost performance ratio" of the new product. A lawsuit brought as a result of psychological imbalance. The dispute in this case is far from the "fraud" in the civil code contract and the "fraud" in the consumer protection law. The plaintiff believes that the defendant's sales fraud is purely subjective and has no factual and legal basis.

The Beijing Shunyi District people's Court of first instance held that the listing plan of the new model of the ideal car belongs to the commercial decision-making plan and trade secrets within the ideal car, and there is no clear requirement as to whether and when such information should be disclosed to consumers. The release and listing of ideal cars is a relatively macro market decision, which is not confirmed based on the purchasing behavior of a consumer. Before the release and listing of the new vehicle, the ideal company, only as an automobile sales company, was not informed in advance that the listing plan of the new vehicle existed. For both buyers and sellers, it is unknown when the new car will be released. The sales staff of the ideal company can not fully grasp the consumer psychology of consumers when selling vehicles to the outside world. From the Wechat chat records submitted by the plaintiff with the sales staff of the ideal company, we can also know that before the release of the new car, the sales staff did not know that the new car was going to be released, and the ideal company did not have the intention to deceive consumers in the sales process. There is no quality problem with the vehicles sold by the ideal company to the plaintiff. Based on this, the plaintiff's claim that the defendant's behavior constitutes fraud lacks factual and legal basis, and the court does not support it.

Since then, the plaintiff Na was dissatisfied with the judgment of the first instance and appealed the ideal company and Beijing che Hejia to the Beijing No. 3 Intermediate people's Court. The court of second instance held that Na's appeal was untenable and should be rejected.

Fraud means that one party deliberately informs the other party of the false situation, or deliberately conceals the true situation to induce the other party to make a wrong expression of intention. According to the litigation principle of "who claims, who gives proof" in the Civil procedure Law, if the ideal car owner sues the ideal car to the court, it is necessary to provide sufficient evidence to prove the fact that the ideal car has fraudulent intention and damage. according to the ideal car owner, the ideal salesperson is only a verbal promise when buying a car, and if the promise is not included in the purchase contract, it is difficult to judge that the ideal car has sales fraud.

In recent years, the new forces of car building have frequently encountered incidents of price reduction and rights protection, which is fundamentally different from the sales model of traditional automobile mainframe factories. Traditional car companies generally adopt the agency model, with 4S stores first wholesale new cars from manufacturers, and then independently pricing and selling to consumers, while the new forces of car building mostly adopt the direct operation mode, with unified sales prices across the country. Once there is a price reduction in the terminal market, it is very likely that there will be a psychological gap among car owners who have just mentioned new cars, including Xiaopeng and Tesla.

In addition, traditional car companies will release sales half a year or even a year in advance when upgrading, terminal sales stores will generally reduce prices to clear inventory, consumers can also choose whether to buy new models or not, and the new forces of car building have only taken more than a month from booking to picking up cars, and the infiltration of new car change news lags far behind, which is also unfriendly to consumers who have just mentioned new cars.

Of course, as the court said, the new car listing plan belongs to the commercial decision-making plan and trade secrets within the car, the automobile mainframe factory does not have the obligation to be forcibly informed, and price reduction is also the right of the main engine factory, but cars as bulk consumer goods, usually buy new rather than old, model change information is still relatively important for consumers, automobile enterprises should be transparent and timely in the release of information, at this point. The new power of car building needs to learn and improve from traditional car companies.

Welcome to subscribe to the WeChat public account "Automotive Industry Focus" to get the first-hand insider information on the automotive industry and talk about things in the automotive circle. Welcome to break the news! WeChat ID autoWechat