AutoBeta(AutoBeta.net)03/28 Report--

Today, Mr. Han, a party to Tesla's "withdrawal of one indemnity for three" case, said in a personal Weibo post: the Beijing Municipal higher people's Court has ruled in accordance with the law to reject Tesla's application for retrial, and the case has been finally concluded for more than three years.

Related incident review, 2019 car owner Mr. Han, spent 379700 yuan on Tesla official website to buy a Tesla officially certified second-hand car Model S P85, and then in the process of using the car always found some minor problems, the car owner through a third-party inspection, found that the vehicle C-pillar and rear fender have cutting welding, the car owner Mr. Han that the failure of the vehicle will be a direct threat to life and safety of the return and replacement of the vehicle request, but was refused. Subsequently, the car owner Mr. Han decided to sue Tesla Company to resolve the matter through legal channels.

As for the situation reflected by Mr. Han, Tesla once said that during the period when the original owner was using the vehicle, the vehicle had a very slight collision when changing lanes on January 8, 2019. According to the on-site photos, damage agreement, accident identification and maintenance list and other evidence, it can be proved that the accident only injured the left rear leaf plate of the car body, the edge of the rear bumper and the surface of the wheel hub, and did not damage the vehicle safety structure at all. does not constitute a major accident or structural damage; Tesla company is not aware of the accident, there is no intention of fraud. And there is no major accident in the vehicle involved, nor is there any structural damage caused by the replacement of the leaf board. Tesla did not carry out any fraud when selling the vehicle. The vehicle delivered to Mr. Han fully complies with the sales promise of "no major accident and fire soaking water". Mr. Han's claim has no factual and legal basis and should be rejected. In December 2020, the case had a verdict of first instance. According to the judgment issued by the car owner, the result of the first instance was Tesla's purchase fraud and ordered it to return one to three. That is, the car purchase contract was revoked, and Tesla refunded 379700 yuan for the car purchase and paid 1.1391 million yuan in compensation.

According to the court in the judgment, the maintenance of the vehicle involved in the case does involve large area cutting, welding, and so on, and this way and degree of repair will inevitably have an important impact on consumers' willingness to buy cars. Tesla company only told Mr. Han that "the vehicle does not have structural damage", which is not enough to achieve the due degree of information disclosure. No matter in terms of positive actions or negative omissions, Tesla Company meets the objective requirements of fraud. On the question of whether Tesla company has the intention of fraud, according to the facts of this case, Tesla company knows or should know about the accident and maintenance of the vehicle involved, and it has the subjective conditions of fraud. To sum up, Tesla Company constitutes fraud.

In response to the result of the judgment of the first instance, Tesla said: fully respect the court's judgment based on current information, and will fully protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. However, the vehicle craftsmanship in this incident is very different from that of traditional models, and it is considered that the vehicle evaluation report in the first instance does not fully and accurately reflect the real condition of the vehicle. Therefore, Tesla later filed an appeal against the case. In 2021, the car owner Mr. Han once again posted on his personal Weibo that the result of the second trial of the case upheld the original verdict of the first instance for the Beijing second Intermediate people's Court. Tesla was guilty of fraud and dismissed the appeal and withdrew one to three. In March 2022, a picture of Tesla's application for retrial was posted on the Internet. The picture shows that Tesla is not satisfied with the civil judgment No. 2302 of Beijing No. 2 Intermediate people's Court (2021) and is now applying to your court for a retrial according to law. At the same time, there are two requests for retrial in the application for retrial. The first point is to "rescind the civil judgment No. 2302 of Jing02 (2021) made by the Beijing No. 2 Intermediate people's Court, and change the judgment to reject all the claims of the respondent Han." The second point is to order the respondent Han to bear all the litigation costs of the first and second instance of the case.

This time, although the "return one for three" case has finally come to an end. However, there are still civil lawsuits on both sides. One is that Tesla company sued the car owner Han Chao for a total of more than 770000 yuan for the use and maintenance of the scooter. On March 13, the car owner Mr. Han issued a statement that the lawsuit against Tesla for the scooter claim opened today. Tesla asked to pay the scooter-related usage fee of 1500 yuan per day, totaling more than 500,000 yuan. In this case, the court of the first instance upheld part of Tesla's claim. Support 150 yuan per day for the use of scooters as appropriate.

There are also two reputation disputes between Mr. Han and Tesla. Mr. Han also said in this post: the two reputation disputes with Tesla are under trial, and the court of first instance has made a suspension ruling because "according to the case has not yet been concluded." Today, after receiving the judgment, it has delivered the "civil order" to the relevant court as soon as possible, and hopes that the court can restart the trial as soon as possible. It is understood that the two reputation dispute cases were car owner Han Chao sued Tesla Company previously issued false statements about "car owner Han Chao participated in, planning Shanghai auto show rights protection incident" and other false statements, infringing upon his reputation right. Another case is for Tesla Automobile (Beijing) Co., Ltd. to sue Mr. Han for long-term slandering and belittling Tesla through his personal account on Sina Weibo since the beginning of 2020. Including the use of "garbage", "scoundrel" and "rogue" to describe Tesla's enterprise and its products, whose actions have seriously infringed upon Tesla's corporate reputation.

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