AutoBeta(AutoBeta.net)07/22 Report--

The core of car refund is whether it constitutes fraud. Once there is cheating behavior, it is proper to compensate three times the purchase price, but it is a long process to protect rights, and many consumers may not have such firm determination. Recently, Yangzhou a man sued 4S shop "refund one compensation three" case after one year finally heard the verdict, the court found that 4S shop constitutes sales fraud, compensation 1.38 million.

According to media reports, in June 2017, Mr. Ji of Yangzhou spent 460,000 yuan to buy a Lincoln MKX 2.0 car. Soon after picking up the car, he found that there were many problems with the car. Mr. Ji introduced that he first found that the position of the A-pillar was loose, the gap above the rearview mirror was also very large, the front windshield was not installed correctly, and then he found two glass fragments on the left front of the instrument panel.

After discovering something wrong, Mr. Ji felt that what he bought might be a "problem car", so he found the 4S shop theory, hoping to get a clear statement. The 4S shop insists that the vehicle is brand new and that there is no maintenance and replacement of the front windshield.

As the negotiation failed, Mr. Ji immediately contacted a lawyer for help and began judicial appraisal of the vehicle. On June 30, 2017, the forensic report came out and found that the front windshield of the Lincoln car met the characteristics that had been replaced.

In May 2018, Mr. Ji decided to take the 4S shop to court.

In the trial process, Yangzhou Tianxuda Lincoln 4S shop believes that the car is imported with original packaging, and needs to undergo special quality inspection when leaving the factory and entering the customs, and the inspection result is qualified. Moreover, the quality inspection was also carried out before the vehicle was handed over, so 4S shops strictly fulfilled their contractual obligations and there was no fraud. As for the replacement of the front windshield, the company said that although it is true to replace the front windshield, this is what the manufacturer does, it is a normal production process, meets the factory production process requirements and relevant quality standards, and the manufacturer has no obligation to disclose the replacement parts to consumers.

After hearing the case, the People's Court of Hanjiang District did not accept the defense opinion put forward by Yangzhou Tianxuda Company that the front windshield of the car should be replaced in the production stage. Because Mr. Ji found glass slag on the left side of the instrument panel shortly after buying the car, this did not conform to the normal phenomenon caused by replacing the front windshield in the production stage. At the same time, ordinary consumers can find glass slag on the instrument panel, but professional automobile practitioners fail to find it when inspecting. This kind of most obvious problem cannot be found, which cannot exempt 4S shop from the responsibility of replacing the front windshield of automobile.

In July this year, the People's Court of Hanjiang District made a first-instance judgment that 4S shop sales fraud should be "refunded one to compensate three," returned 460,000 yuan of car purchase money, compensated 81,800 yuan for insurance purchase, licensing and other expenses, and paid three times the amount of compensation for 1.38 million yuan. In addition, the judgment requires 4S stores to pay the above compensation within ten days.

Netizens all expressed support for such a judgment result, one netizen also said: buying an accident car is equal to winning the prize!

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