Asymmetric dilemma between consumers and electricity dealers

Online limited-time special selling mode in the domestic rise in 2008, the only product will be as such representatives, the rapid expansion, in 2012 in the NYSE listing, was once known as the "Demon stock." At present, this special electric dealer sale model because of the new elimination law's return stipulation encounters the consumer to issue "the quality door" question. A few days ago, "Daily economic news" reporter contact only the relevant department responsible for the product to understand that the consumer and the electricity business site in the return of goods related to the criteria of the determination of asymmetry.

Relevant lawyers said that the new law 25th stipulates that the Internet shopping applicable 7th no reason to return the system, but there are four categories of goods, and other according to the nature of the goods and consumers at the time of purchase to confirm the goods should not be returned, do not apply for no reason to return. And here's "not to return" lack of judgment standards, even by WHO to judge is not clear, so consumers and electric business site is very easy to dispute. When consumers question the authenticity of goods, the biggest problem is the difficulty of proving the burden of proof, which is the distribution rule of the burden of proof.

Consumer: Business Conclusion not authoritative

Recently, Consumer Fu (a pseudonym) to the "Daily economic news" reporter that it was in January this year, the only product will be registered, and has been a diamond-class members, but the recent shopping experience let him only goods will sell the authenticity and quality of doubt.

Fu told reporters two shopping experiences. The first is a man's leather shoes. Fu purchased the leather shoes about one months later, only to take out the use, but wearing less than 10th, the shoes appeared on the heel of the situation, he was more than "7 days for no reason to return" of the time category and has been through, did not contact businessmen to seek solutions. The second is the "fruit run World Fig dry" in the open bag after the "slight pungent odor", and the goods are very moist. According to Fu, the fig dry packaging marked on the shelf life of 12 months, and the ingredients table is only marked with fig one, no other ingredients, so he suspected that the product contains additives but not marked. Since then, Fu on the dry matter of figs call only goods receiving service to raise questions.

Fu to reporters recalled that the only product will be the response is "through contact with the manufacturer, the product by ultraviolet radiation, the Department of Pure natural, can be assured of use." If there is doubt, in the case of unopened goods can be returned for them. Fu pointed out that only the product will be verified by the manufacturer of Fig dry as "pure natural" conclusion does not have authority, then refused to return. Fu said that at present it has complained to the state Food and Drug Administration of the product, and the Bureau has accepted the treatment.

Only goods will: goods from the regular channel procurement

Recently, for the above mentioned Fu, "Daily economic news" reporter interviewed the only relevant departments responsible for the goods. The head of the response said that only goods will be sold from the brand side, agents, brand branches and international brands in China's offices and other formal channels of procurement. Companies to strictly review the qualification of suppliers, business licenses, such as five certificates, product inspection reports and brand licensing documents. For imported goods, documents such as entry clearance documents will be requested. In addition, the only goods will be in accordance with national regulations, require suppliers to provide the corresponding commodity special qualification certificate.

The above-mentioned only product will be related to the responsible person also said, first of all, if the customer purchased leather shoes There is a quality problem, even if more than "7 days no reason to return" the period, but also with customer service feedback, the same can be returned; second, for consumers suspected of dried fig dry add preservatives The State stipulates that the preservatives used in preserves and fruit and vegetable foods are benzoic acid and Sls acid. The fig dry manufacturer--The fruit run World provides the quality inspection report of this commodity, benzoic acid and Sls acid is "not checked out", prove that the product does not contain antiseptic.

The official said at that time, the information feedback to consumers, in response to the question of the taste of their products, the company customer service at that time told the manufacturer, that is, the goods are ultraviolet disinfection, so contains a small amount of malic acid and succinate, so the individual fig will have sour; company customer service also said to the consumer Can be returned unconditionally for its handling.

Lawyer: Existing rules are controversial

From the above case, the consumer and the Electronic Business site on the relevant issues of the facts diverging. In response to this issue, China Electronic Commerce Association Policy Law Committee members, Sheng law firm director of the lawyer Yu Guofu analysis, the essence of the difference is the fact of judgment, involving the "burden of proof", and China's "Consumer Rights Protection Law" and "product quality Law" has provisions.

Yu Guofu said that businesses should bear the initial burden of proof of their products qualified, but in the case of electrical business enterprises proof that the goods have been qualified, consumers do not agree with the effectiveness of the proof, should provide their own goods and business evidence of the quality of the proof of the contrary. For example, in the case of dried figs, when the merchant has provided the quality inspection report, if the consumer does not approve, it should prove that the product is inconsistent with the quality report, or provide evidence that there are other quality nonconformities.

It and intellectual property lawyers, China Internet Association Credit Evaluation Center Legal Adviser Zhao Occupation added that if the consumer commissioned a third party to identify the commodity, prove that the food contains preservatives, can be held to the legal responsibility of the website, but also in accordance with the "Food Safety Law" required web site or manufacturers to bear 10 times times the responsibility of compensation.

Since March 15 this year, the implementation of the revised version of the "Consumer Rights Protection Act" has increased the content of a large number of standardized online shopping, from the policy level, whether there is still drilling loopholes in the scope of the law?

In this respect, Zhao occupation to the "Daily economic news" Reporter said, the new law stipulates that the Internet shopping applicable 7th no reason to return the system, but not for the four categories of goods, (a) consumer custom; (b) fresh and perishable; (iii) online downloads or consumer-opened audio-visual products, computer software and other digital goods; The delivery of newspapers, periodicals, and goods in accordance with the nature of the commodity and the consumer at the time of purchase to confirm that it is not suitable for return without reason. However, "not to return" lacks the standard of judgment, even to who has the right to judge is not clear. There is an easy dispute between consumers and their website.

For domestic large electric dealers, when consumers questioned the authenticity of goods, Zhao occupation that the biggest problem consumers face is the burden of proof.

Zhao occupation further added that some goods manufacturers do not provide true and false identification services, THIRD-PARTY certification agencies are often only the existence of quality problems to identify, and not to identify true and false. Therefore, if the website denies that the goods sold are fakes, consumers often find it difficult to effectively defend themselves, rooted in the distribution rules of the burden of proof. In these cases, for example, consumers face similar problems.

Yu Guofu to remind consumers, online shopping in the event of disputes, consumers should properly keep the evidence of consumer rights, in order to safeguard rights.

With the exception of: consumer-made, live perishable, online download or consumer-opened audio and video products, computer software and other digital goods and delivery of newspapers, periodicals and so on