Da Vinci claim 400,000 use fee is counterclaim

Recently, "Daily economic news" reporter learned that the consumer and Leonardo da Vinci's furniture of the war on rights again. In March 2011, Ms. Chen ordered a set of furniture at the da Vinci store in Hangzhou. July, Leonardo da Vinci furniture fraud was exposed by CCTV, Ms. Chen and da Vinci furniture negotiations, the da Vinci furniture will be fully refunded, and asked Ms. Chen returned all the furniture purchased, but Ms. Chen did not refund the furniture purchased. Several times Dunning no fruit, The da Vinci furniture a paper petition will sue Ms. Chen to court, ask it to return furniture, and compensation for furniture use fee nearly 400,000 yuan. Ms. Chen believes that "Leonardo da Vinci" cheated consumers, should be back to a loss. So, Ms. Chen also a paper petition to the da Vinci Furniture Court. It is understood that the case was held in Hangzhou on January 4, 2013, the court has not yet decided. Consumer V. "Da Vinci" fraud should be doubled compensation Ms. Chen to the da Vinci Furniture filed a counterclaim, that "Da Vinci" know false sell false, belong to fraud consumer behavior, in accordance with the "Consumer protection Law", should double compensation. Ms. Chen's agent, Zhejiang Jing Heng Law firm Zheng Zhijin lawyer to the reporter showed the da Vinci furniture in court to show the furniture of Ms. Chen, the Declaration of the bill, pointed out that three people sofa, single seat sofa, coffee table have no certificate of origin, and only the angle of proof of origin, the actual weight and the declaration on the mark of serious discrepancy. "The evidence submitted by the other party is not original, the authenticity cannot be verified, the content is all in English, the form also does not conform to the legal stipulation." "For the return agreement, Zheng Zhijin that this is not an agreement, but a memo." "It is agreed that the business to provide product certification, consumers decide whether to buy or return." "The actual role of this agreement is not a return, but a commitment to product origin and quality, Leonardo da Vinci in the specified time to provide relevant proof, consumers can choose not to return." Zheng Zhijin told reporters, in fact, "Leonardo da Vinci" was exposed by the CCTV, but also by the Shanghai Trade and Industry Bureau of the administrative punishment, indicating that its existence deceive consumers behavior. and "Da Vinci" did not in the "return agreement" agreed within the period of time to provide Ms. Chen furnished with the relevant proof, so can not prove that its sale of furniture is Italy imported. "Da Vinci" so-called "Italy imported", there is fraud. Ms. Chen believes that, in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, operators to consumers to provide goods or services fraud, should be in accordance with the requirements of consumers to increase compensation for their losses, the amount of compensation for consumers to buy the price of goods or accept the service costs one times. "Return agreement" sparked controversy March 2, 2011, Ms. Chen in the da Vinci furniture Hangzhou store ordered a set of more than 865,000 yuan of furniture, and on July 6 sent to Ms. Chen's home. July 10, CCTV exposure to the da Vinci furniture fraud, Ms. Chen began to worry. "Ms. Chen is not allowed to buy the ' original Italian imported furniture ' is true, so she proposed to check the origin of the goods and customs clearance certificate." Zheng Zhijin said to the daily economic news reporter. After consultation, July 16, the two sides signed a "retreatGoods Agreement. The Da Vinci Furniture agreed in the agreement, "in 7 working days, will the product Origin certificate, the Customs clearance certificate to the customer, and lets the customer determine whether the product is imported by Italy originally." If the guests agree not to return, Leonardo da Vinci that this is a timely customer support, will give customers very favorable discount, discount will be with the relevant documents to the customer. July 22 and July 26, Leonardo da Vinci furniture two times will be more than 865,000 yuan of the money to her account. However, Ms. Chen did not return the furniture. Leonardo da Vinci furniture that the two sides signed the "return agreement", we should meet the obligations of the Agreement. Since the payment has been refunded, Ms. Chen should return the furniture, but in fact, it violates the principle of good faith, refuses to fulfill the obligation to return the furniture, should bear the legal responsibility. So Hangzhou da Vinci Trade Co., Ltd. sent a letter of attorney to Ms. Chen, and on December 11, 2012, it was sued in court. Leonardo da Vinci Furniture, based on the three packs of furniture products liability provisions, "for the products have been used in accordance with the maximum price of the original purchase of 0.1%, the daily collection of depreciation fees." According to this calculation, Ms. Chen's furniture from July 27, 2011 to October 27, 2012, a total of 455 days, should compensate for more than 393,000 yuan of furniture use fee, while returning furniture. For "Leonardo da Vinci" claims for the use of furniture, Fang Zhihua that, unless "Da Vinci" can prove that consumers have actual use of furniture, otherwise it is difficult to get the court's support. The first case of "Da Vinci" was awarded a full refund January 9, "Daily economic news" reporter to Hangzhou da Vinci Trading Co., Ltd., staff said that the leadership is not in the company, let reporters leave contact information, and tell the leader. But as of press time, the "Da Vinci" aspect did not have any response. Public data show, July 2, 2012, Hangzhou sentenced a consumer sued "Da Vinci" case. Bought Davencika Bridt Furniture, Mr. Wei, see CCTV exposure "Da Vinci" false reports, specially from Canada back to Hangzhou da Vinci Trade Co., Ltd. to sue. Mr. Wei said that when buying, the salesman repeatedly assured that 100% of the furniture is Italian production, the Department of imported. After the rejection of the return, Mr. Wei sued "Leonardo da Vinci" to request refund of payment and compensation for losses. This has become the country's first consumer lawsuit "Da Vinci" case. At that time, Hangzhou Gongshu District Court judgment, Hangzhou da Vinci Trade Co., Ltd. false propaganda, misleading consumers, should be returned to consumers Wei more than 3.2 million yuan payment. Fang Zhihua, a senior lawyer at Zhejiang Hangzhou law firm, said consumers demand a refund, legal also stand on the foot, but the problem is the consumer and "Da Vinci" signed the "return agreement" in the former, both sides may have reached a certain agreement on the refund return, so the consumer's appeal, the court will not necessarily support.