Warning of being fined for "cost 75 yuan down jacket priced at 1598 yuan"
There have been waves of cold waves this year, and all kinds of down jackets have also been sold frequently.
Recently, an administrative penalty letter published by the Beijing Municipal Administration for Market Regulation shows that Yi Nian (Shanghai) Fashion Trading Co., Ltd. was fined and confiscated in RMB for selling down jackets costing 75 yuan per piece at a price of 1,598 yuan per piece due to shoddy charging. 15704.45 yuan.
As a well-known brand of down jackets, they are also sold at the counters of large shopping malls. The price of 1598 yuan per piece seems to be normal, and ordinary consumers will not doubt the quality and reasonable price of its products.
However, I did not expect that the actual cost of this down jacket is only 75 yuan.
From the perspective of consumers, the legitimate rights and interests are infringed, but the ones who pay a higher consumption cost are inferior products.
And the merchants have undoubtedly made huge profits from it - the profits are as high as 21 times.
Although this batch of down jackets has a total of 80 pieces, a total of 2 pieces have been sold by November 3, 2021 (one of which was sold by random inspection), which means that the harm to the society is limited, but the cost and the price are huge. Selfishness is shocking enough.
It is gratifying that the shoddy down jackets that are difficult for ordinary consumers to identify were detected in time by the Beijing market supervision department, and administrative penalties were used to prevent more consumers from paying for this kind of profiteering clothing.
How is this shoddy being seen through?
Judging from the reports, it should be that the relevant departments have passed market sampling inspections and compared the products with the express implementation standards GB/T14272-2011 "Down Clothing" and GB18401-2010C "National Textile Products Basic Safety Technical Specifications", combined with cost and price.
One of the messages released by this case is that when many consumers do not have the ability to identify problematic clothing, the regulatory authorities are strong defenders of market order and consumer rights.
We have sufficient "legal weapons" to combat illegal and tortious acts.
Laws and regulations such as the "Product Quality Law" and "Punishment Measures for Infringing Consumer Rights and Interests" all have shoddy penalty clauses.
The above-mentioned enterprises are punished in accordance with Article 50 of the "Product Quality Law", that is, shoddy products will be confiscated for illegally produced and sold products, and 50% of the value of the illegally produced and sold products will be imposed. A fine of more than three times but not more than three times; if there is any illegal income, the illegal income shall be confiscated.
That is to say, whether it is a random inspection found to be shoddy, or a fine issued in accordance with the law, it shows that the "night watchman" maintains the proper state of the clothing market, which not only makes consumers feel more secure, but also gives clothing enterprises a sense of security. With lessons and warnings.
For the above-mentioned fined companies, not only will they "eat" the fines and the products in question cannot continue to be sold, but also the credibility and reputation of the brand will be affected.
Therefore, other clothing companies should learn from this administrative penalty case and not play similar tricks.
Relevant reports show that shoddy charging is very common in the clothing industry.
For example, GAP, a well-known clothing brand, was fined more than 111,000 yuan by the Shanghai market supervision department last year for shoddy charging, and this is not the first time the company has been punished for similar reasons.
For another example, in September last year, Shanghai Jianshang Clothing Co., Ltd., an affiliate of the clothing brand MJstyle, was fined for shoddy charging. The company has been fined many times for similar reasons.
It can be seen that shoddy charging has become a normalized action for many clothing companies to obtain improper benefits and infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
Clothing is different from other commodities. Most consumers do not have the "spotlight" to identify clothing as shoddy, and some clothing companies take advantage of this weakness of consumers to obtain high profits under the guise of well-known brands.
Because some problem clothes are not counterfeit well-known brands, they are extremely deceptive to consumers.
In this regard, consumers should not be superstitious about well-known brands, but also improve their ability to identify clothing quality, and have the awareness of rights protection to avoid being deceived.
(eagle)