A wedding company purchased 60 vases online and applied for a return on the 6th day after receiving the goods.

After agreeing to the return application, the merchant opened the box and inspected the goods, and found that many vases had water stains, so they refused to refund.

The buyer asked the merchant to return the goods in accordance with the "seven days no reason to return" rule and bear the return shipping cost, and took the merchant to court.

All 60 vases were "returned for no reason"

  Cautious merchants are suspicious

  Xiao Li opened an online store on a certain platform, selling vases and other decorations.

One day, a buyer bought a vase from the store to look at, and then placed an order for 60 vases at a price of 5,800 yuan.

Xiao Li promised that on the basis of "seven days no reason to return", buyers can enjoy no reason to return within 15 days, provided that the goods are not used.

  However, on the 6th day after receiving the goods, Xiao Li received a return application for the above order, the reason being that "the size is wrong / I don't like it / the effect is not good".

Xiao Li felt that something was wrong. After all, the buyer only placed the order after seeing the sample, so he immediately called the buyer to confirm the situation.

During the communication process, Xiao Li learned that the buyer was engaged in the wedding industry, and these vases were exactly what they needed for the wedding, and the buyer said that the vases had not been used.

  Considering that the product is still within the return period, Xiao Li agreed to the return application and opened the box for inspection after receiving the vase.

Unexpectedly, many vases that were randomly disassembled all had water stains, which were obviously used.

So Xiao Li refused to accept the express, and refused to refund on the grounds of "affecting secondary sales".

  After repeated communication to no avail, the buyer filed a lawsuit with the Hangzhou Internet Court.

  Whether the vase can be "returned without reason" has become the focus of controversy

  The buyer claimed that the 60 vases he returned were in a complete and undamaged state, and the labels and packaging that came with the products were also kept intact, but the merchants refused on the grounds that the products had been used, had water stains, and affected secondary sales. Refund.

The buyer believes that the merchant should fulfill the obligation to return the goods, return the full payment, and bear the logistics cost of 268 yuan due to the return.

  The merchant argued that all the goods returned by the buyer had seriously affected the secondary sales, had obvious traces of use, and did not meet the condition of "return without reason".

For the sake of goodwill, it cannot sell the second-hand vases that have been soaked in water to other customers. These vases are equivalent to scrapping for the merchants.

And according to Article 25 of the "Consumer Rights Protection Law", the freight of returning goods shall be borne by consumers, and merchants do not need to bear the freight.

  During the trial, the buyer admitted that he was a staff member of a wedding company who purchased vases for wedding decorations.

This batch of vases was indeed used in weddings for water and flower arrangements.

However, it believes that the vase has no quality problems and meets the requirements of the goods in good condition, and applies for a refund within seven days.

Therefore, it requires the merchant to return the goods in accordance with the "seven days no reason to return" rule and bear the return shipping cost.

Court: Used vase not in good condition

  No reason to return

  The court held that although the buyer applied for a return within seven days after receiving the goods, according to the evidence submitted by the merchant, it could be confirmed that the returned vases generally had water stains. The behavior is not "unpacking and inspection due to the necessity of inspecting the goods", it is the use of the goods beyond the needs of inspection and confirmation of the quality and function of the goods, which will inevitably affect the secondary sales and lead to a large depreciation of the value of the goods. "Seven days no reason to return" conditions, the buyer's request for "seven days no reason to return" has no corresponding basis.

  In addition, the "Return Commitment" on the product order page shows that although the return time limit is 15 days, it requires "use: not used", so the buyer's practice does not conform to the 15-day return agreement between the two parties.

  In the end, the court dismissed all the buyer's claims.

  Judge's statement

  When consumers shop online, it is not easy to judge the authenticity and reliability of the goods only by displaying pictures and texts, so the law gives consumers the right to "return without reason within seven days", that is, when consumers are not satisfied with the goods purchased online, they can Returns are made within a reasonable period of time without giving reasons.

But "no reason" does not mean "unlimited" or "unconditional".

According to the "Consumer Rights Protection Law", "returned goods should be in good condition" is the premise of applying the seven-day no-reason return rule.

  In this case, the purchase of vases and water and flower arrangements for wedding decoration is not "unpacking and inspection due to the necessity of inspecting the goods", but has exceeded the needs of inspecting and confirming the quality and function of the goods. According to the general public perception, the value of the goods has already Obvious derogation, which in turn affects secondary sales, does not apply the "seven days no reason to return" rule.

Keywords: