Can the money for the "automatic renewal" of the APP be refunded? Expert Answers from China Consumers Association

　　"Consumption Insights" column series interview topic: APP is "automatically renewed", can your membership fee be refunded?

　　With the integration of the mobile Internet into all aspects of public life, the APP "automatic renewal" service has been criticized in many consumption scenarios.

Since September 2021, the difficulty of automatic renewal and cancellation of a number of APPs has been exposed by the People's Daily and other media, and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the China Consumers Association and other departments have also notified and requested rectification.

However, some APPs still have the phenomenon of "edge ball" to varying degrees, and complaints about such problems on the people's complaint platform have always been high.

　　Recently, in a series of interviews in the "Consumption Insights" column launched by People's Daily Online and China Consumers Association, around the topic of "automatic renewal", whether your membership fee can be refunded, Guo Yaozong, Deputy Director of the Complaints Department of China Consumers Association, Lu Yun, a lawyer of the China Consumers Association Lawyers Group and director of the Consumer Rights Legal Professional Committee of the Beijing Lawyers Association, answered questions from netizens on the People's Complaint Platform.

Acts such as opening automatic renewals by default are suspected of being illegal

　　Some consumers reported that when handling related payment services through the App, they signed the automatic deduction function of password-free payment by default and vaguely, which resulted in forced automatic renewal.

There are also consumers who reported that when opening the VIP service, the automatic deduction and automatic renewal are completed without entering a password, or the page does not clearly indicate that the automatic deduction will be made on an annual basis, and the payment will be automatically deducted.

　　In this regard, Guo Yaozong analyzed that in the first case, the automatic deduction function of password-free payment is activated by default. This seems to be the choice of the consumer, but in fact, the operator made the choice for the consumer.

In the online consumption scenario, many consumers do not read the terms and conditions carefully when making decisions. If consumers do not click to agree, they cannot proceed to the next step. Therefore, many consumers develop the habit of subconsciously clicking to confirm. Not disagree or cancel.

　　For the second case, Guo Yaozong analyzed that the automatic deduction or renewal was completed without entering the password, and the payment was automatically deducted without clearly indicating that the annual automatic deduction was performed on the page, which violated the consumer's right to know, the right to choose and property.

The first paragraph of Article 8 of the "Consumer Protection Law" stipulates that consumers have the right to know the real situation of the goods they purchase or the services they receive.

In addition, Article 19 of the E-Commerce Law stipulates that e-commerce operators in tying of goods or services shall remind consumers in a conspicuous manner, and shall not use tying of goods or services as an option for tacit consent.

In addition, Article 17 of the "Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Online Transactions" also makes more detailed provisions. In addition to stipulating that consumers should be reminded in a conspicuous way, it also stipulates that any option of tying goods or services shall not be set as Default consent, the option selected by the consumer in the previous transaction shall not be set as the default consent of the consumer in the subsequent independent transaction.

　　"The default activation of automatic renewal is the tying service mentioned in the above laws and regulations. If the operator provides relevant terms of service, the option of automatic renewal is checked by default, and the consumer is not clearly reminded, it may involve a violation of the "E-commerce". Law and the Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Online Transactions, and need to bear corresponding legal responsibilities." Guo Yaozong said.

The contract can be terminated if the consumer is not clearly informed before the deduction

　　During the service process, operators fail to fulfill their obligation to remind before the expiration date, consumers are automatically deducted without receiving any advance notice, and operators only provide reminders through emails or in-site letters. Consumers generally pay attention to If it is not, there is no valid prompt. After seeing the consumption bill, the deduction has been completed.

　　In this regard, Lu Yun said that in the "Consumer Rights Protection Law", there are provisions for consumers' right to know.

In judicial practice, it is also determined that the operator bears the corresponding responsibility because the operator has not fulfilled the corresponding obligation of disclosure.

The legislative background is that when operators and consumers conduct transactions, consumers are often in a relatively disadvantaged position, so operators are required to provide specific goods or services when providing relevant goods or services.

　　"When the two parties are trading, if the operator fails to inform the other party about the major rights and obligations of the consumer, the consumer can claim these terms. I have not noticed that the provisions are not the content of the contract or the agreement between the two parties. In fact, this is also In order to ensure that consumers have a full understanding of the content they consume or related rights and obligations." Lu Yun said, if the operator fails to effectively inform, explain in detail, and remind consumers in a prominent way, so that consumers will not be Consumers can claim to terminate the relevant contract if they make wrong judgments under the circumstances of knowing too much or not knowingly.

　　"The consequence of rescinding the contract is that the other party can be asked to return the goods. Therefore, in the entire operation process, first of all, as a consumer, you should carefully check the relevant terms and content, especially the pop-up dialog box or the received information, and consumers should pay attention to carefully check it. ." Lu Yun said.

　　"For operators, in fulfilling their obligation to inform consumers, they should make effective notices in accordance with the "Consumer Rights Protection Law" and the "Civil Code", and remind consumers in a conspicuous way. , consumers can make a statement that conforms to their own wishes." Lu Yun emphasized.

Operators must follow the principle of fairness in providing standard terms

　　In the process of rights protection, many consumers found that some platforms unilaterally stipulated the deduction in advance in the form of standard clauses, or stipulated that the deduction is irrevocable, and even designated a specific arbitration committee or a court with specific jurisdiction to resolve disputes. Additional expenses for accommodation, travel, and high arbitration fees arising from litigation in different places make it more difficult for consumers to protect their rights.

In this case, from the perspective of platforms and operators, how should they be constrained?

　　Guo Yaozong analyzed that the standard terms are generally prepared in advance by the platform for repeated use, and there is no negotiation with consumers when the contract is concluded.

For both parties, this will help reduce the time cost of negotiation and improve the efficiency of the transaction.

However, if it is not constrained, as the drafter of the standard terms, the platform will easily take advantage of its dominant position and dominant position, violate the principles of contract freedom, equality, fairness and justice, and violate the wishes of consumers, setting the above-mentioned advance deduction or deduction. Unreasonable conditions such as irrevocability, appointment of arbitration, and jurisdictional courts, damage the rights and interests of consumers.

　　Guo Yaozong said that regarding the regulation of standard terms, the Civil Code and the Consumer Rights Protection Law have clear provisions, which mainly include two aspects: on the one hand, for matters involving the major interests of consumers, reasonable reminders should be given, Let consumers notice the existence of these clauses, rather than later consumers discovering that there are so many unfavorable clauses; on the other hand, the standard clauses provided by operators must follow the principle of fairness, that is, even if When it comes to prompting obligations, such as bolding or blackening, it does not mean that these standard terms are necessarily valid.

If the operator violates the principle of fairness and seriously damages the rights and interests of consumers, the law stipulates that such clauses are also invalid.

　　"In March this year, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Regulations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Online Consumer Dispute Cases (1)", which clearly stipulated the invalidity of five standard terms, further restricting operators from using unfair standard terms to infringe consumption These legal provisions have also formed a relatively complete regulation system for standard clauses.” Guo Yaozong said.

　　Finally, Guo Yaozong emphasized that the law is only a necessary condition for purifying the market environment, not a sufficient condition. To truly restrain these behaviors, it is also necessary for the operators who are the drafters of the standard clauses to enhance their self-discipline and social responsibility.

"One-shot trading is not a long-term way to operate. Operators cannot make consumers lose trust for petty profits. Once consumers' trust is lost, the platform will have no basis for survival."