"Signing for receipt does not mean that the quality of goods is recognized" is the meaning of consumer rights protection
Shi Fengchu
The "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Online Consumer Dispute Cases (I)", which will take effect on March 15, clarifies that if the standard clauses provided by e-commerce operators have the following contents, the court shall find them invalid according to law: (1) The consignee's receipt of the goods shall be deemed to recognize that the quality of the goods conforms to the agreement; (2) The responsibilities of the e-commerce platform operators according to law shall be borne by the operators on the platform; (3) The e-commerce operators have the right of unilateral interpretation or Final interpretation.
In addition, operators who make additional commitments to return goods without reason shall abide by their commitments.
The most common phenomenon that people see when shopping online is that some operators mark in the online store or in the product description column, "Signing for receipt is deemed qualified", "This product is not suitable for seven-day no-reason return", "No return after unpacking", etc. typeface.
In this regard, most consumers, because they are not aware of the relevant laws and regulations, regard them as the regular operations of the operators to comply with, and even after buying unsatisfactory goods, they will accommodate the operators in order to comply with the aforementioned rules.
In fact, consumers' "not being truthful" has made some operators reluctant to repent, and even intensified their efforts to erode the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
This makes consumers who are already in a weak position even more isolated and helpless, and it is difficult to compete with operators and online platforms who have resources in terms of commodity quality, information technology, and transaction rules.
The above judicial interpretations firmly stand on the side of consumers and vigorously defend the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
Signing for a product only means that the consumer has received the product. Before the consumer has opened the package and inspected the product, it is impossible to make a judgment on the quality of the product and whether the product conforms to the description of the merchant.
The "standard terms" that the merchant "signs the receipt as a qualified product" is obviously unreasonable.
In addition, according to the "Consumer Rights Protection Law", in addition to consumer-made, fresh and perishable, online download or consumer unpacked audio-visual products, computer software and other digital commodities, newspapers and periodicals delivered. , consumers can enjoy the seven-day right to return the goods without any reason.
According to the judicial interpretation, merchants may not clearly inform consumers when selling, and consumers can also enjoy the right to return for no reason within seven days without the explicit approval of consumers.
In addition, merchants who make commitments on commodities other than the aforementioned 4 categories of commodities shall not go back on their promises.
In addition, it should be noted that the above-mentioned judicial interpretation has also made targeted provisions for the current popular online live streaming, and treats the live streaming platform and the operator as an online operator.
Therefore, according to the judicial interpretation, the sale of goods in the online live broadcast room damages the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. The online live broadcast marketing platform operator cannot provide the real information of the live broadcast room operator, and consumers can request the live broadcast marketing platform to bear the liability for compensation.
Accordingly, the live broadcast platform must fulfill the corresponding audit and gatekeeping responsibilities, otherwise it will be held accountable.
In general, the judicial interpretation stands from the perspective of consumers and common sense, so that vulnerable consumers will not be calculated by operators and online platforms everywhere.
In particular, the judicial interpretation denies that online platforms and operators enjoy the right of unilateral or final interpretation, which is equivalent to abolishing the overbearing practice of "the final interpretation right belongs to the merchants".
In the process of online shopping and rights protection, consumers will no longer worry about being treated unequally, which also forces operators to pay attention to consumer rights, operate in compliance with regulations, and create a shopping environment that is more conducive to consumer experience.
Comics/Chen Bin