Poor old people homemade sauerkraut online sales of 9 yuan 9, but by the buyer claim 1,000 yuan. Is there a legal basis for the consumer's claim for this move or is it suspected of extortion?
9 pieces 9 online sale of homemade sauerkraut
The man was claimed $1,000 by the buyer
Approaching "315", due to the issues involving "professional counterfeiters" and "consumer rights", the matter of "online sales of 9.9 yuan of sauerkraut buyers claiming 1,000 yuan" has caused huge controversies on the Internet.
The incident originated on March 1, when the party, Lin Mou, posted a video on social media in which Lin's father was told that he had been claimed 1,000 yuan for homemade sauerkraut. At present, the video has more than 70,000 likes and more than 4,000 comments on the platform, and netizens have expressed sympathy for the suffering of the elderly.
Yesterday evening, the parties publicly responded to the matter through a short video, and revealed the specific details of the incident, according to Lin's description in the video, it can be learned that the buyer complained that sauerkraut is a three-no product, according to the provisions of the law, the seller is required to return the goods for a refund and compensate 1,000 yuan, and if the money is given, the lawsuit will be withdrawn.
Lin mou believes that he has met a professional counterfeiter, saying that he will not give this money. He also said: "Where is your conscience of the gang that is risking the name of cracking down on counterfeiting, and if you seek benefits in this way and harm the common people, will your conscience not be painful?" If I were to give it to you, thousands and thousands of people would have suffered the same fate. ”
As the incident continues to ferment, the incident has aroused widespread discussion on social media, and public opinion is almost in a one-sided trend at present.
While expressing sympathy for the elderly, netizens have also questioned whether the buyer is a professional counterfeiter, and some people believe that knowing the fake and buying a fake, claiming under the banner of a professional counterfeiter is actually a disguised act of extortion.
Are the sauerkraut sellers wronged?
In this incident, whether the consumer's claim is to defend his rights according to law, or is the professional counterfeiter blackmailing porcelain, and the key to the question is whether the old man's homemade sauerkraut belongs to Sanwu products? Do I need to sell after i need a logo?
In this regard, some lawyers said that according to Article 28 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Quality and Safety of Agricultural Products:
Where agricultural products sold by agricultural product production enterprises, farmers' professional cooperative economic organizations, and units or individuals engaged in the purchase of agricultural products shall be packaged or labeled in accordance with regulations, they shall be packaged or marked before they can be sold. The packaging or label shall indicate the product's name, place of origin, producer, production date, shelf life, product quality grade, etc. in accordance with regulations; where additives are used, the names of additives shall also be indicated in accordance with regulations.
Article 48: "Whoever, in violation of the provisions of Article 28 of this Law, fails to package or label an agricultural product sold in accordance with the provisions, shall be ordered to make corrections; if the correction is not made within the time limit, a fine of not more than 2,000 yuan may be imposed." ”
According to the incident, Lin's homemade sauerkraut is not a pre-packaged food, but belongs to edible agricultural products (primary processed agricultural products), although there is no production and operation license, but it is still necessary to do some of the origin, production date of such basic identification, if necessary agricultural products can also do some professional qualification testing.
Therefore, the buyer's claim has a certain legal basis, but from an ethical point of view, if the buyer is for profit-making purposes, for 1,000 yuan compensation to crack down on counterfeiting, then this kind of behavior is indeed not worth advocating.
Professional counterfeiter or professional extortionist?
In fact, in recent years, similar cases have not been few, and the claims have been made by groups of farmers who lack some basic commercial food regulations and inadvertently bring opportunities to counterfeiters.
As early as last December, the "10 times claim for homemade sausages sold online" also attracted widespread attention.
The person concerned is a pork stall owner in Sichuan who usually sells homemade bacon and sausages online. On the eve of the Spring Festival, a Shanxi netizen saw one of his voices and took the initiative to contact him to buy 2,000 yuan of sausages.
Afterwards, the pork stall owner was sued by the buyer because his sausage was a prepackaged food, without any food labels and information, nor did he have a production license, and filed a lawsuit for a refund of one to ten.
In the end, the court ruled that the plaintiff buyer's claim that the defendant was producing without a license was not supported. The defendant was ordered to refund the plaintiff's purchase price of 1,000 yuan and reject the plaintiff's other litigation claims.
According to the notice of the court, it can be seen that the plaintiff buyer in the incident has previously had a number of cases involving consumer compensation in the court, and the WeChat chat and transaction results between the buyer and the seller can be seen that the buyer purchased a fresh sausage of 2,000 yuan in advance after understanding the process of making sausages by the defendant, and the two parties also communicated on whether to package, indicating that the defendant sold bulk food, not prepackaged food, and the sale of bulk food did not need to be marked on the packaging.
The judgment of this case is also considered by the majority of netizens to be a case of "supporting" the online sale of local specialties, so it is reasonable that public opinion in the "sauerkraut case" supports the peasants and the elderly. As Luo Xiang once said, the law is only the minimum moral requirement for people, and if a person claims to be disciplined and law-abiding, then this person is likely to be a personal scum.