The boom in e-commerce has made online shopping more convenient than ever, but the after-sales service issues that come with it are becoming more and more complex.
One incident that attracted widespread attention was a dispute over the refund of a mink coat in Haining, Jiaxing. A person in charge of the Tmall online store named Xiao Zhu felt incomprehensible and angry at the platform in the face of the buyer's request for a full refund after three years of wearing, as well as the judgment and deduction of the Tmall platform, and demanded a clear basis for refund.
The incident began with a woman from Hebei Province who purchased a men's mink jacket in December 2020 and filed a complaint a week later about the quality of the clothes.
At that time, the two parties negotiated, and Ms. Yang decided to repair it locally, and the online store gave compensation of 200 yuan for the price difference. However, today, three years later, Ms. Yang suddenly asked for a refund for a return, and the Tmall platform also supported this request.
When discussing how to deal with such issues, it is necessary to take into account the after-sales service rules of the e-commerce platform, the quality assurance period of the goods, and the protection of consumer rights and interests.
In this case, Tmall customer service mentioned in an interview that the normal after-sales time is 15 days after the transaction is successful, and some categories of goods can initiate an after-sales application within 90 days after the successful transaction. In addition, there are special circumstances, if the product description does not match, the platform will most likely support a refund.
On the face of it, the refund request for this coat seems to go against the normal after-sales rules. However, the quality problem raised by Ms. Yang and the inconsistency between the product description and the situation became the basis for the platform to support refunds. This leads us to wonder what role product descriptions and quality assurance commitments play in the context of online sales.
Xiao Zhu's online store sold the mink jacket with the label "Imported American Mink", but Ms. Yang's eldest brother claimed that the customs declaration form provided by Xiao Zhu was not from the United States, but from Vietnam and Thailand, which directly related to the accuracy of the product description.
Xiao Zhu later explained that there was indeed a batch of American mink, but it was stopped because of poor sales, and that the fabric used in the dress was imported from Finland or Denmark. In this case, the negligence of the title of the product may have become the legal basis for Ms. Yang's return.
When discussing this event, we also need to pay attention to the issue of the quality of the goods. Ms. Yang mentioned that the mink coat she had purchased had not had any quality problems for five or six years, and that the coat had lost its hair and exposed its skin in less than three days.
Does this mean that the product has a quality problem, or at least fails to meet the expected standards in terms of durability? But Xiao Zhu firmly denied that the clothes had quality problems and made reasonable maintenance recommendations.
In dealing with the incident, the Tmall platform appears to have taken a consumer-friendly stance, even though it has caused financial losses to Xiaozhu's online store. For merchants, this treatment has sparked a discussion about the rights and responsibilities of the platform.
After all, this coat has been worn for three years, why can it still be fully refunded? This question is not only about Xiao Zhu, but also about all merchants on e-commerce platforms.
The contradiction between merchants and consumers is essentially a conflict of contractual relationships. In this case, Xiao Zhu argued that the three years after the completion of the transaction had far exceeded any reasonable deadline for return and exchange.
Ms. Yang and the Tmall platform argue that the defects in the goods are sufficient as a reasonable basis for returns, even if so much time has passed. The core of this controversy is how to define the time limit of after-sales service and the duration of product quality assurance, and how to strike a balance between protecting the rights and interests of consumers and merchants.
Further, this incident also makes people think about the scope of responsibility and power of e-commerce platforms. As a platform provider, Tmall chose to directly deduct the deposit and support the refund in this case, is such a decision ultra vires? At the same time, is Tmall's judgment transparent and reasonable enough?
The dissatisfaction of merchant Xiaozhu stems in part from the lack of communication and explanation in Tmall's handling of disputes.
In addition, this incident also touched on the improvement of the legal environment for e-commerce. At present, the legal framework of e-commerce in mainland China is constantly improving, but there are still many ambiguities at the specific implementation level. In the face of complex business transactions, how to protect their rights and interests in accordance with the law has become an urgent problem to be solved.