"Husband, are you crazy? Expired duck eggs also to buy? "My wife looked incredulous." Hehe, just wait and see, this is our 'cash cow'! Qian Yanlong smiled mysteriously. Who would have thought that these 46 expired salted duck eggs almost made a supermarket unable to eat and walked around?
Have you ever been in a situation where you went to the supermarket and found an expired item, and then reported it to the supermarket in a state of indignation? Recently, there was such a "rights protection" incident in Shanghai, but the result was a big surprise.
Here's what happened: Qian Yanlong and his wife took their 2-year-old son to the supermarket to do some shopping. It was originally a happy family time, but who knew that Qian Yanlong found a "treasure" on the shelf - salted duck eggs that had expired for one day.
If you are an ordinary person, you must avoid it. But Qian Yanlong was good, he bought 6 coins without saying a word, and deliberately asked the cashier to make 6 small receipts separately. Puzzled, his wife asked him why he did this, and he just said mysteriously, "Wait and see!" "
The next day, Qian Yanlong went to the supermarket again, this time he was even more ruthless, directly bought 40 expired salted duck eggs, and still insisted on 40 small receipts. This can make his wife confused: "Are you in the water in your brain?" Why do you buy so many expired things? "
Qian Yanlong said triumphantly: "Fool, this is our 'cash cow'!" After speaking, he immediately called the market supervision department to report the supermarket for selling expired food. This trick is really "ruthless" enough, and it directly panics the supermarket.
The supermarket owner hurriedly called Qian Yanlong, apologized sincerely, and expressed his willingness to pay 10 times the compensation in accordance with the law. 46 salted duck eggs cost a total of 101.2 yuan, and 10 times the compensation is 1012 yuan. Now it's good, Qian Yanlong not only got 46 duck eggs for nothing, but also made a fortune.
But Qian Yanlong is eating scales and iron-hearted! He has to calculate it according to 1,000 yuan per order, and 46 orders are 46,000 yuan, and not a single point less. This can make the supermarket owner angry, and directly scold him for extortion.
Look, this is a "smart" person! He pondered the provisions of the "Food Safety Law" clearly: consumers can claim compensation of 10 times the price or 3 times the loss if they buy food that does not meet food safety standards, and if it is less than 1,000 yuan, they can be compensated at 1,000 yuan.
Qian Yanlong felt that he was really a master of law! Each ticket is less than 1,000 yuan, so it will be counted as 1,000 yuan! 46 small tickets, isn't that 46,000 yuan? It's a great deal!
It's a pity that his wishful thinking crackled, but in the end he touched a gray nose. The court won't buy his account! The judge said, you know that the duck eggs are expired and still buy so much, and you still have to issue separate invoices, which is normal consumption behavior? It's clear that he wants to take advantage of the legal loopholes!
The court finally ruled that the supermarket was indeed at fault and had to pay 10 times the compensation, but it was calculated according to 46 duck eggs and paid 1,012 yuan. In addition, if Qian Yanlong's money for duck eggs is returned, the duck eggs will also have to be returned to the supermarket.
To be honest, is the "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior like Qian Yanlong really safeguarding the rights and interests of consumers? On the surface, he is punishing bad businessmen. But if you think about it, isn't this just taking advantage of the law? What is the difference between using the law as a tool for enriching money for the sake of selfish interests and extortion?
We support legitimate rights protection and fight against counterfeit and shoddy goods. However, rights protection cannot become "false rights", and cracking down on counterfeiting cannot become "robbery". Behaviors like Qian Yanlong's not only do not play a supervisory role, but may disrupt the market order, and even cause some small businesses that operate in good faith to suffer unnecessary blows.
In fact, to protect the rights and interests of consumers, we need to work together. In case of quality problems, timely feedback and reasonable complaints are the right approach. Merchants should also take this as a warning, strengthen management, and prevent the occurrence of such incidents. Only when consumers and businesses work together can we create an honest and healthy consumption environment.
So in the end, I would like to ask: in the face of expired food sold in supermarkets, will you choose to report directly or communicate with the merchant first? As consumers, how can we better protect our rights? What do you think about this?