Recently, consumers or their family members from Beijing, Gansu, Fujian, Hunan, Guangdong and other provinces have shared their rights protection experiences related to a product in WeChat groups. The amount of money involved in each person ranges from 1,000 yuan to nearly 10,000 yuan, but there is a general feeling - "Why is it so difficult to find the subject who is responsible?" ”
Their rights came from a full-spectrum household cleaner called "Bolojing". Since April this year, from time to time, promoters have been selling this detergent in the above-mentioned areas.
According to the bottle of the product, this cleaner is produced by Nanjing Yunmujin Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Yunmujin Company"), claiming to "turn oil into water" and "all-effect cleaning", which can not only clean stoves, tiles, painted walls, leather products, but also microwave ovens, ovens and kitchenware.
━━━━━
The elderly buy a large number of detergents, involving many provinces across the country
"Beijing, 4,000 yuan, age 84, suffering from Alzheimer's; Xiamen, 1,000 yuan, age 71; Guangzhou, 9,000 yuan, age 55; Beijing, 4990 yuan, 68 years old, suffering from Alzheimer's disease......"
Recently, Ms. Zhou from Beijing provided a group solitaire information to a reporter from the Beijing News, counting the region, consumption amount, age and special physical condition of the detergent buyer. Statistics show that the total consumption amount has reached nearly 100,000 yuan, and most of the buyers are elderly, and some of them also suffer from Alzheimer's disease and other diseases.
Through the narration of some consumers, the reporter learned that these household sales use the same model: the promoter first shh
"The salesman will also open the online store and show the elderly people in the house the online price to convince them that the price of the sale is much lower than the market price." A family member of a consumer said.
Ms. Zhou told reporters that her grandmother was old and suffering from Alzheimer's disease. On May 24 this year, the elderly man spent 3,992 yuan in cash to buy 60 bottles of detergent at home, and the promoter did not issue receipts and invoices. Another family member of a consumer in Beijing said that the promoter guided the elderly to open the "quick binding" function to pay.
Regarding the effect of "Bolojing" all-in-one cleaner, the feedback obtained by the reporter is that "it has a large odor and chokes the nose" and "it has no particularly good effect on old oil stains".
The price of the "Bolojing" detergent purchased by the above-mentioned consumers is mostly about 70 yuan, 500 ml per bottle. The reporter searched on a number of e-commerce platforms and found that some stores are selling this product, showing that the price is more than 100 yuan per bottle, but there is almost no sales.
The reporter inquired about the same type of mainstream brand detergent and found that domestic brands with the same capacity are mostly about 10 yuan per bottle, and imported brands are around 20 yuan per bottle.
▲On an e-commerce platform, a screenshot of the detergent sales page.
━━━━━
The dealer could not be found to return the goods, and the consumer was in a dilemma of protecting his rights
"Even if there is no problem with the product, consumers also have the right to return the product without reason within seven days, not to mention that the price of detergent is too high, and there is exaggerated publicity and inducing consumption, why is it so difficult to refund and return?" Ms. Zhou pointed out the difficulties faced by rights protection.
After defending their rights through multiple channels, they found that they could not find a real dealer. Whether it is to complain to the market supervision department, report the case to the public security organ, or call the 12345 hotline. At the end of the day, consumers learn that "whoever sells the product looks for whom".
Since door-to-door sales are mostly "one-sided", it is difficult for consumers to find salesmen. Some consumers tried to contact the market supervision department in Nanjing, where the manufacturer is located. With the assistance of the market supervision department, Ms. Zhou connected with a person in charge of Yun Mujin Company surnamed Guo.
In the call recording provided by Ms. Zhou, the person in charge stated that "it is not a product quality problem, the thing is not sold to you by me, we are just wholesale, and do not assume unnecessary responsibility". Subsequently, the person in charge said that they could help negotiate with the market supervision department, given that they had found them.
After negotiation, the promoter refunded Ms. Zhou 3,500 yuan in two installments, and said, "Don't trouble us in the future." As the number of consumers defending their rights increases, the method of negotiation is no longer effective. The manufacturer insists that it has nothing to do with it, but the consumer who does not have the bill in hand cannot find a dealer.
In this regard, the reporter contacted the Market Supervision Bureau of Pukou District, Nanjing City on October 9. The staff of the bureau said that the administrative law enforcement agencies need evidence to enforce the law, and the manufacturer said that it has nothing to do with the dealer, and "the responsibility is clear". If you want to return the product for a refund, you must either find the invoicing entity of the invoice or find the dealer, "whether the manufacturer is willing to give you a return and refund depends on its social responsibility." ”
On the same day, the reporter also contacted the above-mentioned person in charge of Yun Mujin Company. She said, "Whose products you buy must have a sales method and payment records, so if it doesn't work, go to the police." ”
To the confusion of Ms. Zhou and other consumers, manufacturers and promoters were reluctant to name the real dealer, no matter which department asked.
━━━━━
Is the product okay? Experts point out four major problems based on packaging
The person in charge of Yun Mujin Company has repeatedly emphasized that "there is no problem with the product". According to the product packaging provided by consumers, the reporter contacted Che Siying, an associate professor at the School of Chemical Engineering of Zhejiang University of Technology, and found that there were many problems with the efficacy and ingredient list displayed on the packaging.
The slogans on the product packaging include "turning oil into water", "antibacterial rate of 99%", "can form an antioxidant protective layer on the surface of objects", etc., Che Siying said that from the ingredient list, "Bolojing" detergent cannot realize the transformation of oil into water.
▲ "Bologen" all-in-one household cleaner. Photo courtesy of the interviewee
"In order for oil to become water, it must be decomposed, breaking its chemical bonds, generally decomposing into glycerol and fatty acids under strong acid, strong alkali, heating or biological enzymatic hydrolysis conditions, and then further complete decomposition to obtain water and carbon dioxide. Looking at the ingredient list of this cleaner, it should be an acidic solution. Its total acidity is weakly acidic, not as strong as it is strong. If there is a strong acid or alkali, the corrosiveness will become stronger, and it will definitely hurt your hands, so this is a paradox. Che Siying explained that this detergent should take the method of surfactant, pulling the oil into the water, so as to achieve the removal effect, rather than removing the oil through decomposition.
The packaging of "Bolojing" detergent shows that the main ingredients are deionized water, imported surfactants, penetrants, solvents, citric acid, and fruity essence. Che Siying told reporters that the wording of the ingredient list of "Bolojing" detergent is inaccurate, and it should not understand chemistry.
"'Solvent' is a general term, it is obvious that it is the first ingredient deionized water, repeated; 'imported surfactant' generally does not add the word 'import', import refers to the source, not the name of the ingredient, surfactant is also a general term for a class of substances, specifically can have stearic acid, sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, and the surfactant is likely to be the 'penetrant' in the ingredient list." Che Siying explained.
She pointed out that the ingredient list of the "Bolozin" detergent is strange, it is not the name of the specific ingredient, but the general name. "Like I asked you what you had for lunch? You answer that you ate the food. ”
In response to the slogan of "99% bacteriostatic rate", Che Siying said that there were no common bactericidal ingredients in the ingredient list. "Some surfactants have a sterilization function, but they are mainly used to remove oil stains, and are generally not specifically used for sterilization. Commonly used bactericidal ingredients, such as hydrogen peroxide, potassium permanganate, ethanol, iodine, cheap and easy-to-use ingredients are not seen in its ingredient list. Therefore, the inhibition rate of 99% is questionable. Che Siying explained.
In addition, depending on the formulated composition, the detergent does not achieve the "formation of an antioxidant protective layer". Che Siying explained that there are generally two ways to form an antioxidant protective layer: one is to add antioxidant ingredients, such as vitamin C and polyphenols, which are not included in the formula; The second is to coat a layer of dense material on the surface to achieve the effect of isolating the air, and the detergent cannot play such a coating role.
Che Siying said that judging from the product packaging information, "Bolojing" all-in-one household cleaner "is just a bottle of ordinary stain remover".
━━━━━
Have an authoritative test report? People familiar with the matter said the testing company had long since ceased business
Not only is there a problem with the efficacy and ingredients claimed by the product, but with the deepening of the reporter's investigation, the "product test report issued by a third-party authority" called by the person in charge of the above-mentioned Yun Mujin company also has problems.
In the dialogue with consumers and reporters, the person in charge has always stated two points: there is no problem with the product, and there is a product test report as proof; The manufacturer has nothing to do with the distributor, the manufacturer just wholesales the goods to them.
The product test report provided by the promoter obtained by the reporter shows that the inspection was commissioned by Yun Mujin Company, and the testing agency is Beijing Yingzhun Testing Technology Service Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Yingzhun Testing Company").
▲Screenshot of the detergent test report.
After reading the test report, Che pointed out that the common unit of total acidity in the test report should be "mg/L" or "g/L", and it is usually not measured as a percentage.
In addition, the report shows that the test is based on the standard GB/T 21241-2007. According to the national standard information public service platform, this standard is a recommended national standard for sanitary ware cleaners, but it has been repealed on July 1, 2023 and replaced by a new standard. The date of inspection on the report is April 6, 2024.
▲The national standard information public service platform shows that GB/T 21241-2007 has been repealed.
The reporter also found that the test report had the logo of the China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS). Subsequently, the reporter called CNAS, and the staff introduced that the CNAS logo represents that the testing institution has been recognized by CNAS, but it is not only recognized by CNAS to carry out testing business.
According to the guidance of the staff, the reporter did not inquire about the British testing company among the accredited institutions on the CNAS official website. In the "Announcement on Suspension of Cancellation" on the official website, the reporter inquired that Yingzhun Testing Company had voluntarily applied for cancellation of all approved scope on July 21, 2021.
▲According to the official website of CNAS, the company has voluntarily applied for cancellation of all the accreditation scope.
For the use of the CNAS logo in the test report after cancellation, the staff said that they can complain and report to the relevant departments of CNAS.
With a series of questions, the reporter tried to contact the Yingzhun Testing Company, but did not find the public contact information. According to the test report and the company's website, the company is located in Tongzhou District, Beijing. On October 9, the reporter went to visit the place. In this four-story building, which covers a variety of formats such as distribution stations, auto repair shops, chess and card rooms, the reporter did not find the Yingzhun testing company. A man familiar with the building said that the company was long gone.
The reporter searched for "Beijing Yingzhun Testing Technology Service Co., Ltd." on the China Judgment Network, and retrieved a total of 8 documents, most of which were provided by Yingzhun Testing Company in the dispute over the sales contract. In a down jacket sales contract dispute, the report issued by the Yingzhun Testing Company provided by the seller showed that the down content was 95%. Commissioned by the court to re-test, the down content was 3.3%. In the end, the court did not accept the test results of the company.
In a civil judgment of the first instance of a lease contract dispute, the reporter found that Yingzhun Testing Company, as the defendant, was the defendant and the leased party pursued rent and liquidated damages. In the court argument, Yingzhun Testing Company said, "We are facing the company's bankruptcy due to poor management, and sold all office supplies and equipment to a waste recycling company on July 7, 2021 and prepared to load and unload them on the same day." ”
The leased address involved in the case is the address shown on the test report and the company's website, and the company said that it sold the device on July 7, 2021 and was ready to move out, which is also consistent with the time when it applied for cancellation of the CNAS license.
According to a number of enterprise information query platforms, Yingzhun Testing Company was Beijing Journey to the West Trading Co., Ltd. before the change in 2018, and its business scope includes the sale of food, fresh fruits and vegetables, daily groceries, clothing, shoes and hats, etc., and the business scope has increased technical services, technical testing, and technical consulting after the change.
According to the platform, the company is in a state of operation. However, its 2023 annual report stated that the number of social security contributors in the company was 0, and the company's payment situation "was not publicized by the company".
There are signs that there is a problem with the company. The reporter contacted a staff member of a competent department where the company was located. After the reporter said "Yingzhun", the staff member reminded that "the report is basically fake, and the company has long stopped doing it."
The staff said that Yingzhun Testing Company originally did textile testing, and as far as it was known, it did not do detergent testing. "We contacted this company a while ago, and there was only one person left, why did we keep the license and not cancel it? Because of the lawsuit, the company still has the problem of foreign debt. The staff member said.
━━━━━
The manufacturer said that there was no problem with the testing agency and sent the samples for inspection by courier
The information obtained by the reporter shows that there may be problems with the test report issued by the British Zhun Testing Company in April this year. In a conversation with the person in charge of Yun Mujin Company, she said that the testing agency was fine, "it can be proved that it was handed over to the salesman, and he (she) gave us the report."
When the reporter asked about the test report, the person in charge said that he was not very sure and needed to take a look. Subsequently, she told reporters that there are two testing companies, one is a testing company in Hunan sent by Yun Mujin Company, and the other is a Yingzhun testing company sent by Yun Mujin Company's entrusted manufacturer.
However, the test report of the Yingzhun Testing Company showed that it was commissioned by Yun Mujin Company, which was inconsistent with the person in charge's statement.
The reporter asked, which manufacturer and where is the manufacturer entrusted by Yun Mujin Company to produce detergents, and the person in charge bluntly said, "That's my processing plant, why should I tell you?" ”
According to the Product Quality Law, the labeling on the product or its packaging must be truthful, including "the name of the product, the name of the manufacturer and the address of the factory in Chinese". Therefore, in the case of entrusting other manufacturers to produce goods, the name and address of the entrusted manufacturer should be clearly indicated on the packaging of the goods to ensure that consumers can clearly understand the source of production of the products.
For the product testing process, the person in charge said that the sample was taken out from the product and sent directly to the testing company by express, and the other party issued a test report within 15 to 20 working days. The reporter consulted professionals and learned that the method of sending the inspection by express delivery to the prosecution is not standardized.
"The British Zhun Testing Company has long been out of business, is this report sure that it was issued by the British Zhun genuinely?" After being questioned by reporters, the above-mentioned person in charge said that if there is a problem with the test report, it means that its staff gave a fake report.
When the reporter continued to ask, the other party said that he had changed the testing agency, "I can not answer you now", and asked "Why do you have my phone" and "You are looking for my company's stubble", and hung up the phone after speaking.
━━━━━
Lawyer: If there is false publicity, the manufacturer can be held responsible, and the falsification of the test report involves a criminal offense
In view of the difficulties faced in the process of consumer rights protection, as well as possible problems in product packaging and test reports, the reporter interviewed professional lawyers in the consumer field.
· If I can't find a dealer, can I hold the manufacturer accountable?
The person in charge of Yun Mujin insisted that the product was no problem and had nothing to do with the dealer. In this case, can consumers find a dealer to hold Yun Mujin Company accountable?
Bi Xiaoxun, a partner of Beijing Xinnuo Law Firm and a member of the 11th Beijing Lawyers Association Consumer Rights and Interests Legal Professional Committee, told reporters that Yun Mujin's unilateral claims could not be listened to, and the market supervision department needed to carry out an investigation, such as the contract signed between the manufacturer and the dealer, the bill flow, the settlement method, etc., to confirm the relationship between them. If the real sales entity is confirmed to be the manufacturer, the consumer can hold the manufacturer accountable.
Bi Xiaoxun emphasized that the above situation is only applicable to the situation where there is no product quality problem.
· If there is false advertising in the product packaging, is the manufacturer responsible?
If the claimed efficacy of the detergent bottle cannot be realized after professional appraisal, it is false advertising and constitutes consumer fraud under the law. "Fraud in the consumer field mainly refers to the fact that producers and operators deliberately conceal the true situation, inform false information, make consumers fall into a wrong perception, and then make a wrong expression of intent to buy products." Bi Xiaoxun explained that in this case, manufacturers and distributors need to bear the corresponding legal responsibility.
In other words, if it is confirmed that there is false advertising on the product packaging, the consumer can directly hold the manufacturer accountable.
For the sale and purchase formed under consumer fraud, if the consumer wants to revoke the formed sales contract, he needs to file a lawsuit with the court, and can request punitive damages of "one false penalty and three fines". "If this kind of consumer fraud is more common, the market supervision and management department also has the right to require the manufacturer to refund after consumer complaints, but this kind of compensation is not based on the level of revocation of the contract, which is equivalent to a simpler and more efficient handling of the problem and saving the cost of consumer litigation." Bi Xiaoxun told reporters.
· If a product test report is falsified, is it a criminal offence?
"If the product test report provided by Yun Mujin Company confirms that it is fake, the problem will be more serious." Bi Xiaoxun said that this would involve a criminal offense.
If it is indeed a test report issued by the British Quasi Testing Company, and the falsification is true, first confirm whether the company has the corresponding testing qualifications. If there is a qualification, but there is a problem with the test report, the testing institution needs to bear the corresponding legal responsibility; If you do not have the qualifications, you cannot engage in the relevant testing business, and the falsification of the test report involves the forgery of legally valid documents, which is a criminal offense.
If the manufacturer falsifies the test report, although the testing company involved is a private enterprise, it is not a crime of forging official documents of state organs, but it also involves the forgery of legally effective documents, which is also a criminal offense. At the same time, it may also involve the issue of forging privately engraved seals.
· Is a non-liability agreement with the promoter valid?
In the process of defending their rights, some consumers contacted the promoter and refunded the money, but the promoter asked to sign an agreement to make the consumer promise to "not look for trouble" after that. Is this agreement valid?
Bi Xiaoxun said that there is no legal objection to such an agreement, and it mainly depends on whether it is equal and voluntary. However, this agreement only agrees on refunds, and even if the consumer and the promoter sign such an agreement, it will not affect the subsequent liability based on consumer fraud.
In addition, based on similar consumer disputes, consumers can file class action lawsuits to reduce the burden of litigation. When filing a lawsuit, the company can be listed as a third party to facilitate the identification of the problem with the test report.
Bi Xiaoxun told reporters that for the clues of suspected fraud collected by consumers, after complaints and reports, the market supervision and management department should verify it ex officio and give feedback within the statutory time limit. If the market regulation department fails to perform its statutory duties, consumers may file an administrative reconsideration or administrative lawsuit.
Source: Beijing News