For modern "workers", changing jobs for cities and moving houses has become commonplace. So that every time you move, looking at the chaotic environment is undoubtedly a critical blow to the mind, physical strength and endurance.
If you encounter an inattentive moving company again and again, it is almost a half-life.
Last year, singer and writer Wu Hongfei encountered such a bad thing, after she hired Beijing Sifang Brothers Moving Co., Ltd. to move, she was asked to pay expenses that were not told in advance, and the total bill was as high as more than 18,000 yuan.
So Wu Hongfei took the company to court. Yesterday, the Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing Municipality publicly pronounced a verdict on the case.
Committed the crime of forced trading, six people from a Beijing moving company were sentenced
According to @Jingfa Network News, on August 12, the Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing Municipality publicly pronounced a first-instance judgment against Zhao Mouqiang, Xu Moujiang and other defendants of Beijing Sifang Brothers Moving Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Sifang Brothers Moving Company) for committing the crime of forced trading.
The defendant, Sifang Brothers Moving Company, was fined RMB500,000. The company's legal representative, Zhao Mouqiang, was convicted of forced trading and sentenced to four years in prison and fined 40,000 yuan. Xu Moujiang, an employee of the company, and five others were convicted of forced trading and sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from two years to one year and six months, and were all sentenced to fines of 20,000 yuan.
After trial by the court, it was ascertained that between July 2019 and July 2020, in order to grab illegal benefits, zhao Mouqiang, its legal representative and actual controller, agreed with the customer on a lower handling fee by telephone to induce the customer to use the moving service provided by the company, and then instructed the defendants Xu Moujiang, Wen Mouqiang, Dou Moufeng, Dou Moufei, Ren Mouhong, and others who served as the leader of the car team to unilaterally increase the handling costs in the process of handling services, and to stop moving and refuse to leave. Verbal threats and other means forced customers to pay higher service fees, and the number of criminal facts reached 43, which seriously disrupted the market economic order.
After trial, the court held that the defendant unit Sifang Brothers Moving Company forced others to accept services by threatening means, undermined the market order of fair competition, infringed on the victim's freedom of trade, and belonged to the act of forcing others to accept services by threatening methods, and the circumstances were particularly serious.
Defendant Zhao Mouqiang, as the main person in charge of the Sifang Brothers Moving Company, organized and planned to carry out the forced trading behavior, and was the supervisor directly responsible for the company; the defendant Xu Moujiang and 5 other people directly participated in the implementation of the forced trading behavior of the Sifang Brothers Moving Company, and were directly responsible personnel, and the acts of the defendant unit Sifang Brothers Moving Company, the defendant Zhao Mouqiang, Xu Moujiang and other 5 people all constituted the crime of forced trading.
In view of the fact that defendant Zhao Mouqiang admitted guilt and accepted punishment in court, defendant Xu Moujiang and 5 others were accomplices, and there were circumstances of confession and admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment, the court gave defendant Zhao Mouqiang a lenient punishment in accordance with law, and mitigated the punishment of defendant Xu Moujiang and 5 others.
On the basis of the facts of the crime, the nature, circumstances and degree of harm to society, the court renders the above-mentioned judgment in accordance with law.
The 1500 yuan moving fee becomes 18000 yuan
According to the Beijing News reported last year, Wu Hongfei recalled that she searched for "which of the best Beijing moving companies" on a search engine, and the first search results were Beijing Sifang Brothers Moving Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Sifang Brothers Company"). After clicking on the company's official website, Wu Hongfei called the contact number on the website.
On the phone, the staff of Sifang Brothers said that the use of a car costs 300 yuan, an increase of 6 yuan per kilometer outside 10 kilometers; from the entrance of the community to the home 200 meters to walk, charged 200 yuan; in addition, there is no fee for dismantling furniture.
In addition to verbally agreeing on the phone, the two sides also made WeChat confirmation of the charging information.
Wu Hongfei said that the distance he moved was about 30 kilometers, using two vehicles and 6 moving workers. According to the agreement, the total costs should be 1500 yuan to 2000 yuan, but on the night of the move on July 25, the total price of the bills issued by Sifang Brothers reached more than 18,000 yuan.
The bill shows that the moving fee mainly includes two parts: labor cost and vehicle use fee. The former is calculated according to 6 people working 7 hours each, and the cost is 14,600 yuan. However, in the previous telephone and WeChat agreements, the moving company did not mention this fee, nor did it provide a price list.
Regarding the use time of the vehicle, Wu Hongfei also raised objections. Quad Brothers was supposed to arrive at 11:30 a.m. that day, she said, but one car was 2.5 hours late and the other was 5 hours late, and the moving company did not explain why.
To this end, Wu Hongfei did not pay according to the bill and questioned, and the two sides froze for two hours. Wu Hongfei said that that night, the police and the community property rushed to the home to mediate, and after consultation, they paid Sifang Brothers 4,000 yuan.
In 2020. On the evening of July 25, Wu Hongfei exposed the matter on Weibo; three days later, Sifang Brothers issued an "apology" for this. Sifang Brothers confirmed the main facts of the incident and made a "serious apology" to Wu Hongfei. In addition, the company intends to refund the handling fee of 1,000 yuan and the psychological consultation fee of 2,000 yuan, but Wu Hongfei refuses to accept the refund.
On August 18, 2020, Beijing Chaoyang police issued a notice saying that they had recently received a mass alarm that the Sifang company claimed that the price was low and there were no other additional costs before receiving the order, and then urged customers to sign a contract with hidden additional cost clauses on the grounds of hurrying to move. In the process of moving, the porter sits on the ground and starts to demand high labor costs on the grounds of the contract, while verbally threatening, saying that if he does not give money, he will not leave, and will lie in the customer's home. After receiving the report, the police quickly carried out their work, through a large number of return visits to the company's previous service recipients to collect evidence, gradually found out the way they were suspected of forced trading, and arrested the gang members headed by Zhao Mouqiang (male, 24 years old) in one fell swoop, and criminally detained according to law.
Sifang Brothers was fined 1 million yuan
According to Qixinbao, Beijing Sifang Brothers Moving Co., Ltd. was established in 2016 with a registered address of No. 27, Chaoyang North Road, Chaoyang District, and its legal representative, Zhao Zhenqiang.
On August 15 last year, the Beijing Chaoyang District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau applied to the Chaoyang District People's Court for compulsory enforcement of the Administrative Punishment Decision Letter [2020] No. 64 of the Beijing Municipal Supervision and Penalty Zi (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Punishment Decision). The Four Brothers Company was fined 500,000 yuan and applied for an additional fine of 500,000 yuan, a total of 1 million yuan.
The facts of the case mentioned in the court's administrative ruling are very similar to those of Wu Hongfei and Sifang Brothers.
The administrative ruling said: Sifang Brothers did not deny the moving price mentioned by consumers in WeChat, nor did it have other explanations. On July 25, 2020, Sifang Brothers did not clearly and completely inform consumers of the price of moving charges during the whole process of moving for consumers. After the end of the move on July 25, 2020, Sifang Brothers asked consumers for 18,000 yuan in moving fees, which were not recognized by consumers, and after the alarm and property coordination, consumers paid Sifang Brothers Company 4,000 yuan for moving fees. On July 27, 2020, Zhao Zhenqiang, an employee of Sifang Brothers, passed to consumers the apology letter with the official seal and signed by Zhao Zhenqiang and Zhao Moumou through WeChat, and Sifang Brothers wrote in the apology letter that "there is no mention of the labor cost of 300 yuan per person per hour, let alone the price list..." and other contents.
The Beijing Chaoyang District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau issued a warning and a fine of 500,000 yuan for the price violations of sifang brother companies using deceptive or misleading language, writing, etc., to induce consumers to trade with them, to eliminate the impact of false advertising and impose a fine of 300,000 yuan on its false advertising behavior, and to impose an administrative penalty of 300,000 yuan on the price violation in the Administrative Punishment Decision, At present, the Chaoyang District Municipal Supervision Bureau applies to this court to enforce the penalty decision of a fine of 500,000 yuan, and applies for the enforcement of an additional fine of 500,000 yuan, a total of 1 million yuan.
The result of the court's judgment was that the penalty decision of a fine of 500,000 yuan and the penalty content of an additional fine of 500,000 yuan were granted.
In addition, in July 2021, Beijing Sifang Brothers Moving Co., Ltd. was included in the list of abnormal operations by the Beijing Chaoyang District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau for failing to publish its annual report in accordance with the time limit stipulated in Article 8 of the Interim Regulations on the Disclosure of Enterprise Information. Previously, in 2019, the company was also classified as abnormal because it could not be contacted through its registered domicile or business premises.
Editor| Sun Zhicheng, Du Hengfeng, Du Bo
Proofreading | Lu Xiangyong
Daily economic news synthesized from @ Jingfa Network Affairs, Beijing News, Qixinbao, etc
Daily economic news