Reporter Xue Jianghua and correspondent Ni Lizhu reported: Today is the 3.15 Consumer Rights protection day, the reporter learned from the Panyu court about a case of consumers' purchase of wooden doors, and the judge supported everyone to teach how to protect their rights when they encounter similar situations.
In recent years, wooden doors have gradually become popular items of choice in home decoration because of their simple and atmospheric style, but the phenomenon of wooden door worms has also caused trouble to many people. When the purchased wooden door or wooden frame is found to have worm holes after a period of use, under normal circumstances, consumers will choose to contact the seller to repair or replace the product, but if the seller refuses to replace the unqualified product, take the attitude of ignoring, not assuming and shirking responsibility, how should the consumer protect his rights? The Panyu court heard a similar case.
The wooden door has not been used for half a year with insect borer holes
On March 20, 2017, the plaintiffs, Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu, ordered a total of eight sets of oak solid wood doors and door frames at the defendant Shiqiao Wei store and installed them, and the warranty period was one year from the date of acceptance. In mid-August of the same year, Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu discovered that two of the door frames had insect moths, and on August 27, they notified the defendant store to request door-to-door testing. On September 3, in the presence of representatives of both sides, live mealybug borers were removed from the door frame wood, and the evidence was conclusive, but the defendant Shiqiao Wei store refused to admit that its product quality was unqualified, and asked the plaintiff to find an insect pest control company to test the house.
The test conclusion is that the product was rejected by the whitefly worm moth merchant
After Guangzhou Huamou Termite Control Engineering Co., Ltd. visited the plaintiff's house and furniture twice, it was concluded that the products of a certain store in Shiqiao were mothed by mealybugs, and no insect pests were found in the houses of Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu and other wooden furniture. After difficult negotiations, the defendant agreed to replace the two sets of door frames that were first found to be mothed free of charge (which was replaced and installed on 28 September 2017). In the course of this negotiation, the plaintiffs, Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu, successively found worm holes in other door frames and notified the defendants, but the defendant stores did not follow up on the situation reflected by the plaintiff and refused to bear the follow-up responsibility for the unqualified quality of their products. On October 9, 2017, the plaintiff discovered that one of the door panels had cracked and notified the defendant, but the defendant never came to the door to test and solve it.
The defendant Shiqiao Mouwei store adopted an attitude of ignoring, not bearing and shirking responsibility for the goods sold of unqualified quality, and the plaintiff's legal request for replacing the entire batch of unqualified quality products had been clearly rejected without reason. The plaintiffs, Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu, sued the defendant, a Certain Wei store in Shiqiao, to the court.
The court ruled that the defendant refunded the purchase price and demolished the wooden door involved in the case
The Panyu court held that the eight sets of oak doors purchased by the plaintiffs Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu from the defendant Shiqiao Wei store had quality problems, and were damaged by the powdery beetle worms and insects entrained by the wooden door itself, and the court confirmed it. The defendant did not replace all the oak doors involved in the case that were all subjected to insect moths in time, and the plaintiff had the right to request the termination of the contract, and it demanded that the defendant refund the purchase price of 10,880 yuan, which the court upheld. The defendant, Shiqiao, a Certain Wei store, should dismantle the eight sets of oak doors involved in the case, and the necessary expenses such as demolition and transportation shall be borne by the defendant. If the defendant does not dismantle it within the time limit specified by the court, the plaintiff has the right to dismantle it on its own.
The oak door involved in the case was purchased by the defendant Shiqiao Wei store from a regular manufacturer, and when the delivery and installation were accepted by the plaintiffs Ms. Wu and Mr. Liu, only from the appearance could not find that there were parasitic entrained whiteflies in the oak door, the existing evidence could not confirm that the defendant had fraudulent behavior when providing the goods, and the plaintiff demanded that the defendant pay three times the price of compensation of 32640 yuan, there was no factual basis, and the court did not support it.
【Judge's Statement】
Article 24 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests stipulates that where the goods or services provided by business operators do not meet the quality requirements, consumers may return them in accordance with national regulations or the parties concerned, or require business operators to perform obligations such as replacement or repair. Article 55 provides: Where proprietors provide goods or services fraudulently, they shall, at the request of consumers, increase compensation for the losses they have suffered, and increase the amount of compensation to three times the price of the goods purchased by consumers or the cost of receiving services; Where the amount of increased compensation is less than 500 yuan, it shall be 500 yuan. Where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions.
At the same time, the judge reminded consumers that when purchasing goods or receiving services, they must inspect the goods and obtain and retain relevant invoices and other shopping vouchers. When the legitimate rights and interests of daily consumption are endangered, the evidence should be preserved at the first time through video recording or photography; timely rights protection is convenient for fixing evidence and appraisal, communicating and negotiating with business operators to resolve, and relevant audio and video recordings, WeChat, QQ, mobile phone text messages and other records should be saved. If the consultation fails, you can promptly complain to the Consumer Association or the relevant administrative departments, or you can directly file a lawsuit with the court. In addition, the judge also reminded consumers that when concluding a sales contract, the material of the solid wood door, the origin of the solid wood, the warranty period, etc. should also be clearly agreed in writing, and the preferential treatment promised in the oral commitment should also be noted in writing. In the process of trading goods, business operators and consumers shall abide by the principle of good faith, truthfully inform the true situation of goods, and if one party has fraudulent behavior, it will be punished.