Mr. Ni spent more than 80,000 yuan to enroll his daughter Beibei (a pseudonym) in a group class of a training institution so that her daughter could enter Peking University, Tsinghua or the high school attached to the National People's Congress in "junior high school", but in the end, her daughter did not enter the above three schools. Mr. Ni sued the training institution to the court on the grounds of false propaganda, demanding a refund of tuition fees and compensation for losses.
Yesterday, the case was heard in Haidian Court.
Enroll in 80,000 yuan courses in prestigious schools.
Mr. Ni claimed that on October 25th, 2014,65438+2004 10, he signed the Agreement on Student Counseling and Ability Achievement with Beijing Bello Education Consulting Co., Ltd. According to this agreement, after relevant evaluation and evaluation, Bello Company thought that the service designed by Beibei Company could be promoted to a first-class middle school and class in Beijing after no more than 592 hours. Target schools and classes include but are not limited to Peking University High School, Tsinghua High School and China Renmin University (Weibo). Within the validity period of the agreement, if Beibei fails to enter the target school, Beibei Company will refund Mr. Ni 100% of the service fee for reaching the standard.
After the two parties signed the above agreement, Mr. Ni paid the company a service fee of 88,300 yuan, and Beibei also participated in the relevant extracurricular training organized by the defendant. 20 15, Xiao Sheng junior high school, Beijing. Beibei passed the examination for special students majoring in dance and was admitted to Beijing No.11 school.
Parents v. training institution fraud case
Mr. Ni inquired through industrial and commercial registration information that the business scope of Bello School is educational consultation, excluding education and training, and there is no school license. However, Bello Company said in the enrollment propaganda that 65,438+0,000% students can enter famous schools as long as they enroll in their group classes, and made a lot of false propaganda through lectures, emails, etc., misleading him to believe that they have a high education level and enrollment channels. In fact, Bello Company did not obtain a school license. The company concealed the facts and its behavior constituted fraud.
Mr. Ni said that the goals of the ideal school he chose for his daughter were Peking University, Tsinghua and the High School Attached to the National People's Congress. Beibei didn't enter the agreed target school. She went to school as a dance specialty student, which has nothing to do with the service agreed by both parties. Therefore, Bello Company was sued, demanding a refund of service fee of 88,300 yuan, payment of interest loss of 8,388 yuan and compensation of 88,300 yuan, totaling184,988 yuan.
The training school says the goal has been achieved.
Bello Company replied that what Mr. Ni said was untrue. The target schools signed by both parties include No.11 Middle School, and Beibei finally entered No.11 Middle School. The objectives of the agreement signed by both parties have been completed, and the company has fulfilled its contractual obligations. There is no fraud, so I disagree with Mr. Ni's claim.
Bello's evidence in court shows that the company has training agreements with other units. The company provides educational consultation, and there is a training school in Xicheng District to provide training. The courses are also arranged by the training school and there is a school license.
The school also said that Teacher Ni had thanked the school for providing the opportunity to take the exam. In this regard, the school submitted a thank-you speech from Teacher Ni to the court at that time.
It is understood that in the agreement signed by the two parties, in terms of target schools, Peking University High School, Tsinghua High School and National People's Congress High School are all highlighted. Eleven schools are also mentioned in the agreement, but they are not marked together with the above three schools.
The case was not pronounced in court.
■ Follow-up
1 Some institutions offer training courses through "consultation"
Judge Claire Kuo of Haidian Court said that at present, some training institutions do not have school licenses. Within the business scope of these institutions, there will be an educational consultation, and according to this project, these institutions can offer various training courses, and the regulatory authorities have no mandatory regulations on whether training institutions need to apply for school licenses. However, if it is an educational institution that issues certificates, it must have a school license.
Claire Kuo suggested that before enrolling their children for training, parents should inquire about the industrial and commercial registration information of the institution through the enterprise information consulting network, or inquire whether the institution is involved in legal proceedings through the documents of the court information network. At the same time, they can ask the training institution to issue the original license. To participate in qualified training and study, it is necessary to check the school license of the training or educational institution.
Parents should pay attention to keeping receipts and invoices when paying fees, and sue for rights protection in time if there is any problem in the organization. In the trial practice, many parents have been waiting to see the problem, resulting in the disappearance of many problem training units, resulting in the dilemma of safeguarding rights.
2 commitment to school choice is contrary to the "junior high school" policy.
Mr. Ni said that the ideal school he chose for his daughter was the three high schools attached to Peking University, Tsinghua and Renmin University. Among the classes and group classes offered by training institutions, the cost of applying for classes is only a few thousand yuan, but the cost of group classes is nearly 6,543,800 yuan. They choose high-cost group classes in order to let their daughters go to the ideal middle school. At that time, when the organization enrolled students, it promised that the group classes could be attended or not, and the organization would arrange for them to enter the target school. Teacher Ni believes that these arrangements of colleges and universities belong to the "internal channels" to enter the target school.
However, what is the admission principle of "Xiaoshengchu"?
It is understood that since the Beijing Municipal Education Commission initiated the education reform last year, the admission of Xiaoshengchu has always been based on the principle of admission to the nearest school. Although the admission methods in different districts are different, they are mainly dicing admission, special student admission and promoting excellent admission. According to the statistics of the Municipal Education Commission, the proportion of students enrolled in junior high schools nearby has exceeded 70% last year.
This means that computer random allocation has become the most important channel in junior high school, and the possibility of choosing a school is extremely small. Only those with special skills or qualifications for further studies can be considered.
In addition, the Beijing Municipal Education Commission has repeatedly stressed that junior high schools must accept students in accordance with the enrollment plan formulated by district and county education commissions, the designated school service areas, and the enrollment service system for primary schools and junior high schools; It is strictly forbidden for public primary and secondary schools (Weibo) to hold or participate in "pit classes" linked to enrollment held by private schools, so as to ensure the openness and transparency of enrollment in primary schools and junior high schools.
In other words, any publicity or training mode related to school choice is contrary to the policy of junior high school.
remind
It is not easy to guarantee a conditional refund.
Judge Claire Kuo of Haidian Court said that the number of "insurance" disputes is increasing from the cases of training institutions that have been tried. The cost of this kind of training is generally more than 1 10,000 yuan, with a maximum of 300,000 yuan. Generally, the content is to protect one exam, enter a key middle school, and obtain a test paper or relevant certificate.
When signing a "guaranteed" contract with a training institution, parents must read the contract carefully. The so-called "no refund" promises are mostly conditional. After a dispute occurs, the court will generally make a judgment according to the contract.
In addition, the First Intermediate People's Court recently tried three cases of similar training institutions. One of them was a failed candidate of 20 14, who spent nearly 40,000 yuan on a class, but failed to take the college entrance examination again (Weibo). The candidate then sued the training school for a refund, but eventually lost the case because the learning plan of the training institution was not fully implemented.
The presiding judge of the First Intermediate People's Court analyzed that each candidate's own situation is different, and the same learning style of training institutions cannot be suitable for everyone. If the candidate's foundation is not solid, parents' "quick success and instant benefit" will often be counterproductive.