Ms Mao of Hangzhou sued Kuchi Bicycle Hangzhou Branch and Beijing Head Office on the grounds of defrauding consumers, demanding a refund of one deposit and compensation for three cars. Kuchi Hangzhou Branch has jurisdiction over Binjiang Court,165438+1October 28th. The reporter was informed that the court accepted the case four days ago.
At the beginning of May this year, Kuchi bicycle entered Hangzhou, which was originally a light and smooth version of the blue-seat green body. At the beginning of June, the "local gold" version was launched, and it also has a charging device in function, which can charge the mobile phone while riding.
In September, Kuchi bicycles broke out in a large area throughout the country, and the deposit could not be refunded. Qianjiang evening news once interviewed the head of Kutcher's Hangzhou branch. At that time, the person in charge said nonsense because of the software upgrade. At that time, a large number of consumers complained to the market supervision department. The reply given by Kutcher Hangzhou Company is that the local branch is only responsible for the maintenance of bicycles, and the Beijing head office is responsible for the specific deposit management and platform operation.
A few days later, Mr. Hu could not be contacted. Kuchi Hangzhou Branch, which was originally leased on the 7th floor of Huashengda Plaza in Binjiang, Hangzhou, went empty overnight.
165438+1On October 20th, Beijing Head Office announced three refund calls, but basically they were either turned off or could not be contacted. At one time, it was even reported that if the deposit was to be refunded, it had to be returned to the Beijing company.
Kutcher introduced the third-party operator "Encyclopedia Technology". Things turned out to be that the operation of Kuchi bicycles was outsourced to customers, and the deposit dispute remained in Kuchi. However, consumers still can't contact Kutcher, and there is still no progress in the deposit incident.
Consumer experience
I want to refund the deposit of 298 yuan.
I found that the payment record was cleared in the background of the APP.
The plaintiff in this case, Ms. Mao, is one of many consumers. In August this year, Ms. Mao rented a cool bike for the first time.
The deposit of Kuchi bicycle is as high as 298 yuan, which is the highest among many bicycles enjoyed by * * *, while the deposit of most other bicycles enjoyed by * * * is only 99 yuan.
Later, Ms. Mao felt that there were fewer and fewer cool bicycles on the market. In the month of 165438+ 10, she wanted to refund the deposit and found that her record of paying the deposit had been cleared in the background of the APP.
After searching online, Ms. Mao realized that Kutcher had been troubled by negative news for a long time, and she chose to take Kutcher to court.
The plaintiff's agent, Lin, is the chief lawyer of Zhejiang Law Firm. He said that the APP service contract was formed between consumers and Kuchi bicycles. Now Kutcher has unilaterally breached the contract and is suspected of defrauding consumers. According to Article 55 of the Consumer Law, one should be refunded and three should be compensated. This is the idea of this prosecution.
Lin said that at present, the victim WeChat group he knows has gathered more than 50 people, and everyone is waiting for the direction of this lawsuit.
Regarding the trend of this case, Mr. Lin predicted that due to the small amount, it would cost 1,000 yuan to refund one and compensate three, and this case is likely to be settled.
Lawyer's statement
This kind of * * * enjoys hitting people with bicycles.
Non-refundable deposit or judgment
People in the legal profession are worried about this bicycle crash. Because such APP service disputes often involve a large number of people, the legal relationship is novel.
Take Kutcher's bicycle as an example. According to the data previously released by the company, as of August this year, the company has put in more than one million bicycles, and the cumulative registered users have exceeded100000. Each user needs to pay a deposit of 298 yuan. If all registered users pay the deposit, the total deposit involved is nearly 3 billion yuan.
The huge amount involved makes it possible for civil cases to be converted into criminal cases.
There are provisions in the contract law, because the nature of the deposit does not belong to the enterprise, its nature and rights still belong to the consumer. If the customer's deposit is used for other purposes of the company, it is suspected of "illegal possession".
If the company is aimed at depositing funds at the beginning of its establishment, it is even worse in nature and is suspected of "fraud". Once suspected of fraud, the person in charge of the company may face life punishment.
Judging from these circumstances, the trend of this case in Binjiang Court is even more exciting.
It is more reliable to solve the problem through legal channels.