Originally worth about 110000 yuan, a used car was sold on salted fish for 110000 yuan. As a result, people really paid for it After the seller cancelled the transaction, he was sued by the buyer. Ms. Yu, the party concerned, said that the reason for the price of RMB 11000 was that she had written a 0 less.
After being sued, Ms. Yu posted her experience on the Internet, which triggered a heated discussion among many netizens. Some people thought that the seller was very unjust, while others questioned whether it was "low-cost diversion" that overturned the car. The upstream news reporter (material reporting mailbox [email protected] ) It is understood that the case was heard for the second time in Taishan people's Court on June 6.
Women's Salted Fish sell used cars, worth 110000, with a price of 110000
According to Ms. Yu, the party concerned, she is engaged in fast food business. In February this year, due to lack of funds, I was ready to cash out a 1.5T model of gilligar technology top configuration car I used. However, she was not very satisfied with the prices offered by the online drop off shop, so she was ready to sell the car on the free fish.
Ms. Yu said that the vehicle was purchased under her husband's name in 2019. The original price was more than 160000, and she only drove more than 20000 kilometers in more than three years. She said that according to her own estimate, she was going to sell the vehicle at the price of 111000 yuan. However, when filling in the price, she was careless and wrote the price as 11000 yuan, "I don't know how to write a zero less."
After the vehicle was connected to the Internet, Ms. Yu said that she did not know that the price was wrongly marked. Until a few days later, someone directly photographed the car and paid for it. She also asked when she would transfer the ownership. Ms. Yu found that she had marked the price of the car at 11000 yuan.
"This price is obviously not marketable." Ms. Yu said that the transaction information showed that the buyer's ID was Mr. Jin. She tried to ask the buyer for a phone number for communication, but the other party did not provide a phone number at the first time, and the phone reserved for receiving goods could not be connected. So she canceled the deal. She said that she had not paid much attention to idle fish since then.
But in April this year, Ms. Yu suddenly received a summons from the court and learned that the other party had taken him to court. In this regard, Ms. Yu said that she was very shocked. How could a mistake of her own be brought to court and face the demand for huge compensation? Later, she sent her experience to the Internet platform, and many netizens expressed sympathy for her experience. Some netizens even said that if he lost the lawsuit, he would buy all the links marked with 1 yuan on the second-hand platform.
Netizen comments
Some netizens also questioned Ms. Yu's "hand error" and believed that her purpose was "low-cost drainage". Ms. Yu provided the reporter with a list of her free fish sales, and said that she had only sold some idle items, and was not a business at all. There was no need for "drainage".
The buyer sued for compensation and participated in several rights protection lawsuits
On June 6, the people's Court of Taishan City, Guangdong Province tried the case. The reporter learned from the indictment and court video that the plaintiff believed that Ms. Yu did not operate in good faith, and closing the order without the buyer's consent should be regarded as a clear notification of non performance of the contract. The second-hand car sold by Ms. Yu is worth about 100000 yuan. Her failure to perform the contract will cause the buyer to spend an extra 90000 yuan to buy the same car. If she sells it, she can also obtain more than 80000 yuan of benefits. Therefore, Ms. yu should bear relevant responsibilities according to law.
Ms. Yu defended herself on behalf of her husband, Mr. Chen. She believed that it was a major misunderstanding to sell the involved vehicle online at a price of 11000 yuan. In view of the first sale of the vehicle, a 0 was omitted. The buyer found out after taking the payment, and then returned all the arrears.
Ms. Yu believes that the plaintiff Huang Li (a pseudonym) has also confirmed that the market price of the second-hand car is more than 100000 yuan. The price she published is a pure mistake. This transaction obviously violates the legal principle of apparent unfairness. She has the right to request the cancellation of the contract, but failed to contact the plaintiff for negotiation.
In addition, the transaction is based on the Xianyu platform. According to Article 4 "transaction" of the user code of conduct of Xianyu community, both parties have the right to close the order after the buyer pays and before the seller delivers. In addition, I only trade some idle and useless goods on idle fish, and I am not a real merchant, so I am not a merchant consumer relationship with the other party.
Idle fish trading agreement
Huang Li believes that the contract between the two parties is established according to Article 49 of the effective e-commerce law. Ms. Yu shall bear the liability for contracting fault and compensate for the loss of interests caused by her own party.
"Later, we found that he (Huang Li) was involved in many lawsuits." Ms. Yu told reporters that they also found that Huang Li had participated in a number of rights protection lawsuits. The reporter then conducted a search through the Chinese referee document network. The results showed that in many cases, the Appellant had the same name, date of birth and address as Huang Li in Xiping County, Henan Province. The content of the lawsuit involved many cases, such as online shopping contract disputes, tort liability disputes, digital product liability disputes, etc., and the number of cases is roughly counted as tens.
Lawyer analysis:
Platform transactions shall comply with platform regulations
Apply for cancellation of the contract according to the principle of obvious unfairness
Hetongyu, a lawyer of Chongqing lejun law firm, believes that according to the provisions of the civil code, e-commerce should comply with the rules of the third-party trading platform, and its rules are also part of the contract. If the trading rules of the e-commerce platform stipulate the circumstances under which the sales transaction contract can be revoked, this is allowed by law.
In addition, if the contract is indeed "obviously unfair", even if the contract is established, the parties can also cancel the sales contract through certain legal procedures. Obviously unfair means that the result of the implementation of civil legal acts is too favorable to one party and too unfavorable to the other party for involuntary reasons.
Linyucheng, a lawyer from Chongqing gongxiao law firm, believes that. In this case, the buyer and the seller voluntarily registered the idle fish account. The idle fish platform service agreement and the idle fish related platform rules signed between them and the idle fish company are the true intentions of both parties, do not violate the mandatory provisions of national laws and administrative regulations, and are legal and effective. Both parties shall perform their respective rights and obligations in accordance with the agreement.
Therefore, according to the transaction rules in paragraph 1 of Article 4 of the code of conduct for users in Xianyu community, Mr. Chen, as a seller, has the full right to close the order and terminate the transaction after the buyer pays and before the shipment.
Secondly, Article 147 of the Civil Code stipulates that "the perpetrator of a civil legal act based on a major misunderstanding has the right to request the people's court or an arbitration institution to revoke it." This article stipulates that the perpetrator of a civil legal act committed on the basis of a major misunderstanding shall have the right to request the people's court or an arbitration institution to revoke it. The seller mistakenly wrote the transaction price of 110000 yuan as 11000 yuan. The transaction price of 11000 yuan is far from the target price, and if the transaction is concluded, it will cause huge losses to the seller, which is against the principle of fairness. Therefore, he can request cancellation according to law.
Finally, according to the provisions of Article 152 of the civil code on the elimination of the cancellation right, the party who has a major misunderstanding shall exercise the cancellation right within 90 days from the date when he knows or should know the reason for cancellation, that is, the Seller shall take the initiative to apply for cancellation of the order 90 days after he knows that the buyer has taken the order.
Upstream journalist pengguangrui