On June 6 last year, Mr. Shu drove to the Shahu Vehicle Administration Office to license his new car. Unexpectedly, the traffic police refused to license the new car because the engine number of the actual vehicle did not match the engine number recorded on the goods import certificate. . According to the receipt issued by the traffic police, Mr. Shu saw that the engine number of the new car was very unclear, and there were many consecutive characters between the numbers.
It turns out that "Range Rover" has become "Range Rover". When he got home and took out the car purchase invoice issued at that time, Mr. Shu discovered that the invoice said "Land Rover", and it was Dynaken "Land Rover", not a Range Rover. After that, Mr. Shu began to question the quality of the vehicle and sent the vehicle to two appraisal agencies in Tianjin and Guangdong for inspection.
The appraisal conclusion is: the engine number of the car is not clear and there are consecutive characters; the cylinder casing, exhaust pipe, vacuum booster brake master cylinder mounting bracket, support rod at the bottom of the chassis and other parts of the engine Severe rust was found; the 12-way power seat only has 10-way function; the spare tire is missing; in addition, the brake pipe is not installed in the brake pipe slot, which may cause brake failure and electrical appliances. If the wiring is not firmly fixed, it may also cause a short circuit and a fire. In the end, the two appraisal agencies agreed that the vehicle did not meet China's national motor vehicle standards.
After several negotiations to no avail, Mr. Shu entrusted a lawyer to file a lawsuit in early June last year, suing the automobile company Kangshun Xiangrui Company to the Huangpi District Court, requesting an order to terminate the car purchase contract and refund the 1.15 million yuan purchase price. Provide triple compensation totaling 3.45 million yuan, etc. The final verdict was that the car company constituted sales fraud and the company was compensated 3.45 million yuan
The court of first instance found that Kangshun Xiangrui Company’s sales behavior constituted fraud and ordered it to return 1.15 million yuan of the consumer’s car purchase price and pay the consumer Compensation will be three times of the car purchase price, totaling 3.45 million yuan. After the first-instance verdict, Kangshun Xiangrui Company was dissatisfied and appealed to the Wuhan Intermediate Court. The Wuhan Intermediate People's Court held that.
The focus of the dispute in this case is that Kangshun Xiangrui Company failed to deliver the vehicle as stipulated in the contract, reduced the configuration (12-way electric leather seats were reduced to 8-way electric leather seats) and virtual configuration (smart keys instead of smart card) constitutes fraud.