Online Store Fraud Consumers? "Refund One, Penalize Three" No Negotiation!

“Dear, your purchased item has been shipped. Please be patient…” Hearing this phrase during online shopping is the most reassuring. However, for Zhang Ming (pseudonym), who lives in Jinyuan District, Taiyuan City, after receiving this logistics notification, he faced a wait of more than twenty days.

After repeatedly “arguing” with the online store, Zhang Ming chose to protect his legal rights as a consumer through the law.

On May 4, 2024, Zhang Ming purchased a toilet from the online store “MouMou Home Decoration Building Materials Flagship Store” operated by Sunshine Industrial Co. (pseudonym), paying 979.17 yuan.

That day, the platform showed “Expected shipment before 24:00 on May 5, delivery before 24:00 on May 8.”

The next day, Zhang Ming found that the logistics information had been updated to “Your order has been picked by a third-party seller, awaiting outbound delivery to MouMou Jieda, tracking number S3076*****.”

On May 8, the goods had not been delivered, so Zhang Ming contacted the online store.

The store customer service explained: “Dear, your item has already been shipped.”

“Shipped on the 6th, on the way to Taiyuan, Shanxi. Once arrived, the courier will contact you.”

“Your item is direct logistics delivery. Logistics information cannot be updated during transit. Once it arrives locally, it will be updated immediately. Please wait patiently for the courier’s call.”

In response to Zhang Ming’s repeated inquiries, the customer service promised delivery by May 11.

On May 12, the goods still had not arrived. The customer service replied: “Dear, it is on the way to the destination. Expected delivery on May 14. Please wait for the logistics to contact you.”

On May 14, Zhang Ming’s wait was again in vain. This time, the customer service said: “Logistics feedback indicated that on May 13, the item was found damaged during delivery, requiring a change of logistics company and re-shipment.”

During this period, Zhang Ming logged into the logistics company’s official website to check the tracking number provided by the online store. The website showed: “This tracking number does not exist in the system. Please re-enter.”

Zhang Ming said: “I also called the logistics company. They clearly stated they couldn’t find this tracking number. It definitely hasn’t been handed over to the logistics carrier yet.”

It wasn’t until May 27 that the online store handed over the toilet to another logistics company. On June 1, when the goods were delivered, Zhang Ming chose to refuse acceptance.

“I will seek legal rights!” Frustrated, Zhang Ming sued the operator Sunshine Industrial Co. to court, requesting the court to annul the online shopping contract, demand a refund of the payment, and seek triple damages.

After accepting this online contract dispute case, the Taiyuan Jinyuan District People’s Court applied simplified procedures and held a public hearing.

“The merchant received the payment but did not actually ship the goods. Instead, they fabricated fake tracking numbers and falsely claimed damage to deceive consumers.” “This behavior seriously infringes on consumers’ legitimate rights. I choose to speak out for myself and for other consumers,” Zhang Ming said in court.

“The key issue in this case is whether the online store operator engaged in false shipping? Whether such behavior constitutes consumer fraud and warrants punitive damages?” Judge Li Jinping explained.

The court’s investigation found that Zhang Ming placed an order and paid for goods from Sunshine Industrial Co.'s online store, forming a valid online sales contract, which both parties should fulfill according to law.

However, after Zhang Ming paid, Sunshine Industrial fabricated a nonexistent tracking number and entered it into the system, creating a false impression of shipment. Proof from the logistics company confirmed the falsity of the tracking number involved.

Moreover, during the long delay in delivery and Zhang Ming’s repeated inquiries, the online store customer service repeatedly made false promises of delivery, concealing the fact that the goods had not been shipped. Therefore, Sunshine Industrial’s behavior constitutes false shipment and breach of contract.

The “Measures for Penalty of Acts Violating Consumer Rights” stipulate that any operator who deceives consumers to obtain payment or fees without providing goods or services as agreed commits fraud.

Judge Li Jinping stated, “To determine whether an operator commits fraud, one must consider whether the operator had fraudulent intent, whether they engaged in fraudulent acts, whether the consumer was misled by the fraud, and whether the consumer made a false statement based on that misperception.”

In this case, Sunshine Industrial, as the seller, engaged in false shipment by entering fake tracking numbers and repeatedly promising false delivery times, deceiving the consumer.

These actions created an illusion of normal contract performance, causing Zhang Ming to remain in error and wait continuously, incurring unnecessary time and opportunity costs.

“Sunshine Industrial, as the operator, intentionally fabricated facts and concealed the truth to occupy the consumer’s payment without fulfilling their obligations,” Judge Li Jinping said.

Therefore, Sunshine Industrial’s conduct has exceeded simple breach of contract and constitutes consumer fraud!

“The online store’s behavior meets the characteristics of fraud as defined in the ‘Measures for Penalty of Acts Violating Consumer Rights,’ infringing on consumers’ right to information and fair transaction, disrupting the normal market order,” Judge Li Jinping further explained.

The “Consumer Rights Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China” states that if a business provides goods or services with fraudulent conduct, they shall compensate the consumer for losses upon request, with the compensation amount being three times the purchase price or service fee; if the amount is less than 500 yuan, it shall be increased to 500 yuan.

Accordingly, the Taiyuan Jinyuan District People’s Court legally ruled to annul the online shopping contract between Zhang Ming and Sunshine Industrial Co., requiring Sunshine Industrial to pay Zhang Ming 979.17 yuan within ten days of the judgment’s effective date and to pay triple damages of 2,937.51 yuan.

“Courts regulating the false shipment behavior of platform merchants support us consumers. Thank you, court!” Zhang Ming said happily after receiving the judgment.

Currently, online consumption provides great convenience in daily life and has become an important way for the public to shop.

This case not only protects consumers’ legitimate rights and interests, ensuring their right to information, choice, and fair trade, but also serves as a warning to dishonest operators: the internet is not outside the law.

“We aim to clarify value orientation through individual cases, leading operators to honest business practices, boosting consumer confidence and sense of security, encouraging consumers to ‘dare to buy’ and ‘willing to buy,’ while helping operators expand broader and more sustainable markets, promoting steady and long-term development of online consumption,” Judge Li Jinping said.

He also reminded consumers to promptly retain evidence and bravely use legal weapons to defend their rights when facing false shipments, malicious delays, or other infringements, making their shopping experience safer and more secure.