Four people, including Jiang, bought 7,800 group purchase coupons for 7-day hotel stay at the price of each 18 yuan on Qunar.com, and then Qunar.com unilaterally frozen all the group purchase coupons and refunded them, which caused disputes between the two sides. After the court of first instance rejected the prosecution of Jiang, Jiang appealed to Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court. Yesterday morning, the second trial of the case was held in Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court.
The 116 yuan hotel group purchase coupon was wrongly marked as 18 yuan.
In August 2014, Xingzhi Hotel reached an agreement with the fun company affiliated to Qunar.com on the 7-day hotel chain Wuxi Central Station Store, where Qunar.com released the group purchase marketing information of the hotel and provided users with electronic consumption vouchers, which were recognized by the hotel.
In November, 2014, Qunar.com published a group purchase product of "7-day hotel chain Central Station Store staying in a traditional twin room for one night" in Wuxi, with a discount of 0.9%, and the group purchase price was 18 yuan. Jiang, Wang, Zhu and Wang bought 2100 copies, 2500 copies, 1900 copies and 1300 copies of goods respectively, which are valid for one year, and paid all the group purchase money, and have received the electronic group purchase coupons issued by the website of Funa Company.
On the first day of the product’s launch, some people spent money with 18 yuan’s group purchase coupons. Qunar.com found that it mislabeled the room with a total price of 116 yuan as 18 yuan, and then unilaterally frozen the above 7,800 group purchase coupons and made a refund.
After receiving the refund notice, Jiang and others sent letters to Qunar.com several times, asking them to perform the contract according to the contract, but they were rejected. Later, Jiang and other four people appealed to the court, requesting that Qunar.com continue to fulfill the group purchase according to the group purchase information published on the website.
Violate the principle of fairness and dismiss the prosecution in the first instance.
When the case was opened in the first instance, Qunar.com said that the employee mislabeled the original cost price of 109 yuan as 7 yuan on the day of the incident, and then the system automatically generated the group purchase price 18 yuan. In the process of reaching an online service contract with four people, including Jiang, there were frauds and major misunderstandings, and the conclusion and contents of the contract violated the basic principles of voluntariness, equal compensation, honesty and credit, fairness and so on. If we continue to perform the contract, it will cause huge losses to the company. Therefore, we request the court to reject the claims of Jiang and others, and file a counterclaim to request the cancellation of the group purchase contract involved.
The court of first instance held that qunar. com’s group purchase information was wrong in expression, and if the group purchaser bought the hotel check-in service with 18 yuan’s group purchase coupon, the payment and service were seriously unequal, which violated the principle of fairness.
The court held that the prices of the 7-day chain hotels in Wuxi involved in the case were all above 100 yuan, and even the hotels with relatively simple facilities needed at least 29 yuan. According to the first-instance judgment, the court revoked the online sales contract reached by four people, including Jiang and Qunar.com, on hotel group purchase coupons, and rejected other claims. Jiang and other four people refused to accept the appeal.
Qunar. com called consumers "cheating"
When the second trial was held yesterday, Qunar.com said that after the price was found to be wrong, the website removed the related products. For some consumers who have already purchased, they will be allowed to continue to stay. "But when we inquired about the appellant’s information, we found that they were suspected of cheating, so we frozen the group purchase coupon and refunded it."
The agent of Qunar.com said that the reason why it is suspected of cheating is because "they are all newly registered users on the day of purchase, and the time period for purchasing group purchase coupons is also the same, and the IP address of their Internet access is the IP address of the hotel."
Jiang and others denied this statement. "I bought it when I thought it was cheap, and I didn’t consider so much." In addition, regarding Qunar.com’s unilateral freezing of group purchase coupons, Jiang and others said, "If the other party thinks that the contract can be revoked, it should be handled in accordance with the law, and the group purchase coupons cannot be frozen and refunded unilaterally. We believe that this behavior violates the relevant provisions of the contract law and is a breach of contract."
In addition, there are some scattered buyers of the group purchase products involved, and Qunar.com has fulfilled these contracts normally. This differential treatment violates the appellant’s right to fair trade.
Yesterday, the court did not pronounce a sentence in court.
Text/reporter Kong Dejun