Foshan mobile was convicted of fraud and double co

Foshan mobile was convicted of fraud and double compensation

this is the first time that the court has found that telecom operators' forcing users to customize value-added services constitutes fraud

legal system Guangzhou, January 28 (Xinhua) -- you Chunliang's correspondent Lin Jinbiao learned today from the people's Court of Chancheng District, Foshan that there is no need to worry about the colonization and eating of termites and other insects in Guangdong Province, The court recently pronounced a judgment in the first instance on a case of infringement of the rights and interests of consumers caused by telecommunications services, and the judgment supported the plaintiff's claim that the defendant Guangdong Mobile Communication Co., Ltd. Foshan branch (hereinafter referred to as "mobile company") double its deducted monthly information fee of 16 yuan, and provided a bill of charges. It is reported that this is the first time that the national court system has applied the consumer protection law to determine that the compulsory customization of dream business by the communication department constitutes fraud and double compensation

Mr. Chen is a smart card user of "M-Zone" launched by the defendant mobile company. On April 14 last year, it received a push letter from "" with the name of "you have unread messages". The public's worries have not been eliminated. Chen then clicked to download the information, but first prompted "connecting" and then displayed "unknown response". After Chen hung up the connection, he called the defendant's customer service to check the phone bill balance and found that he had been deducted 8 yuan. Chen later logged in to the mobile dream station and found that he had been forced to customize the "women's street" WAP business launched by Guangzhou news information company, with a monthly charge of 8 yuan. Afterwards, Mr. Chen complained to the defendant many times for compensation and printing the list, but they were all rejected, so he filed a lawsuit with the people's Court of Chancheng District, requiring the defendant to double the compensation for his losses and printing the M-Zone bill list

the court of Chancheng District held that the defendant mobile company, as the operator of basic telecommunications business, has a cooperative business relationship with Guangzhou Shixun company, the second defendant of the operator of value-added telecommunications business, rather than just an agency charging relationship

in addition, as the defendant of the basic telecom operator, the mobile company has the obligation to review and monitor the value-added telecom service items and contents and the push information sent through its operation network. In this case, the push information received by the plaintiff belongs to the offer information of customized value-added telecommunications services, but the content displayed in the message is only "you have unread messages", there is no customization prompt, tariff standard, and does not contain the main terms of the contract. It directly leads to the consequences of customization and deduction of information fees in the experimental method of car wheels just by clicking. Therefore, this information has obvious characteristics of inducement and deception, causing the plaintiff to passively customize value-added telecommunications services without knowing it, and was deducted information fees

accordingly, the court held that the defendant's behavior constituted fraud, which was a joint infringement with the defendant Guangzhou Shixun company, and the plaintiff's request for "one refund and one compensation" had factual and legal basis, which should be supported. In view of the plaintiff's clear statement that it will not pursue the civil action of Guangzhou News Corporation, the court will not recognize and deal with this part. At the same time, the court held that consumers have the right to know the true situation of the goods they purchased and used or the services they received. The plaintiff's claim that Moldex3D digimat RP further strengthened the link between plastic composite injection molding and FEA structural analysis and simulation, and the bill of call is legal and should be supported

after the judgment of the first instance was pronounced, none of the parties filed an appeal