, ,

,

three years ago, Mr. Li bought a white Buick car for nearly 200000 yuan. However, more than ten days later, the new car was told that there was a small paint spot on the front of the car, which was suspected to have been repaired

and

paid for a new car, but they were suspected of getting a maintenance car. Mr. Li, however, began a three-year lawsuit with car dealers.

and

focus on whether the car body trace is caused before or after the car is picked up. In this regard, both sides hold their own views. The dealers believe that the quality of the vehicles is up to standard and in line with the contract, and the owner’s statement lacks basis. However, Mr. Li said that after the incident, the dealer promised to replace it with a brand-new bumper free of charge. It can be inferred that the dealer recognized that the vehicle trace was formed before picking up the car, and in the “motor vehicle appraisal evaluation report” of the third party organization, there was also an identification of the formation time of the paint spots.

and

finally, the case went through a lot of procedures, such as first instance, second instance and so on. Finally, on August 5, Chengdu Intermediate People’s court made a judgment, and Mr. Li lost the lawsuit.

Mr. Li said that he had been fighting this lawsuit for three years, and now he wants to know whether his car has been repaired before collecting it?

, but it seems that no one has given the answer. Mr. Li, the owner of

,

,

, filed a lawsuit against

and

. The court made a retrial and made a judgment of “one refund and three compensation”. They sold the repaired car to me as a new car, which constituted a sales fraud… ” Mr. Li is from Meishan, Sichuan Province. He usually works in Chengdu. Now, he has used this controversial car for nearly three years.

and

on August 17, 2017, he spent nearly 200000 yuan in Chengdu Qiyang pilot Automobile Distribution Service Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Qiyang company”), bought a white Buick car, and picked up the car on August 22 of that year.

and

12 days later (September 3), he was in the repair shop for a flat tire. During this period, the maintenance personnel told him that there were paint spots on the body of the car, and the front bumper had traces of re painting after disassembly and repair, which might have been repaired. Therefore, on September 5, he went to Qiyang company to ask for vehicle inspection.

and

in the factory inspection issued by Qiyang company on September 13, the reporter saw that “after checking the appearance of bumper, there was no scratch and deformation. There was a paint drop of about 1 mm in diameter on the left front bumper (at the inner corner of the left front headlight), and a crack on the right side of the grille under the front bar There are no signs of removal of the bolts and clips on the water tank upper trim panel. ” Mr. Li was also informed that the company had not done painting repair on the bumper.

,

,

and

have not been repaired. Why are there paint spots? I’ve only bought a car for more than ten days. I haven’t had an accident. I can’t have caused it. ” In the process of negotiation, Qiyang company agreed to replace the bumper for Mr. Li free of charge, and said that it could ask the appraisal agency for identification, “if it has been identified that it has been repaired, it can be replaced.”

,

,

and

vehicles have maintenance traces

,

,

nuts have passive traces

,

,

body paint spots

,

,

body paint spots

Mr. Li said that the two sides held their own opinions and failed to communicate. Finally, he filed a lawsuit with the people’s Court of Shuangliu District, Chengdu, where Qiyang company is located. Mr. Li said, “they sold the repaired car to me as a new car, which constituted sales fraud, and demanded punitive compensation of” one refund and three compensation “in accordance with the consumer protection rights and interests law.”

,

, ,

,

the Shuangliu District Court of first instance did not support Mr. Li’s claim. He refused to accept and appealed to Chengdu Intermediate People’s court. Later, the Chengdu Intermediate People’s court held that the facts of the original judgment were not clear and sent back for retrial. On May 8, 2018, after the Shuangliu District Court filed the case again, Mr. Li requested to identify the formation time and cause of the vehicle front bumper paint spot. The court of

and

entrusted the third-party appraisal agency Sichuan Zhonglian second-hand car appraisal and evaluation Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Zhonglian company”) to carry out the appraisal, and issued the motor vehicle appraisal evaluation report. The evaluation conclusion is: the front bumper fixing screw has obvious disassembly traces, the front bumper has the repair second-hand paint The formation time was before the delivery of the vehicle on August 22, 2017.

,

,

,

identification results

finally, the Shuangliu District Court supported Mr. Li’s claim and made a judgment of “one refund and three compensation”. In addition to returning 190660 yuan to Mr. Li for his car purchase, Qiyang company also has to compensate Mr. Li by 571980 yuan. The first instance of

,

,

decided that

and

dealers were not satisfied with the appeal of

and

. The Court changed the judgment: the company should compensate Mr. Li 30000 yuan for

,

and the appraisal institution entrusted by the first instance did not have the relevant qualification, and the domestic existing technology could not judge the specific time of trace formation… ”

and

in October 2019, Qiyang company refused to accept the judgment, and appealed to Chengdu Intermediate People’s court to cancel the above judgment. Qiyang said that the appraisal agency entrusted by the court of first instance was beyond the scope of the agency’s appraisal, and the appraisal conclusion was not scientific and legal.

and

according to a staff member from Sichuan Zhenggang motor vehicle Judicial Appraisal Institute at the opening of the court session, whether there are painting repair traces on the car bumper can be identified. The identification method is generally inspection method and micro physical evidence comparison. At present, domestic technology can not do this, and the painting time can not be determined by naked eyes.

and

have been examined by Chengdu Intermediate People’s court, and the appraisal institution entrusted by the first instance really does not have trace identification qualification. Secondly, according to the relevant provisions, the appraisal opinion should include the principle, method and the description in the appraisal process. However, the “evaluation method” in the motor vehicle appraisal and evaluation report is “other”, which does not specify the principle, and the appraisal result of the defect formation reason and formation time can not be clearly stated in the evaluation report. Therefore, the court did not We have accepted the evaluation report. Finally, the court withdrewThe first instance judgment of Shuangliu district court was cancelled, and Qiyang company decided to compensate Mr. Li 30000 yuan. Why did

,

,

,

identify the formation time of Zhonglian company? According to Mr. Wan, the appraiser who carried out the appraisal at that time, “it’s really impossible to identify the formation time in China, but it is certain that the vehicle has been repaired.”

he said that there were four reasons for the identification of the formation time of the traces. First, the owner provided a photo with the date of shooting and wrote a letter of guarantee, “to ensure that there was no accident or maintenance between the time of collection and the negotiation period.” They also checked the negotiation video of both sides, “although Qiyang company did not admit that the vehicle had been repaired in the negotiation, it offered to replace the bumper for free If it doesn’t, Qiyang company doesn’t need to pay for the owner’s self repair behavior, which is not in line with common sense. ” In addition, they learned later that the price of the car purchased by the owner was more than 20000 less than the market price. Based on their years of experience and dealing with 4S stores for many years, it was concluded that there might be a small accident with the car. Therefore, it was concluded that the formation time of the trace was before the delivery of the car.

and

it is reported that Mr. Li once applied to the court for a second appraisal. However, the court held that since the domestic existing technology could not judge the specific time of the trace formation, even if the cause of formation was identified, it would be meaningless to determine the responsibility of vehicle owners and vehicle dealers, so it did not support Mr. Li’s request.

lawyers remind > > >

should pay attention to the acceptance of vehicles when they buy and deliver the car.

for the second instance judgment, lawyer Yang, Qiyang’s deputy lawyer, said that Qiyang company was also considering applying for retrial at the beginning, “because the compensation of 30000 yuan in the judgment also increased the liability risk of dealers.” However, as an enterprise, it also has to consider the economic cost, time and energy. In the end, it still respects the effective judgment and actively contacted Mr. Li to pay 300 million yuan.

Lawyer Yang of

said that after Mr. Li found Qiyang company, the company provided him with the delivery and transportation process of the whole vehicle, and also made it clear that the whole process had not been repaired. Moreover, when the vehicle was delivered, the owner also accepted the vehicle, and there was a delivery record signed by the owner. “He had no evidence to prove that the defects of the vehicle were caused before the delivery of the vehicle Come back to us in more than 10 days. We don’t approve of such a situation. ” Mr. Yang said that although the owner repeatedly said that he cherished the car and did not scratch and touch it, the vehicle was originally a consumable, and when the owner found the dealer, he had already driven 3000 km. In the use process, it was inevitably affected by some local factors. Why did Qiyang company propose to replace the bumper for Mr. Li for free at that time? Lawyer Yang said that in order to placate consumers, “it costs thousands of yuan to replace a bumper, but he did not recognize it.” For Mr. Li wants to apply for re identification, lawyer Yang said that this is the right of the owner, but at present, the vehicle has been used for nearly three years, and there is no condition for testing.

lawyer Yang also reminds consumers, “vehicle delivery is a link of risk transfer.” Every buyer should pay attention to the acceptance of the vehicle when buying and delivering the car. “Acceptance is a legal procedure. If you give up this legitimate right, both consumers and dealers should bear the adverse consequences.

and

are not satisfied with this judgment, but he is not sure whether to apply for retrial. “I don’t know whether there is any need for retrial.” He said that in the past three years, he had experienced four court trials and spent 450000 yuan before and after the trial, and the energy he spent could not be measured by money.

and

are always worried about spending money on a new car, but suspiciously buying a car that may have been repaired. He told Red Star news that even if this matter comes to an end, he also hopes to remind future car buyers to learn from the experience and avoid detours.

Red Star journalist Hu Ting Zhangling reports

original title: new car found small paint spots, buy a car to buy a repair car? This case was changed twice, and it took three years to settle “