“拆除不退不换”属格式条款 “打卡后退货”属滥用权利

Core Viewpoint - A controversial consumer behavior has emerged where some individuals exploit the "seven-day no-reason return" policy by using newly purchased clothing as temporary props for photos before returning them, prompting retailers to implement oversized tags as a physical deterrent [1] Group 1: Consumer Rights and Retailer Protections - Oversized tags may constitute an excessive limitation on consumers' rights to choose and engage in fair trade, as they can hinder the ability to accurately assess fit and style [1] - Retailers have the right to request the return of "intact" products and take reasonable measures to prevent non-trial use, but must not disrupt the balance between "reasonable inspection" by consumers and "protection of retailer property" [1] - Clauses stating "no return or exchange if tag is removed" may be considered standard terms, but their validity hinges on whether the tag itself is reasonable and does not obstruct normal trial [1] Group 2: Legal Implications of Return Policies - If oversized tags prevent normal fitting, it may be seen as a de facto deprivation of the right to return, allowing consumers to claim that retailers failed to provide accurate information or violated their legal rights [1] - Consumers retaining tags while using clothing for photo opportunities may be viewed as an abuse of rights, with the distinction between "reasonable trial" and "excessive use" based on the intent and extent of use [1] - Retailers can refuse returns based on evidence of actual use, as the principle of good faith in civil activities must be upheld [1] Group 3: Recommendations for Policy Clarity - There is a need for clearer regulations to define the boundaries of "reasonable trial" to prevent disputes, including guidelines on trial conditions and prohibitions on wearing items outdoors [2] - Future regulations should shift from a singular focus on "physical integrity" to a dual standard of "physical integrity + behavioral compliance" to better protect legitimate rights while curbing abuse [2] - Measures taken by retailers must not impede consumers' reasonable inspection rights and should adhere to the principle of minimal impact on consumer rights [2]