转自：四川在线 遇到这种情况怎么办？ 律师观点： 四川瀛楷典扬（成都）律师事务所主任吴山表示，遇到酒店毁约，建议消费者采取不取消、不加价的应 对措施，因为一旦取消，可能会被认为消费者自愿退房，这样消费者权益就不能得到有效保护。 马宁 四川在线记者 刘佳 订好车票、酒店住宿 却又被酒店方面 "临时取消订单"的情况时有发生 如果重新预订酒店房间 酒店已"坐地起价" 客房价格高出之前数倍 消费者下单且付款成功，依据电子商务法，合同成立，商家单方面强行取消订单应视为违约行为。若商 家存在违约行为，能继续履行约定的要继续履行；不能履行的，需赔偿消费者相应损失。若商家以虚假 装修等虚假信息欺骗消费者，构成消费欺诈，按照消费者权益保护法，消费者不仅可要求退款，还可要 求增加赔偿其受到的损失，增加赔偿的金额为消费者购买商品的价款或者接受服务费用的3倍；增加赔 偿的金额不足500元的，为500元。 简单来说做好四件事就不用担心酒店毁约提价： 1、留存证据，将与商家的沟通过程进行录音，保存被取消的订单截图，收集能够证明商家恶意解约的 材料； 2、联系平台进行投诉，并要求平台提供商家真实有效的联系方式； 3、可以向消协、有关行政部 ...

Core Points - The article highlights the efforts of Minsheng Bank's Jinan Licheng Branch to enhance financial risk awareness among community residents through innovative outreach and education initiatives [1][2] - The bank has established a "Financial Knowledge Promotion Team" that collaborates with community workers to conduct door-to-door visits, providing tailored financial risk education to vulnerable groups, particularly elderly residents [1] - The initiative includes the distribution of informative materials such as the "Elderly Anti-Fraud Guide" and "Safe Card Usage Tips," focusing on common scams targeting seniors [1] - A dedicated consumer protection area has been set up at the bank branch, serving as a "knowledge charging station" for residents to access a variety of financial education resources [1][2] - The ongoing commitment of Minsheng Bank to consumer rights protection is emphasized, with plans for sustained community engagement to ensure financial safety and stability [2]

9月28日，记者了解到，北京市市场监管综合执法总队对4家共享充电宝服务企业依法作出罚款的行政处 罚。这是全国市场监管领域运用《中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法》，针对共享充电宝租赁领域侵害 消费者权益问题的首度"亮剑"。 此前，2025年7月，北京市市场监管综合执法总队针对多起消费者投诉的"归还难、乱收费"等问题，对4 家企业予以立案调查。经查，这些企业存在租赁服务与售后服务脱节问题：代理商负责柜机运营，品牌 方仅提供线上租赁，导致消费者常因柜机满位、设备故障无法归还，却仍被持续计费，甚至归还后扣费 不止 。同时，企业客服多为AI自动回复，消费者退费等诉求难以解决，且计费规则等信息公示不透 明，侵害了消费者公平交易权、自主选择权与知情权 。 目前，4家企业已积极整改，加入《北京市共享充电宝行业自律公约》，承诺建立暂停计费机制——因 柜满等原因无法归还的，核实后可暂停计费；因设备问题等导致无法归还的，可免除费用 。 (家电网® HEA.CN) ...

9月24日，"品质与责任"食品安全研讨会在北京新京报社召开。国家市场监督管理总局等行业主管单 位、中国奶业协会、中国营养保健食品协会、中国社会科学院食品药品产业发展与监管研究中心、中国 法学会消费者权益保护法研究会、以及食品、消费、平台等行业知名企业代表参会。与会代表就共护消 费者餐桌安全，守护消费者权益等内容达成共识，研讨会倡议共同为消费者"买得放心、吃的安心"保驾 护航。 ...

Core Insights - The Beijing Municipal Market Supervision Comprehensive Law Enforcement Team has imposed administrative fines on four shared charging treasure service companies, marking the first enforcement action in the country under the Consumer Rights Protection Law regarding consumer rights violations in the shared charging sector [1] Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The enforcement action follows multiple consumer complaints regarding issues such as "difficult returns" and "arbitrary charges," leading to investigations into the four companies [1] - The investigation revealed a disconnect between rental services and after-sales services, with agents managing cabinet operations while brand owners only provided online rentals, resulting in consumer difficulties in returning devices and ongoing charges despite failed returns [1] Group 2: Consumer Rights Violations - Consumers faced challenges due to full cabinets and equipment malfunctions, leading to continued billing even after failed returns, and customer service primarily relying on AI responses, making it difficult for consumers to resolve refund requests [1] - The lack of transparency in billing rules and information further infringed upon consumers' rights to fair trading, autonomous choice, and informed decision-making [1] Group 3: Industry Response - The four companies have actively rectified their practices by joining the Beijing Shared Charging Treasure Industry Self-Discipline Convention, committing to establish a billing suspension mechanism for situations where returns are impossible due to full cabinets or equipment issues [1] - The companies have pledged to waive fees for returns that cannot be completed due to equipment problems [1]

近日，陕西延安宝塔区浪子烤肉店使用"阴阳菜单"一事引发讨论，有网友反映该店针对本地人和外地人 使用不同菜单，实测点单相同的一顿饭付款却相差59元。9月27日，南都N视频记者从延安市宝塔区市 场监督管理局获悉，该店已停业，市监局责令其立即整改，并对该店依法立案，列为重点监管对象。 近日，有网友在社交平台发布视频称，延安宝塔区浪子烤肉店使用"阴阳菜单"。针对本地口音客人和外 地口音客人，店家使用了不同菜单。"烤面皮差7块、烤锅巴差11块、羊杂差10块……一共差了59块 钱。"视频中，店家称"其他人都是我们这儿的老顾客，有时候会给他们打点折"。 网友反映同一份菜价格不同。 9月27日，延安市宝塔区市场监督管理局针对此事发布通报。通报称，经查，该店在消费者不知情的情 况下，对同一菜品设置了不同价格，该行为涉嫌违反《消费者权益保护法》等法律法规，侵犯了消费者 的合法权益。目前，该店已停业，市监局责令其立即整改，并对该店依法立案，列为重点监管对象。 通报表示，"该问题暴露出我局在日常监管过程中存在薄弱环节。即日起，我局将持续加大市场监管力 度，严查各类侵害消费者权益的违法违规行为。" ...

新京报讯(记者陈琳)明明已经归还共享充电宝，却仍在计费；跑遍半个城市，找不到一个能还的空 位……近期，北京市市场监管综合执法总队对共享充电宝行业展开专项执法，针对消费者投诉集中 的"归还难""乱收费"等问题，对4家主流共享充电宝服务企业正式立案查处。 经查，上述企业因自身运营管理问题，无法有效响应消费者停止计费、退还费用等合理诉求，构成"故 意拖延或无理由拒绝"的违法行为，违反了消费者权益保护法。北京市监部门依法对涉事企业作出行政 处罚，这也是全国范围内首次就该领域侵害消费者权益行为"亮剑"。 被处罚后，4家企业已积极整改，加入《北京市共享充电宝行业自律公约》，并公开承诺：建立"暂停计 费"机制，如因柜机无空位等原因无法及时归还，经核实可暂停计费；因设备故障等不可抗力导致无法 归还的，可免除费用。同时承诺优化计价模式、提升充电宝电量、加强柜机空位管理、完善人工客服 等。 北京市消协相关负责人表示，共享经济的本质是提升资源利用效率，而非通过设置归还障碍变相提高使 用成本。当前出现的"百元充电宝"现象，已背离共享初衷，侵害消费者权益。此次监管出手，正是对行 业健康发展与用户合法权益的有力维护。 调查发现，部分品牌 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issue of video platforms displaying advertisements that exceed the indicated countdown time, leading to consumer frustration and potential violations of consumer rights [3][15][17]. Group 1: Consumer Experience - Users often experience a delay in the transition from advertisements to the actual content, with countdowns that do not accurately reflect the time remaining [1][10]. - The article describes various scenarios of advertisement overrun, including initial ads not counted in the countdown and ads continuing even after the countdown ends [8][10][11]. Group 2: Regulatory Attention - The National Market Regulation Administration has responded to complaints regarding the inconsistency between advertisement duration and its labeling on video platforms [3][5]. - The increase in complaints has prompted official scrutiny of the practices employed by these platforms [6][15]. Group 3: Economic Implications - Video platforms generate significant revenue from advertisements, with iQIYI reporting 1.27 billion yuan in ad revenue for Q2 and Mango TV 1.587 billion yuan for the first half of the year [16]. - The article suggests that the additional seconds gained from advertisement overruns can accumulate to a substantial amount of revenue due to the large user base [15][16]. Group 4: Consumer Rights and Trust - The misleading countdowns and advertisement practices are seen as violations of consumer rights, as they create a false sense of expectation for users [17][25]. - The article emphasizes the importance of respecting consumer time and trust, arguing that such practices could damage long-term relationships between platforms and users [25][27].

Core Points - A restaurant in Yan'an, Shaanxi Province, has been accused of using a "dual-price menu" that charges local customers and tourists different prices for the same meal, with a discrepancy of 59 yuan [1] - The local market supervision bureau has initiated an investigation into the restaurant's pricing practices, which allegedly violate consumer rights laws [1] - The restaurant has been ordered to cease operations and rectify its pricing strategy, and it has been placed under heightened regulatory scrutiny [1] Company Summary - The restaurant involved is located in a tourist area and has been reported to offer discounts to regular customers, which may contribute to the pricing disparity [1] - The local authorities have confirmed that the restaurant's practice of setting different prices for the same dish without consumer knowledge is a violation of the Consumer Rights Protection Law [1] - The restaurant has been temporarily closed as part of the investigation and is now a focus of regulatory actions [1] Industry Summary - The incident highlights potential issues within the restaurant industry regarding pricing transparency and consumer rights [1] - Regulatory bodies are actively monitoring and addressing unfair pricing practices in the food service sector, indicating a stricter enforcement of consumer protection laws [1] - The case may prompt broader discussions and potential reforms in pricing strategies among restaurants, especially those in tourist-heavy areas [1]

Core Viewpoint - The recent discussions around "paid seat selection" in the airline industry have raised concerns about consumer rights and the legality of such practices, with experts suggesting that these practices may violate consumer protection laws [1][2][4]. Group 1: Lack of Transparency - Airlines have not publicly disclosed the standards for their "seat locking" rules, including the basis for calculating the locking ratio, dynamic adjustment mechanisms, and specific fees or points required for seat selection [2][3]. - This lack of transparency infringes on consumers' right to know the true conditions of the services they purchase, as stipulated by the Consumer Rights Protection Law [2]. Group 2: Increased Locking Proportions - Reports indicate that the proportion of locked seats has increased significantly, particularly on popular routes, with a shift from locking only special seats to including more desirable seats in the economy class [2][3]. - This practice limits consumers' choices, as airlines are reserving premium seats for paid selection while offering only less desirable options for free [2]. Group 3: Questionable Justification for Fees - The rationale behind charging for seat selection is under scrutiny, as consumers traditionally expect that the purchase of a ticket includes the right to a seat [3][4]. - The pricing of seat selection within the same class varies without a clear basis, suggesting that the fee structure is more about maximizing profits rather than reflecting service costs [3]. Group 4: Consumer Rights Violations - The practice of charging for seat selection is seen as a violation of consumers' rights to know and choose, contradicting the airlines' responsibilities as public service providers [4]. - Recommendations include airlines adhering to safety protocols for special seats, standardizing their operational practices, and increasing transparency regarding seat locking rules and fees [4].