近日，蕉内官方小程序突然出现大幅折扣，大批消费者纷纷下单。有消费者表示，其分为两次下单，共 购买了20多件商品，总价762元。其中袜子、内裤、男士保暖套装等大部分商品单价均为22元，女士厚 绒打底裤、女士薄绒打底裤、女士堆堆领肌底衣单价69.5元。 当天晚上，该消费者收到了短信称：由于系统原因，所购商品无法正常发出。 该消费者认为，所谓"系统故障"等理由不能成立。如果确实存在系统异常，商家也应向消费者告知异常 原因和处理结果。此外，"系统故障""页面异常"等本质是企业或者平台的问题，不应由消费者"买单"。 类似的情况并非个例。《BUG》栏目查询发现，在社交平台上，多位消费者集体"声讨"蕉内称："玩不 起就别玩""低价补偿就能打发了""自己设置的价格有问题就不发货，靠一条短信解决问题"。 文 |《BUG》栏目 张奥 近日，蕉内品牌因"下单却不发货"而遭到广泛质疑。 有消费者透露，蕉内小程序突然出现大幅折扣，包括羽绒服、冲锋衣、保暖套装等原价数百元的商品， 最低仅22元。购买后，蕉内却拒绝正常发货。 "少量现金补偿就能打发了？""靠一条短信解决问题？"消费者们提出质疑。 蕉内官方客服向《BUG》栏目表示："之前页 ...

蕉内官方客服向《 BUG》栏目表示："之前页面异常，导致价格有异常。已经紧急修复处 理了，价格以页显示为准。只 可以 在订单 取消后补偿 30元 。 " 文 |《BUG》栏目 张奥 近日，蕉内品牌因 "下单却不发货"而遭到广泛质疑。 有消费者透露，蕉内小程序突然出现大幅折扣，包括羽绒服、冲锋衣、保暖套装等原价数百 元的商品，最低仅 22元。购买后，蕉内却拒绝正常发货。 "少量现金补偿就能打发了？""靠一条短信解决问题？"消费者们提出质疑。 价格异常取消订单， 律师：违约，应该发货！ 近日，蕉内官方小程序突然出现大幅折扣，大批消费者纷纷下单。有消费者表示，其分为两 次下单，共购买了 20多件商品，总价762元。其中袜子、内裤、男士保暖套装等大部分商 品单价均为22元，女士厚绒打底裤、女士薄绒打底裤、女士堆堆领肌底衣单价69.5元。 当天晚上，该消费者收到了短信称：由于系统原因，所购商品无法正常发出。 该消费者认为，所谓 "系统故障"等理由不能成立。如果确实存在系统异常，商家也应向消 费者告知异常原因和处理结果。此外，"系统故障""页面异常"等本质是企业或者平台的问 题，不应由消费者"买单"。 类似的情况并非个例 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses a case where a consumer, Mr. Zheng, faced a loss due to an e-commerce platform unilaterally canceling his gold purchase order, raising questions about the platform's practices and consumer rights [1][10]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Mr. Zheng purchased 50 grams of gold at approximately 900 yuan per gram, totaling 45,000 yuan, but the order was canceled after it entered the delivery stage, resulting in a loss of over 1,800 yuan due to price fluctuations [1][7]. - The platform claimed that orders could be canceled if the purchase quantity exceeded normal consumption needs, which Mr. Zheng disputed as he successfully purchased gold using a different account [2][9]. Group 2: Legal Perspective - A lawyer stated that Mr. Zheng had formed a valid sales contract upon payment, and the platform's cancellation constituted a breach of contract, requiring compensation for all losses incurred [10][11]. - The lawyer emphasized that the platform's actions violated the principles of good faith and contractual obligations, as there was no reasonable basis provided for the cancellation [10][11]. Group 3: Compensation and Consumer Rights - Mr. Zheng's claim for 2,000 yuan in compensation was met with only a 200 yuan offer from the platform, which the lawyer deemed unreasonable, suggesting that actual losses should be compensated [11]. - The lawyer recommended that Mr. Zheng could escalate the matter to consumer protection authorities or pursue legal action if the platform did not adequately address his claims [11].

Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the complexities and risks involved in commercial leasing, particularly in competitive bidding scenarios where the qualifications and compliance of bidders are scrutinized [1][17][18]. Group 1: Auction and Leasing Details - A small shop of 51 square meters at Wuxi College was auctioned with an initial annual rent of 85 million yuan, totaling 255 million yuan for three years [1][7]. - The shop was later leased to another operator for an annual rent of 60 million yuan after the initial bidder failed to comply with the terms [1][12]. - The auction included various commercial properties, with starting prices ranging from approximately 42,120 yuan to 79,560 yuan per year for different types of businesses [3][14]. Group 2: Legal Dispute and Claims - Wuxi College filed a lawsuit against the initial bidder, seeking compensation for the rent difference amounting to 750,000 yuan due to the failure to sign a lease agreement [1][17]. - The initial bidder argued that the auction process had flaws, claiming that the auction company did not properly verify the compliance of the bidding documents [17][18]. - Legal experts indicated that both parties may share responsibility for the dispute, with the auction company potentially bearing a larger portion of the fault due to inadequate verification of the bidder's qualifications [18][19].

Core Points - The incident involving Damai.net's ticket sales for Lu Han's concert has sparked significant consumer dissatisfaction due to a scheduling error that led to the cancellation of ticket purchases [1] - Consumers who successfully purchased tickets received confirmation but later had their orders revoked, leading to claims of breach of contract against Damai.net [1] - The legal interpretation suggests that once a consumer successfully places an order and makes payment, a contract is established, and unilateral cancellation by the seller constitutes a breach [2] Group 1 - Damai.net's error in ticket sales for Lu Han's concert resulted in a public apology and a refund policy that included a 3% discount coupon for affected consumers [1] - Many consumers expressed their grievances on complaint platforms, highlighting the financial implications of the cancellation, including non-refundable travel expenses [1] - Legal expert Chen Yinjian clarified that if the error was unintentional, it may not qualify as fraud, which is necessary for consumers to claim triple compensation [2] Group 2 - According to the E-commerce Law, once a consumer submits an order and payment is made, the contract is binding, and the seller cannot unilaterally cancel it [2] - If the seller cannot fulfill the contract, they are obligated to refund and compensate for any losses incurred by the consumer, such as travel arrangements [2] - The conditions for claiming triple compensation require evidence of intentional fraud, which may not apply in this case as the error was attributed to staff mismanagement [2]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights a legal dispute involving a fish pond leasing contract in Guangdong Province, focusing on the resolution process facilitated by a judge, emphasizing the importance of mediation in resolving agricultural disputes [1][2][3][4] Group 1: Contractual Dispute - A fish pond leasing contract was signed in January 2024 for nearly 2,000 acres, with an annual rent of 320 million yuan, which was not paid by the lessee, leading to a breach of contract [1] - The cooperative decided to convert the lessee's deposit into rent after multiple failed attempts to collect the overdue payment [1][2] - The lessee, facing financial difficulties, initially resisted the termination of the contract and sought to retain the equipment purchased for 1.2 million yuan [2][3] Group 2: Mediation Process - The judge intervened to mediate the dispute, advising both parties on the legal implications of their actions and the potential for financial loss due to delays [2][3] - The judge suggested a compromise where the lessee could sell the equipment at a reduced price to offset part of the owed penalty, promoting a win-win situation [3] - Ultimately, an agreement was reached where the contract was terminated, the lessee sold the equipment for 800,000 yuan, and the cooperative resumed operations of the fish pond [3][4] Group 3: Legal and Operational Outcomes - The cooperative successfully re-leased the fish pond, which was back in operation by early June, and received the rental payment promptly [4] - The article notes that the local court has a high mediation success rate, with 42.3% of cases resolved through mediation in 2024, indicating an effective judicial approach to conflict resolution [4]

Core Viewpoint - The dispute between Chuanfeng Power and its dealer Wang Xianghua regarding the "remote locking" of electric vehicles has raised significant concerns in the market, highlighting issues of contract compliance and brand support [2][3][4]. Company Overview - Chuanfeng Power, headquartered in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, is engaged in the research, manufacturing, and sales of large-displacement motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, and new energy motorcycles [3]. - The Jike brand, launched in 2020, focuses on electric motorcycles, lightweight electric motorcycles, and new national standard electric bicycles [3]. Dispute Details - Wang Xianghua claims that after closing his Jike brand store due to poor performance, the manufacturer implemented a "remote locking" measure on the inventory vehicles, which Jike denies [2][4]. - Jike stated that Wang's company, Xinding New Energy, breached the contract by unauthorized modifications to the brand's image store, leading to a demand for the return of store investment [3][4]. Financial Aspects - Jike provided approximately 130,000 yuan in store construction subsidies to Wang, who paid a 50,000 yuan deposit and part of the inventory cost [4]. - Wang is seeking a reconciliation of funds, while Jike demands a 130,000 yuan penalty for breach of contract [4]. Market Position - Jike's electric vehicles are priced from several thousand to tens of thousands of yuan, with a total sales volume of 106,000 units in 2024, significantly lower than competitors like Ninebot and Niu, which sold 2.5989 million and 924,300 units respectively [6]. - Wang noted that the brand's market recognition is low, and the demand for high-end electric vehicles in his county is limited, compounded by inadequate support from Jike [6]. Inventory Issues - Wang currently holds over 80 Jike inventory vehicles valued at 300,000 yuan, which he claims were purchased under pressure from the manufacturer [6].