日前，佛山市市场监管局公布了2025年民生领域案件查办"铁拳"行动第二批10个典型案例。其中，高明一餐馆售卖的驴产品，被检出马成分，高明区市场监 管局已将此案移送公安机关处理。 广东鼎哲律师事务所黄雪芬律师对南都N视频记者分析称，市面上，马肉批发价通常仅为驴肉的一半，已查处的马肉冒充驴肉案件中，多数同时存在经营未 经检疫肉类的违法行为，因此用马肉冒充驴肉不仅侵犯消费者知情权和公平交易权，更直接威胁公众健康，构成消费欺诈和重大食品安全风险。 《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百四十条【生产、销售伪劣产品罪】规定，生产者、销售者在产品中掺杂、掺假，以假充真，以次充好或者以不合格产品冒充 合格产品，销售金额五万元以上不满二十万元的，处二年以下有期徒刑或者拘役，并处或者单处销售金额百分之五十以上二倍以下罚金。 黄雪芬认为，虽然马肉本身并非有毒物质，但因为商家对外宣称"纯驴肉"，就构成了"以假充真"。即使是合格产品，只要存在"冒充"行为，就可能触犯此 罪。 （文章来源：南方都市报） 佛山市市场监管局公布的案例细节显示，2025年5月，高明区市场监管局联合公安机关对佛山市高明区某餐馆进行监督检查，发现当事人冷冻柜内被其称 为"驴 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Beijing Changping District People's Court has highlighted a significant case involving fraud in the sale of a used vehicle, where the seller failed to disclose a major accident history, leading to a court ruling in favor of the consumer for a total of 144 million yuan in refunds and damages [1][2][3] Group 1: Case Details - A consumer purchased a used car for 720,000 yuan, with a down payment of 220,000 yuan, under the condition that the vehicle had no major accidents [1] - After discovering the vehicle had a significant accident history and extensive repairs amounting to approximately 1.202 million yuan, the consumer sought a refund and damages from the seller [1][2] - The court found that the seller had committed fraud by concealing the vehicle's true condition, thus violating the contract terms [2] Group 2: Legal Findings - The court identified the key issue as whether the seller engaged in fraudulent behavior during the sale process [2] - According to civil law, fraud involves intentionally providing false information or concealing true information to mislead the other party, which was established in this case [2] - The court ruled in favor of the consumer, ordering the seller to refund the purchase price and compensate for damages, confirming the seller's liability for fraud [3]

新京报讯(记者吴梦真)11月11日上午，北京市第三中级人民法院召开涉医疗领域消费欺诈案件新闻通报 会。新京报记者从现场了解到，一家口腔医院因虚构医生"曾就职于知名口腔医院""从业20年"等行为， 构成消费欺诈，被判赔偿消费者三倍损失。 三中院生效判决认为，赵刚接受口腔正畸服务是为了满足个人对"美"的生活追求，具有消费者的特征； 而某口腔医院属于营利性医疗机构，通过提供口腔正畸服务获取利润，具有经营者的特征，加上涉案医 院的口腔正畸项目均按市场价格定价，未采用政府集体采购价格，而赵刚在该医院支付的费用都是自 费，没有使用医保，因此本案医疗服务合同关系应当适用消费者权益保护法的调整。 根据朝阳区卫健委的行政事项处理意见书，赵刚在某口腔医院治疗期间，医生陈某未注册在某口腔医 院，某口腔医院聘用未注册在该医疗机构的医生担任"正畸主任"为患者提供诊疗服务，足以诱导患者误 以为陈某系具备在该医疗机构执业资质且具有较为丰富工作经验的医生，构成欺诈。医院关于医生陈某 的个人简介称"曾就职于某知名口腔医院""从业20多年"与事实不符，以上虚假宣传直接误导赵刚选择该 医院服务，构成欺诈。 最终，法院判决口腔医院退还赵刚医疗费26 ...

Core Insights - Shanghai Die Paper Technology Co., Ltd. has undergone a change in its legal representative and executive director, with Yao Fei taking over from Yao Runhao [1] - The company has faced a significant trust crisis due to discrepancies between promotional content and actual game features in its popular mobile game "Love and Deep Space" [1][2] - The game has received over 2000 complaints related to consumer fraud, with individual spending records reaching up to 80,000 yuan [2] Company Overview - Shanghai Die Paper Technology Co., Ltd. was established on March 22, 2019, with a registered capital of 100 million yuan [3] - The company specializes in software development, animation design, and online cultural operations, owning popular game series such as "Warm Warm" and "Love" [3] - The company has nearly 400 million registered users globally and is projected to generate nearly 1 billion USD in revenue for 2024 [3] Recent Developments - The new game activity "The Fallen Crown" launched on July 25, 2025, has led to player dissatisfaction due to missing features that were advertised [1] - A lawyer's letter has been issued, categorizing the situation as "consumer fraud" and citing violations of consumer protection laws [2] - The company has received recognition as a key cultural export enterprise for multiple years and has won various awards for its games [3]

Core Points - A consumer named Ren encountered issues purchasing a computer at a high price, which led to widespread attention on the matter [2] - The consumer initially intended to buy an ASUS Tianxuan 6 Pro but was persuaded to purchase a lower-spec model at an inflated price [2] - The local market supervision bureau intervened and facilitated a resolution between the consumer and the retailer [2] Summary by Sections - **Consumer Experience** - Ren planned to buy an ASUS Tianxuan 6 Pro but was redirected to a different model due to claims of performance issues [2] - The retailer presented a price higher than the official website, leading to a payment of an additional 300 yuan [2] - **Retailer Response** - The retailer, represented by Zhang, argued that the recommended model better suited the consumer's needs and claimed the pricing was within a reasonable range [2] - Zhang admitted to using some sales tactics due to poor business performance [2] - **Resolution and Future Actions** - The retailer agreed to refund 800 yuan and provide a brand headphone as compensation after mediation [2] - The market supervision bureau indicated that further investigation into the retailer's sales practices would be conducted to prevent similar issues in the future [2]

Core Viewpoint - The upcoming sales season for Yangcheng Lake hairy crabs raises consumer concerns about counterfeit products and misleading marketing practices, prompting regulatory actions to ensure compliance and protect consumer rights [1][2][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Suzhou market regulatory authorities are conducting a series of actions, including classified monitoring and special law enforcement checks, to regulate the marketing activities of Yangcheng Lake hairy crabs and optimize the business environment [1][6]. - The authorities have identified high-risk enterprises based on complaints and have implemented measures such as listing non-compliant businesses in the abnormal operation directory to reduce disruptions in the industry [6][7]. Group 2: Consumer Protection Issues - There have been multiple cases of exaggerated and false advertising by crab vendors, leading to consumer deception and dissatisfaction, as seen in the case of a company claiming to have 900 acres of farming area while only having 70 acres [2][3]. - Issues such as difficulty in redeeming prepaid crab cards and short-weight products have been reported, indicating a pattern of consumer fraud and marketing manipulation [4][5]. Group 3: Market Monitoring - The market regulatory department has initiated online monitoring of major e-commerce platforms, covering 1,184 entities and 4,411 products, resulting in the removal of 785 violations and the referral of three cases for offline investigation [7]. - A total of 27 cases related to the previous crab season have been investigated this year, with fines totaling 955,200 yuan, demonstrating a strong deterrent effect against illegal practices [6].

Core Points - Amazon is facing a record fine of $2.5 billion to settle claims of misleading customers regarding Prime subscriptions [1][2] - The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) stated that $1.5 billion of the fine will be allocated for customer refunds [1] - The settlement was announced just as Amazon's trial was about to commence [2] FTC's Statement - FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson emphasized the significance of the settlement as a victory for consumers against deceptive subscription practices [2] - The FTC accused Amazon of employing sophisticated tactics to manipulate consumers into subscribing to Prime and complicating the cancellation process [2] - The settlement aims to ensure that Amazon does not engage in similar practices in the future [2]

Core Viewpoint - Consumer fraud refers to deceptive practices by businesses that mislead consumers, resulting in damage to their legitimate rights and interests [1] Group 1: Definition and Conditions of Fraud - Consumer fraud occurs when a business uses false or improper means to deceive or mislead consumers [1] - The determination of fraud in online shopping depends on specific circumstances, including false statements, deceptive actions leading to decisions based on incorrect understanding, and resulting losses [2] - If a business induces consumers to wait or pay additional fees using false information without reasonable justification, it may constitute fraud [2] Group 2: Compensation and Penalties - Businesses found to have committed fraud must compensate consumers for their losses, with the compensation amount being three times the price paid for the goods or services, with a minimum of 500 yuan if the calculated amount is less [4] - If laws or regulations specify penalties, those must be followed; otherwise, administrative departments may impose corrections, warnings, confiscation of illegal gains, or fines ranging from one to ten times the illegal gains, or up to 500,000 yuan if there are no illegal gains [5] - Serious violations may lead to business suspension or revocation of business licenses [5] Group 3: Legal Basis - The Consumer Rights Protection Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates punitive compensation responsibilities for businesses engaging in fraudulent practices, allowing consumers to claim damages and punitive compensation under certain conditions [6]

Core Viewpoint - The rapid development of the digital economy has led to an increase in various consumer fraud schemes, which have infiltrated multiple sectors including shopping, dining, and elder care, necessitating heightened consumer vigilance and protective measures [1] Group 1: High-Frequency Consumer Fraud Tactics - "Windfall" inducements through mobile lottery and false promotions are prevalent, with a notable case where a mobile lottery scheme generated transaction volumes of up to 2 billion yuan in a single day [2] - "Health anxiety" exploitation through misleading claims about food and health products targeting the elderly, with potential penalties for violations of advertising laws reaching up to 2 million yuan [4] - "Safety hazard" fraud involving substandard products masquerading as quality goods, such as recycled materials being sold at high prices, posing serious health risks [5] - "Tech-enabled" harassment through AI-generated calls that exploit personal information, complicating regulatory oversight [7] - "Service reduction" schemes where maintenance services are subcontracted to unqualified entities, leading to inflated repair costs [8] - "Brand imitation" fraud with counterfeit products being sold at premium prices, making it difficult for consumers to distinguish between genuine and fake items [9] Group 2: Consumer Rights Protection Guidelines - Consumers should be vigilant against misleading terms like "free" or "limited time" and verify merchant credentials through official channels [11] - Maintaining evidence such as transaction records and communication logs is crucial for effective dispute resolution [12] - Promptly contacting merchants or platforms for complaints can expedite resolution, with specific hotlines available for various issues [13] - Legal recourse is available for unresolved disputes, including mediation through consumer associations or small claims court [14] - Collective action can enhance consumer protection, encouraging reporting of widespread fraud to authorities [15]

Core Points - The article highlights a case of high-priced locksmith services in Shanghai, where a woman was charged 2410 yuan for a service that was advertised at 25 yuan, raising concerns about consumer rights and pricing transparency [1][4][7] Group 1: Incident Overview - A woman named Xiao Hui was charged 2410 yuan for locksmith services after ordering through an online platform, despite the service being advertised at a much lower price [1] - The breakdown of the charges included 580 yuan for the lock core, 500 yuan for the anti-theft lock body, and additional fees totaling 2210 yuan, which Xiao Hui contested [1][3] Group 2: Company Background - The locksmith service involved, "Old Shanghai Locksmith Service Center," is operated by Shanghai Anxuntong Technology Service Co., Ltd., which was established in June 2025, just two months prior to the incident [4] Group 3: Consumer Rights and Legal Implications - Legal experts argue that the pricing method used by the locksmiths violates the Price Law, as the vague pricing of "starting from" does not provide clear and accurate information to consumers [7] - The incident reflects a broader issue of "locksmith scams" reported by multiple consumers, indicating a pattern of deceptive practices in the industry [6][7] Group 4: Platform Response - Following the incident, the locksmith service was removed from the online platform, and the parties involved reached a settlement after the platform's customer service intervened [6]