Core Viewpoint - The incident involving Romoss power banks highlights the fragility of e-commerce platforms' consumer protection mechanisms, as thousands of users face refund issues due to the seller's insufficient account balance after a recall of 490,000 defective products [1][3]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Romoss Technology announced a recall of 490,000 power banks due to defects in battery cell materials that could cause overheating or even fires [3]. - Consumers are experiencing a tug-of-war with the platform and the seller, as many report being unable to receive refunds due to the seller's insufficient account balance [3][4]. - The platform's response has raised public concerns about the efficacy of e-commerce consumer protection systems [3]. Group 2: Platform Mechanism Analysis - The guarantee deposit system, intended to protect consumers, has proven ineffective in this case, with estimated recall costs exceeding 40 million yuan, far surpassing the typical guarantee deposit for ordinary sellers [4]. - Signs of financial distress in the company, such as operational shutdowns and changes in legal entities, indicate a collapsing funding chain [4]. - The platform has failed to implement a dynamic guarantee deposit mechanism that aligns with product risk, nor has it monitored high-recall-risk sellers effectively [4]. Group 3: Legal Perspective - Romoss has violated the safety assurance obligations under Article 26 of the Product Quality Law, while the platform may have neglected its qualification review responsibilities under Article 38 of the E-commerce Law [5]. - The legal challenge for consumers is exacerbated by the priority of debt repayment, where consumer claims rank lower than employee wages in bankruptcy situations [5]. - The recall execution is complicated by safety risks, as some courier companies refuse to accept returns, and the platform's suggested disposal method poses additional hazards [5]. Group 4: Consumer Self-Help Strategies - Consumers are advised to stop using the recalled products immediately and to file complaints through the 12315 platform, providing necessary order and business license information [6]. - For non-recalled products showing defects, consumers should classify them as hazardous waste and retain evidence [6]. - When purchasing alternatives, consumers are encouraged to choose brands with transparent supply chains, such as Xiaomi and Anker, to avoid falling into low-price traps again [6]. Group 5: Industry Implications - The crisis reflects a broader issue of supply chain quality control failures, particularly with the battery cell supplier's misconduct [7]. - The current e-commerce guarantee deposit system is inadequate for handling large-scale product recalls and unexpected events [7]. - The industry needs to establish a special risk reserve system for e-commerce and mandate product liability insurance for high-volume sellers to protect consumers from bearing the risks of corporate failures [7].