在P2P网贷纠纷中，平台是否属于债务人、与出借人之间是否存在债权债务关系，这个问题直接决定了 网贷出借人应当起诉谁。对于合规经营的P2P平台而言，其法律定位一般为信息中介，与出借人之间形 成的是中介合同关系，而非民间借贷关系。因此，在此类情况下，出借人向平台主张还款责任往往缺乏 事实与法律依据。近日，湖北省某中级人民法院在审理一起出借人起诉玖富普惠平台的案件时，也明确 认定双方不构成民间借贷关系，玖富平台不承担还款责任，并据此驳回了出借人的再审申请。 关于争议焦点二，湖北省中院认为，现有证据表明案涉借款合同中的还款保障措施均明确指向由第三方 保险公司或担保公司提供，玖富公司仅作为信息中介与相关方合作引入此类服务，其与出借人签订的协 议亦明确排除自身提供担保的承诺；依据《最高人民法院关于审理民间借贷案件适用法律若干问题的规 定》第二十二条第一款，网络贷款平台仅提供媒介服务时，出借人请求其承担担保责任于法无据，故一 审判决认定玖富公司承担担保责任错误，应予纠正。最终湖北省中院裁定，玖富公司与熊某之间属于居 间服务合同关系关系，且不承担担保责任，驳回熊某的诉讼请求。 相关诉讼案由： 出借人熊某与玖富普惠平台民间合同 ...

"暴雷"四年多后，"网贷教父"周世平创立的红岭创投终于迎来首次资金清退。 今年2月2日起，陆续有投资者在社交平台发帖称，已收到"红岭系"旗下平台红岭创投、投资宝的首次退赔款。有投资者向红星资本局表示，已经收到法院 转来的500多元，由于时间久远，具体的损失金额已经难以算清，退赔比例约为5%。 这个涉案金额逾千亿、累计涉及48万余人的案件，广东省高级人民法院已于2024年5月作出终审裁定，以集资诈骗罪、非法吸收公众存款罪，判处周世平 无期徒刑，其余17名被告人分别被判处有期徒刑十一年至二年六个月。 "红岭系"涉案资金首次清退 投资者称"又多一笔过年预算" "红岭创投退赔到账35000，经历了多少年的P2P，有比我到账多的吗？""投资宝兑付今日已到账，历时几年真的兑付了。" 2月2日起，陆续有投资者在社交平台发帖称，已收到"红岭系"旗下平台红岭创投、投资宝的首次退赔款。由于距离最后一次兑付已过去数年，不少已将此 事遗忘的投资者在看到银行转账信息后，称"像捡钱一样开心""又多一笔过年预算"。 截图自社交平台 红星资本局注意到，2025年11月24日，深圳市中级人民法院发布公告，正式启动"红岭创投"案首次资金清退工作 ...

作为长期关注民间借贷诉讼案件的律师，笔者近期接到一位4年前找我们代理过借贷官司的客户小张打 来的咨询电话。就在笔者以为小张又有借贷官司找我们代理时，他给我发来一份最高院的民事裁定书， 案情和判决大致如下： 1、2016年9月至2020年9月，原告通过注册"悟空理财"APP的方式，使用玖富普惠平台"投资"服务功 能，经被告玖富公司撮合共出借多笔款项。 2、在出借环节，原告需通过点击"同意并确认出借"的方式和被告签订《出借咨询及管理服务协议》在 内的相关协议及文件。 3、截止2020年11月30日，原告账户仍显示有借款无法归还。 4、原告提起本案诉讼，请求判令玖富公司偿还借款本息。 5、原告认为：其将自有资金充值到银行的存管账户，玖富公司将资金借给不特定的第三人；玖富公司 未取得国家颁发的金融许可证，没有进行风险提示，没有向原告提供借款人信息；双方产生民间借贷的 合意。 6、玖富公司认为，双方是居间中介服务法律关系。 7、法院判决原告败诉。 当前，部分网贷平台正在推动"属地化催收诉讼"，支持出借人在律师帮助下向逾期借款人发起催收和法 律诉讼。这对广大出借人而言无疑是一个重要机遇。建议出借人密切关注所投平台是否已启 ...

来源： 信网 更让人没想到的是，在2分钟内，有17条一模一样的短信连续发到了信号新闻的采访手机 上。而这些短信稍作暂停后，又开始了新一轮骚扰，到11时55分时，手机共收到了34条催收 短信。 新闻漫画。（来源：信 号新闻） 1月16日，信号新闻报道了江西一家公司因员工拖欠"你我贷"平台的网贷，导致公司对外电话频遭催收 骚扰，部分员工也持续收到催收短信一事（详见报道《你我贷搞连坐式催收 江西一公司员工欠债多部 门被迫拔掉电话线》）。1月26日，信号新闻采访使用的手机号遭暴力催收信息骚扰，2分钟内连续收到 17条同样的短信，不到3小时累计收到短信68条。 采访后采访手机收到催收短信 信号新闻曾拨打过一个发短信催收的手机号，对方自称是"北京数科逾期调解中心"，负责2万元以内的 逾期欠款。期间，这位催收人员换了一个189开头的手机号与信号新闻继续沟通。被催收的魏先生证 实，这个189的手机号，也给自己的同事发过催收信息。 | +86 189 | ::15 | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2 | : | ← | 北京 | 魏先生同事收到的短 信。（来源：受访者） 1月26日中午11： ...

这家网贷平台运营方遭遇上市公司清仓式套现。 近期，分众传媒发布公告宣布，将通过境内定向减资和境外股权返还的形式退出旗下数禾科技。 公开信息显示，上海数禾信息科技有限公司成立于2015年下半年，为知名网贷平台"还呗"运营方，而还呗作为数禾科技的拳头产品于2016年2月就率先进入 贷款市场。 数禾科技创始人徐志刚自带银行业资深履历，其在招商银行曾深度参与了信用卡业务的运营管理工作，因此还呗和数禾科技在成立之初，就对股权投资人具 有很大的吸引力。 很快，分众传媒就于2016年3月份通过旗下公司以1亿元的代价拿下了数禾科技70%的股权。 伴随着网贷行业的快速发展，分众传媒持有的股权价值也在水涨船高，2017年末，数禾科技仅仅只是卖出了部分股权就获得了1.2亿元，一举收回了初始投 资成本。 在数禾科技完成B轮融资后，分众传媒旗下公司的持股占比稀释至41.9%。 2019年1月，数禾科技通过上海数桑信息科技有限公司等主体完成了VIE架构搭建，从这里不难看出，数禾科技大有登陆资本市场完成上市的意图。 分众传媒在公告中表示数禾此后还经历了多次股权变动，截至目前分众传媒持股主体持有数禾的股份比例被动增加至54.9%。 也是以此 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the emergence of new high-interest lending models in the context of tightening regulations on loans with annualized interest rates above 24%, highlighting the challenges in identifying true borrowing costs and the rise of complaint-driven intermediaries [1][6]. Group 1: High-Interest Lending Models - New lending products such as "monthly financing guarantees" and "installment malls" have emerged, featuring short borrowing cycles and high fees, targeting individuals with poor credit histories and urgent funding needs [1][3]. - A specific case illustrates a borrower taking a loan of 6,000 yuan with a total repayment amount of 8,318.7 yuan, resulting in an annualized interest rate of 464% [2]. - The "monthly financing guarantee" products typically have short terms of around 30 days and involve small loan amounts, often between 3,000 to 10,000 yuan, with additional high fees that inflate the effective interest rates [3][4]. Group 2: Regulatory Environment - Regulatory measures have intensified, with the China Internet Finance Association conducting inspections on mobile financial apps, leading to corrective actions by several institutions [6][7]. - The People's Bank of China has introduced a classification rating system for non-bank payment institutions, which will impact their operations and regulatory scrutiny based on compliance with lending regulations [7]. - The regulatory focus is shifting towards the entire supply chain of online lending platforms, with recent actions targeting payment institutions that facilitate high-interest loans [6][7]. Group 3: Industry Challenges - The high-interest lending industry operates through a complex and organized structure designed to evade regulatory scrutiny, complicating the tracking and accountability of transactions [4]. - The rise of intermediaries offering to assist borrowers in recovering high fees and interest reflects the growing consumer dissatisfaction and the challenges in navigating the lending landscape [5]. - Payment institutions face difficulties in monitoring the true costs of funds due to the layered nature of partnerships and the obscured characteristics of high-interest products [7].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the emergence of high-interest lending products disguised under new names and structures in response to regulatory tightening on loans with annualized interest rates above 24%. These products target borrowers with poor credit histories and urgent short-term funding needs, utilizing complex and hidden industry chains to evade regulation [1][2][3]. Group 1: High-Interest Lending Products - New lending models such as "monthly financing guarantee" and "installment mall" have developed, featuring short borrowing periods and high fees, leading to significantly elevated effective annual interest rates [1][3]. - A specific case illustrates a borrower taking a loan of 6,000 yuan with a total repayment amount of 8,318.7 yuan, resulting in an effective annual interest rate of 464% [1]. - Complaints against platforms like "Xin Xiaoyong" have surged, with nearly 800 complaints focusing on exorbitant interest rates and hidden fees, including high guarantee fees [2][3]. Group 2: Regulatory Environment - The implementation of regulations prohibiting products with annualized rates above 24% has led to a contraction of previously high-interest lending options, pushing many borrowers to seek alternative, non-compliant products [2][6]. - The China Internet Finance Association has been actively conducting inspections and promoting self-regulation among financial institutions, with some institutions already completing necessary rectifications [6][7]. - New regulations from the People's Bank of China will classify payment institutions based on governance and operational stability, impacting their ability to engage with high-interest lending products [7]. Group 3: Industry Challenges - The complex organizational structure of high-interest lending platforms, often using multiple names and entities, complicates the tracking and accountability of these loans, making it difficult for borrowers to assert their rights [4][5]. - The rise of intermediaries offering to help borrowers reclaim high fees and interest reflects the growing demand for consumer protection in this opaque lending environment [4][5]. - Payment institutions face challenges in monitoring the true cost of funds due to the layered nature of these lending models, which obscures the actual interest rates being charged [7].

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of new regulations on internet lending and small loan companies has led to a crackdown on high-interest lending practices, with many online lending platforms attempting to circumvent these regulations through new business models [1][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - New regulations have been introduced to manage internet lending and small loan companies, aiming to improve financial service quality and compliance [1]. - Third-party payment institutions are conducting compliance checks and terminating partnerships with potentially non-compliant local financial institutions to prevent high-interest lending [1][3]. - Regulatory bodies have previously mandated that payment companies must not open accounts for financial institutions, especially small loan companies, and must scrutinize any business with internal annual returns exceeding 24% [3]. Group 2: High-Interest Lending Practices - High-interest online lending has been proliferating, with examples such as the "鹿优选分期商城" offering products at prices significantly above market value, coupled with high annualized interest rates [2]. - The "分期商城" model allows for disguised high-interest loans, where users may end up paying much more than the market price for products, sometimes without even receiving the goods [2]. Group 3: Challenges in Compliance - The complexity of high-interest lending models makes it difficult for payment institutions to identify and sever ties with non-compliant practices, as many operate under the guise of legitimate services [6]. - Payment institutions face challenges due to the hidden nature of high-interest loans, multi-layered cooperation chains, and the short-term profit incentives associated with these loans [6][7]. - There is a lack of sufficient risk control technology and data support among many small payment institutions, hindering their ability to monitor compliance effectively [6]. Group 4: Recommendations for Payment Institutions - Payment institutions are advised to enhance their compliance systems by implementing strict merchant entry reviews, dynamic monitoring of transactions, and establishing a dedicated regulatory policy tracking department [7]. - Institutions should consider innovative approaches to align with regulatory encouragement, such as improving payment accessibility and utilizing emerging technologies like AI and big data to enhance compliance efficiency [7].

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of new regulations on internet lending and small loan companies has prompted some online lending operators to attempt to circumvent these regulations by using alternative models, leading to a crackdown on high-interest lending practices [1][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - New regulations have been enacted to manage internet lending and small loan companies, specifically targeting annual interest rates above 24% [1]. - Third-party payment institutions are conducting compliance checks and terminating relationships with potentially non-compliant local financial institutions to prevent high-interest lending [4][5]. - Regulatory bodies have previously mandated that payment companies must not open accounts for financial institutions, especially small loan companies, and must scrutinize any business with internal annual returns exceeding 24% [4]. Group 2: High-Interest Lending Practices - Recent investigations revealed that some platforms, like Lu You Xuan, are charging significantly higher prices for products, effectively masking high-interest loans under the guise of installment shopping [3]. - The installment model used by these platforms often results in a total payment that is much higher than the market price, with an example showing a 23.98% annualized interest rate on a product priced at 8,444 yuan compared to its market price of 5,999 yuan [3]. Group 3: Challenges in Compliance - There are significant challenges in completely severing ties with high-interest lending due to the hidden nature of these lending models and the complex relationships between payment institutions and lending platforms [8][9]. - Payment institutions face pressure to maintain revenue from high-interest lending scenarios, complicating their ability to comply with regulations [9]. - The lack of robust risk control technologies and dynamic monitoring capabilities among smaller payment institutions makes it difficult to identify and address non-compliant lending practices [9]. Group 4: Recommendations for Payment Institutions - Payment institutions are advised to establish a "white list" system for partners, implement dynamic monitoring systems for transactions, and create dedicated compliance tracking departments to ensure adherence to regulations [10]. - There is a suggestion for payment institutions to innovate in areas encouraged by regulators, such as enhancing payment accessibility and utilizing emerging technologies like AI and big data to improve compliance efficiency [10].

Core Viewpoint - The payment industry is tightening controls on high-interest online lending, with many institutions halting cooperation with platforms charging annual interest rates above 24%, aiming to cut off the payment channels for high-interest loans [1][3][6]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Multiple payment institutions are conducting urgent inspections and have begun to terminate all collaborations with online lending platforms, particularly those with interest rates exceeding 24% [3][6]. - The tightening measures were prompted by a specific incident involving a payment institution that faced regulatory scrutiny, leading to a directive for special inspections across the industry [3][7]. - Some regions, particularly in East China, are implementing stricter regulatory measures compared to others, reflecting a disparity in enforcement standards [3][6]. Group 2: Compliance Challenges - Despite the swift actions taken, challenges remain, including the presence of non-compliant platforms using disguised operations such as product installment plans to evade detection [1][8]. - The complexity of multi-layered cooperation chains makes it difficult to trace the flow of funds, complicating compliance efforts for smaller institutions [1][10]. - Payment institutions are facing a dilemma between compliance costs and potential profits from high-risk lending partnerships, which may deter proactive compliance measures [11][12]. Group 3: Market Reactions - Some payment companies have reported that the impact of cutting off online lending partnerships is minimal, as these collaborations contributed low profit margins but high risks [12]. - There is a concern that smaller payment platforms may seize the opportunity to engage in high-risk lending as larger institutions withdraw from the market [12][13]. - The industry anticipates a shift towards a "dual compliance" model, where reputable payment institutions collaborate with compliant online lending platforms, while smaller, non-compliant entities may face elimination or forced transformation [12][13].