Xiao Chen (pseudonym) from Guangzhou participated in the "Marriage Insurance Service" in Jiayuan and spent 68,800 yuan.
Since then, Xiao Chen has met 13 men under the introduction of Jiayuan matchmaker, but there has been no following.
Soon, Jiayuan ended the signing service and stopped introducing blind date to Xiao Chen.
According to the chat records provided by Ms. Chen, in the early communication with Ms. Chen, the staff in jiayuan said: "If you can't get married, you can't pass the interview. It is required here that 100% can get married.
On October 30th, 2022/kloc-0, 65438, Mr. Chen told the educational administration teacher that the staff of Jiayuan had promised to find them in the early stage and concealed that "no refund will be given unless they get married", which constituted fraud.
After the request for refund was rejected, Mr. Chen took Jiayuan's company in Guangzhou, Beijing Huaqianshu Information Technology Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Branch No.3354, to court, asking the court to cancel the contract related to this case, and filed a claim for three times the service fee.
The education teacher saw in the first instance that jiayuan staff said, "If you can't get married, you can't pass the interview. I just understand that the requirement of 100% marriage here is only for the sake of marriage and has the sincerity to get married. What Zhang said about "being discovered" is not fraud, but mostly exaggerating propaganda.
In the first trial of Tianhe District Court in Guangzhou, combined with Ms. Chen's evidence and recording, Jiayuan staff had some guiding words in the process of negotiating with Ms. Chen before signing the contract, but Ms. Chen, as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, must have a reasonable understanding and judgment on the required marriage service.
At the end of June 5438 +2022 10, the Tianhe District Court of Guangzhou made a first-instance judgment on this case. Jiayuan gave Chen 1 0,000 yuan and rejected Chen's other claims.
Mr. Chen said that she refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and decided to appeal.
68,800 yuan to participate in "marriage insurance service"
Mr. Chen is over 80 years old and has a decent job.
She said that as she grew older, she had a certain "marriage anxiety".
On 20 15, she registered as a member in Jiayuan. 2065438+In September 2009, Jiayuan's matchmaker called and added her WeChat.
According to the chat records of WeChat, after the two parties added WeChat, the matchmaker would send Xiao Chen information such as membership activities and making friends through WeChat every other week or so.
Xiao Chen rarely replies, but the matchmaker keeps sending Chen Xiao WeChat.
"The marriage insurance service interview is very popular. The city recruits single people with marriage plans within one or two years, and the marriage fee can be refunded within two years.
Seeing this message, in September 2020, Mr. Chen said to the matchmaker on WeChat: "How did you become a member of Marriage Insurance?" I asked. The matchmaker said, "I paid the deposit and I will pay it back to you within one year." "The quota is almost full. The requirements are very strict. The person in charge must interview. "
At the same time, the matchmaker sent two screenshots of refund transfer to Chen Xiao.
The matchmaker recommended "Marriage Insurance Service" to Miss Chen (a pseudonym).
All photos in this article are interviewees.
Mr. Chen said, "Can't you get married that year?" . The matchmaker lost his voice and said, "People who can't get married can't even pass the interview. We demand 100% marriage ... we must plan to get married within one year. People who don't want to get married within a year will fail the interview.
"
Teacher Chen told the educational administration teacher that she was actually "what can I do to get a refund if I can't get married?" He said he wanted to ask. She thought the matchmaker's answer "cleverly" bypassed the question
Xiao Chen said that at the invitation of the matchmaker, she went to Jiayuan Store in Tianhe District.
Matchmaker first recommended a boy with very good conditions to her on WeChat. When I arrived at the store, I didn't see the man either, but several staff members said around the product she recommended, "It costs 5,000 yuan for four people." She thought the cost was too high, so she didn't accept it.
Later, she went to the store to learn about the specific situation of "marriage insurance service" and found that the so-called "interview" passed quickly, and the charging standard was "see 12 people and charge 68,800 yuan".
Service contract and supplementary agreement signed by Mr. Chen and Jiayuan.
According to the service contract and supplementary agreement signed by both parties, Jiayuan promised Mr. Chen that the number of people in one year would be 12 and the amount would be 68,800 yuan.
If Mr. Chen marries under the service of Jiayuan within the contract period, Jiayuan should return money and jewelry equivalent to 70% of the service fee, and Mr. Chen should assist Jiayuan in publicity.
Before signing the contract, Mr. Chen said, "If you can't get married, what about the money?" I asked. One of Li's staff replied, "I will definitely get married."
Considering that 70% of the cost can be refunded when getting married, she signed a service contract and paid the fee.
I saw that 13 people's request for refund was rejected.
Under the recommendation of Jiayuan matchmaker, Xiao Chen met 12 men, but never again.
Xiao Chen said that she had only met this 12 person once. "I can still talk when I meet, but I haven't contacted with WeChat."
Two of them, although she took the initiative to contact and chat, the other party responded indifferently and did not return to WeChat.
The matchmaker's feedback is that her looks are not enough and men don't want to develop any more.
At her request, the matchmaker introduced the manNo. 13, but she said the meeting was not over yet.
After that, Jiayuan said that the service content of the contract had ended, and the blind date was no longer introduced.
Mr. Chen felt cheated by Jiayuan and asked for a refund, which was rejected.
Mr. Chen told the educational administration teacher that in the early communication between the two parties, the staff of jiayuan repeatedly said that they could find it, but did not explicitly say that they could not get a refund if they were not married, which constituted fraud.
After receiving the service, she gradually lost confidence in Jiayuan and no longer trusted each other.
After many unsuccessful negotiations, Mr. Chen sued Jiayuan, asked the court to cancel the contract involved, and filed a lawsuit with a service fee of 206,400 yuan.
Mr. Chen said that during the negotiation, the staff of jiayuan Wangxing was responsible for communication.
10 10/3 1 day, the educational administration teacher contacted Wang Xing's staff, but the other party declined the interview.
According to the first-instance judgment, jiayuan staff member Zhang said, "If you can't get married, you can't pass the interview. It is required here that 100% can get married. " However, although you can get married, it is only for the sake of getting married. After all, the contract amount is very high and a lot of personal information and proof must be provided, so you must have the sincerity to get married. What Zhang said about "being discovered" is not fraud, but mostly exaggerating propaganda.
As an adult, Xiao Chen's reply from the staff in jiayuan does not mean that Xiao Chen signed the wrong contract, but that the contract signed by Xiao Chen is a paper contract. Xiao Chen must clearly understand the service content, service nature and contract purpose of this service contract.
Jiayuan said that the service content has been fulfilled as agreed, and the gift project is to provide online guidance according to Mr. Chen's request after the service expires. However, after fulfilling the contract, Mr. Chen is unwilling to accept services such as free meeting for one year.
First instance: Jiayuan has an inductive sentence, and he will get a refund of 10,000 yuan.
Tianhe District Court held in the first instance that, based on Xiao Chen's evidence and recordings, whether Xiao Chen could not find a suitable partner to get married and refund the service fee during the one-year service period of Century Jiajing was an important factor affecting Xiao Chen's signing of the contract.
Relevant facts show that there are some guiding words in the process of negotiation with Mr. Chen before signing the contract. However, as a person with full capacity for civil conduct, Ms. Chen must have a reasonable understanding and judgment on the required marriage service, and make it clear that marriage service may not necessarily lead to marriage. What's more, the service content, duration, payment and return of fees are clearly stipulated in the contract. In this case, Ms. Chen claimed that the staff of Century Jiajing used certain guiding language during the negotiation stage, which constituted fraud. Ms. Chen had the right to terminate the contract wrongly, and also had the right to ask Jiayuan to pay three times the service fee.
Teacher Chen's chat record with jiayuan employees.
The Tianhe District Court stated that the relevant service contracts and supplementary agreements are the true intentions of both parties, and their contents do not violate the provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and should be legal and effective, and both parties should perform them according to law.
According to the contract between the two parties, the service fee paid by Mr. Chen is 68,800 yuan, including service items and gift items. Jiayuan has completed one of the service projects, and Mr. Chen revealed that Jiayuan will no longer entrust to provide follow-up services. Jiayuan also said that the gift project should be carried out according to teacher Chen's requirements. At the expiration of the service of the gift project, the court began to investigate Mr. Chen of Jiayuan based on the principle of fairness, combined with certain dishonesty in leadership language during the negotiation with Mr. Chen before the contract was signed, and according to the facts of this case.
At the end of June 5438 +2022 10, the Tianhe District Court of Guangzhou made a first-instance judgment on this case. Jiayuan gave Chen 1 0,000 yuan and rejected Chen's other claims.
Mr. Chen said that she refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and decided to appeal.
She hoped that her experience would give her a wake-up call.
(Education teacher Chen)
If you have any questions about the self-taught/adult-taught examination, don't know the contents of the test sites for self-taught/adult-taught examination, and don't know the local policies for self-taught/adult-taught examination, click on Mr. official website at the bottom to get the review materials for free: /xl/