Cat merchants marked "network-wide minimum" was fined 5000 lawsuit against NDRC | NDRC | cat _ news of the day news

Original title: marked "network-wide minimum" was fined 5,000 day cat refuses to accept the tenants sued the national development and Reform Commission

Beijing News News (reporters Liu Yang) CAT, a merchant was labeled "network-wide minimum, 3 days only, sale prices" the words, by the national development and Reform Commission identified price gouging and impose a fine of 5000 Yuan. Over the penalty decision, the merchant will be Beijing, Huairou district on the two-level national development and Reform Commission told the Court. The morning of May 6, two-stage trial attended by head of the national development and Reform Commission, said the merchant promotions is to trick consumers.

　　Operators appealed against the punishment the prosecution request to withdraw

This morning, the case in conciliation Court, defendant, Huairou district, Beijing development and Reform Commission Director Ms Sun by checking prices, and Beijing Municipal Commission of development and reform of cadre Lee as officials appear in court.

Beijing, a food company, claims the plaintiff until November 6, 2014, its cat Mall set up a food store online shop in the "counter" "sales price", the words "belonging to the cat system comes with the field, settled in the merchants have no right to modify the cat back system. Taobao Mall on the "counter" does not refer to physical store prices only means a network established in cat Mall store prices. Huairou Commission of the accused according to the controversial price Express price fraud found that the plaintiff, apparent lack of factual and legal basis. Written decision of administrative penalty to the plaintiff asserts that the defendant and the defendant made by the Beijing municipal development and Reform Commission of the administrative review of decision no factual and legal basis, so the request be withdrawn.

In this regard, the two defendants said, according to the report, national development and Reform Commission on September 1, 2014, until November 15, 2015, check on the plaintiff's unit prices. By the investigation, the unit used false or misleading pricing means to entice consumers or other operators dealing with price violations.

　　"Price-gouging" two conflicting versions

The Prosecutor says "counters" and "discount price" is the cat system comes with, the store can modify the amount, are not allowed to change. As for the "special concessions, network-wide minimum price, only 3 days, don't miss the chance to" plaintiff set.

In this regard, the defendant says that, after investigation, the plaintiff stated "counters" and "discount price" was designed, not cat, now the exact opposite argument. "And the plaintiffs did not indicate price terms, the lowest of the whole network was breaking the law. ”

"The lowest of the whole network," explains, the plaintiffs said, "our cat Mall sales of moon cake is the only one, we and our own price comparison before. "The plaintiffs admit that there are many online merchants are hanging on the Internet for a long time" promo 3 days "banner, but says he really is to promote recovery after 3 days of 19.9 per cent of the original price. The defendant who claimed that "only 3 days" and does not indicate the starting and ending date is misleading.

The case is in court for sentencing.

Edit: Sze Liu 喆

Responsible editor: Xiang Changming SN123

Article keywords:
The NDRC cat

I want feedback
Save a Web page
The Beijing News

天猫商户标注“全网最低”被罚5000 状告发改委|发改委|天猫_新闻资讯

　　原标题：标注“全网最低”被罚5000 天猫一商户不服状告发改委

　　新京报快讯（记者刘洋）天猫一商户因标注“全网最低、仅限3天，促销价格”等字眼，被发改委认定价格欺诈，并处以5000元罚款。因不满处罚决定，该商户将北京市、怀柔区两级发改委告上法院。5月6日上午，两级发改委负责人出席庭审称，该商户的促销行为是诱骗消费者。

　　商户不服处罚起诉请求撤销

　　上午，该案在怀柔法院开庭审理，被告北京市怀柔区发展和改革委员会物价检查所所长孙女士，和北京市发展和改革委员会干部李女士作为相关负责人出庭应诉。

　　原告北京某食品有限公司诉称，2014年11月6日前，其在天猫商城设立的某食品专营店网上店铺中出现的“专柜价”“促销价”等字样属于天猫系统自带字段，入驻商户无权修改天猫后台系统。且淘宝商城关于“专柜价”并非指实体专卖店价格，仅指在天猫商城设立的网络专卖店价格。被告怀柔区发改委依据存在争议的价格表述认定原告存在价格欺诈行为，明显缺乏事实和法律依据。原告认为被告作出的《行政处罚决定书》以及被告北京市发改委作出的《行政复议决定书》均无事实和法律依据，故请求予以撤销。

　　对此，两被告称，根据市民举报，发改委于2014年9月1日至2015年11月15日，对原告单位的价格行为进行检查。经查实，该单位存在利用虚假的或者使人误解的价格手段，诱骗消费者或者其他经营者与其进行交易的价格违法问题。

　　是否“价格欺诈”双方各执一词

　　原告表示“专柜价”“促销价”是天猫系统自带，店家可以对金额修改，其他无权更改。至于“特价让利、全网最低价、仅限3天、莫失良机”是原告自己设定。

　　对此，被告说，此前调查时，原告陈述“专柜价”和“促销价”是自己设计的，并非天猫自带，现在作出完全相反的说法。“而且原告没有说明降价期限，全网最低价的表述也违反了法律规定。”

　　对于“全网最低价”的解释，原告称“我们在天猫商城销售的月饼是独此一家的，我们是和我们自己一家之前的原价进行对比。”原告承认有很多网络商家确实长期在网上挂着“促销3天”的旗号，但是其表示自己真的是促销了3天后恢复过19.9的原价。对此被告则表示“仅限3天”并没有注明起止日期是误导消费者。

　　该案未当庭宣判。

　　编辑：陈思 刘喆

责任编辑：向昌明 SN123

文章关键词：
发改委 天猫

我要反馈
保存网页
新京报