In addition, according to the survey data of Tianyan, on July 9, 2009, Xuexue.com was fined 200,000 yuan by Chaoyang Branch of Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce for "making false or misleading propaganda about goods or services". Two years ago, Cecil. Because of the same "false propaganda" problem, Com was repeatedly punished by Chaoyang Branch of Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce and fined 70,000 yuan.
Wang Xue was sued again for "refund problem": the court ruled that the refund was made.
According to the civil judgment of Chaoyang District Court published by China Judgment Document Network, Tan Yu1registered information and account number on the website at 0: 00 on October 26th, with 20 17 and11; On 2017101the morning of October 26th1:52, Tan bought six courses of "One-year Privileged Customs Clearance Class for Certified Public Accountants" online, with the amount of 4,998 yuan, valid until 201.
The details of the above training fee payment are as follows: Tan paid 500 yuan to Zhuoao Company through Alipay, and Tan applied for a loan of 4,498 yuan from the recommended online lending platform "Coffee Easy Finance". After being approved, he sent the application code to Zhuoao Company, and Zhuoao Company recognized the receipt of this 4498 yuan.
According to the background records of Wang Xue Company, the six courses of "certified public accountants enjoy one-year customs clearance class" contain many courses. On 20 17,10126 and 27 October, Tan watched some courses such as "warm-up start-up" and "18 exam season fast customs clearance scheme" in the above courses, but did not watch six courses such as accounting and auditing. At the end of the course, Tan only watched 4%.
20 17, 10/in the early morning of October 27th, Tan tried to apply for cancellation of the above loan of RMB 4,498 from Coffee Easy Finance. On the same day, Tan told the staff of Zhuoao Company to cancel the course order he had purchased, and said that the course he studied was "around 500 yuan". In the end, the two sides failed to reach an agreement. On 20 17 1 1, Tan sued the Nan 'an District People's Court in Chongqing, and the case was transferred to the Chaoyang District Court in Beijing for trial.
The Chaoyang District Court finally ruled that the defendant Zhuoao Education refunded the plaintiff Tan's training fee of 4,798 yuan (the tuition fee was deducted from 200 yuan's completed course).
There have been hundreds of complaints: false propaganda, overtime, overlord clauses, etc.
The third-party complaint platform "Gathering Complaints" shows that as of 20 19 10 13, there have been 533 complaints against Xuexue.com; Another complaint platform, Black Cat Complaints, shows that up to now, the number of complaints from Hixue.com has reached 309.
According to astronomical data, Xi Xue. Com was founded on 20 12. Is a long-distance network vocational education and training website, providing first-class training courses such as construction engineer, judicial examination and certified public accountant. Beijing Hi-learning Zhuoao Education Technology Co., Ltd. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Beijing Hi-learning Network Education Technology Co., Ltd., with 100% holding.
According to the eye survey, on October 5th, 20 16/kloc-0, Hixue.com was fined 4050 yuan by Chaoyang Branch of Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce for "designing, producing, performing, publishing education and training advertisements for entering higher schools, passing examinations, obtaining degrees or certificates, or making explicit or implied promises on the effectiveness of education and training".
From 20 17 to 20 18, Xu Xue. Com was fined six times in a row by Chaoyang Branch of Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce and fined 70,000 yuan for "the operators used advertisements or other methods to make misleading false propaganda on commodities".
A compelling investigation shows that on July 9, 2009, Xuexue.com was fined 200,000 yuan by Chaoyang Branch of Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce for "making false or misleading propaganda about goods or services".
According to the administrative penalty, the above-mentioned acts belong to the illegal act of exaggerating or concealing information that has a significant interest in consumers, such as quantity, quality and performance, and misleading consumers, as referred to in Item (8) of Article 6 of the Measures for Punishment of Infringement on Consumers' Rights and Interests.
Related questions and answers: