[2] Compiled from: Shandong High Court
 
[1] Happily spending a large sum on a new phone, it suddenly "spontaneously combusted from high temperature" within just a few days of use. The consumer approached the brand's after-sales service, the seller, and the brand headquarters for a replacement, but was refused each time. So, how should consumer rights be protected?

 
 

Case review
[2] On November 5, 2021, Li purchased an iPhone 13 Pro 256G model from a home appliance company, paying 8,699.00 yuan. In December 2021, Li went to the Heze Apple after-sales service center, citing a small soybean-sized spot on the lower left corner of the phone screen and a pink vertical line on the left side. The service center performed a factory repair, replacing the screen, two signal transmitters, the camera, and the battery.

 
 

On January 30, 2022, the involved mobile phone became extremely hot, emitted smoke, and then a burn hole the size of a sorghum grain appeared on the back of the phone. Li again approached the Heze Apple after-sales service center, requesting a replacement of the same model. After the phone was kept at the service center for 20 days, the staff refused the request on the grounds that an external heat source could not be ruled out as the cause of the malfunction. Li then approached a home appliance company to request a new phone, but was refused. Later, Li contacted Apple's Shanghai headquarters, which gave the same response.
 
On June 22, 2022, Li again approached the home appliance company and returned the involved phone, invoice, repair records, and phone case to the company. The home appliance company had no objections to the malfunction of the phone, the repair process, or the repair records. The company stated that the time of the malfunction had exceeded the return and replacement period. If Li requested a replacement, it would only be processed after confirming that the product's malfunction was due to its own defects and that it still could not function normally after two repairs. After the second malfunction, Li refused further repairs and insisted on a replacement.
 
 
[1] Court Opinion
In this case, after the involved phone malfunctioned, it underwent one repair, indicating that the seller delivered a product with quality issues. When the phone later experienced a severe self-ignition malfunction and could not be used normally, the buyer had the right to choose to terminate the contract or request a replacement to protect their rights. Since the home appliance company could not prove that the delivered phone met quality standards, and given that the phone had quality issues again after one repair, it can be determined that the company provided a product that did not meet quality requirements and could not fulfill the contract's purpose. Li had the right to choose to terminate the contract and return the goods or request a replacement as a remedy for breach of contract. Li's request for a new phone replacement is supported by law.
 
 
《[1] The People's Republic of ChinaConsumer Rights Protection Law
Article 24
If the goods or services provided by the business do not meet quality requirements, consumers may return them in accordance with national regulations or agreements between the parties, or request the business to fulfill obligations such as replacement or repair. In the absence of national regulations or agreements, consumers may return goods within seven days from the date of receipt; after seven days, if conditions for legal contract rescission are met, consumers may promptly return the goods; if not, they may request the business to fulfill obligations such as replacement or repair.
For returns, replacements, or repairs carried out in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the business shall bear necessary expenses such as transportation.

 
 

 
[1] The author's perspective
Many consumers, when encountering product quality issues, believe that rights protection takes too long and costs too much, so they silently accept the loss. However, this mindset of backing down in the face of difficulty not only causes them to suffer losses but may also embolden merchants. In fact, litigation is not the only way to resolve disputes. Consumers can first negotiate with the merchant, and if negotiation fails, they can choose to file a complaint with the consumer association or relevant administrative departments. If you don’t value your own rights, who else will protect them?

Additionally, to avoid difficulties in future rights protection, consumers should keep evidence such as shopping receipts, transaction records, product instructions, and warranty cards. Especially during online shopping, it is best to save screenshots of the order placement, chat records with the seller, and retain relevant payment information and order confirmation details. This way, once a product dispute arises, consumers can efficiently protect their rights.