Attorney Li Zuolin: Analysis of a case where an operating vehicle detoured 1.5 kilometers and the passenger received compensation for consumer fraud
On February 20, 2025, at 17:26, the Shanghai Pudong Court official account published an article titled "Taxi maliciously detours, can passengers demand 'refund and triple compensation' for the fare?" It was quickly reposted by multiple media outlets, clarifying the identification and application standards of "consumer fraud" in practice, and providing guidance for judgments in similar cases. The following is a brief analysis of related issues:
I. Case Review
1. The cruising taxi driver insisted on taking a detour, but failed to fool a "regular customer."
2. Mr. Fu lives in Shanghai. Due to work reasons, on the afternoon of April 14, 2023, he took a taxi home as usual. Shortly after the ride began, he felt something was off. It turned out that the route taken by the taxi driver, Master Wang, deviated from the familiar route Mr. Fu usually took and was also completely different from the route planned by the in-car navigation system. According to the navigation instructions, the vehicle should have turned left, but Master Wang insisted on turning right. Mr. Fu immediately asked Master Wang to follow the navigation route, but Master Wang flatly refused and retorted, "You don't understand, we drive this every day." When he arrived home, Mr. Fu carefully compared and found that the mileage and corresponding fare shown on the receipt had significantly increased compared to usual.
3. That evening, Mr. Fu called to file a complaint. Later, after testing by the Shanghai taxi company to which the taxi belonged, it was found that the driver had indeed taken a detour of 1.5 kilometers that day. The taxi company then called Mr. Fu, admitted that Master Wang had taken a detour, and offered to refund 20 yuan. Dissatisfied with the compensation plan, Mr. Fu sued in Pudong Court, demanding "a refund of one and compensation of three," i.e., a refund of 216 yuan for the taxi fare and 24 yuan for the expressway fee, plus compensation of three times the taxi fare, totaling 648 yuan.
4. The company argued that although the taxi driver had taken a detour, this behavior did not constitute fraud, and it was only willing to compensate the passenger 20 yuan according to relevant regulations.
5. 2. Court ruling: Constitutes fraud, awards 500 yuan in compensation.
6. After trial, the Pudong Court held that the focus of the dispute was whether the taxi driver's detour constituted fraud. Fraud in civil law refers to an act where the perpetrator intentionally deceives another, causing the other party to form a wrong judgment and make a declaration of intent based on that wrong judgment. The court found that as a professional driver providing driving services, the taxi driver should have known the optimal route, but he deviated from the reasonable transport route, drove unnecessary mileage, and charged additional service fees accordingly, causing damage to the passenger's interests. This should be deemed to constitute fraud. The taxi driver is an auxiliary person for the taxi company's contractual obligations, and the legal consequences of the fraudulent act he committed should be borne by the taxi company.
Regarding the amount of compensation, according to the law, if a business operator engages in fraudulent conduct in providing goods or services, they shall, at the consumer's request, increase compensation for the consumer's losses, with the increased amount being three times the price of the goods purchased or the service received; if the increased compensation is less than 500 yuan, it shall be 500 yuan. Regarding Mr. Fu's claim for a refund of all taxi fares with triple compensation, the court held that, under circumstances where the detour portion is clearly distinguishable in the entire trip, demanding a refund of all fares with triple compensation violates fairness, and the fares and tolls for the non-detour portion are necessary expenses that Mr. Fu should bear and do not constitute his losses.
The court determined that the taxi company should only refund and compensate for the extra 19.80 yuan charged for the detour portion. Since the compensation calculated at three times this base amount is less than 500 yuan, the court legally set the compensation amount at 500 yuan. After the first-instance judgment, Mr. Fu appealed but was rejected, and the judgment has now taken effect.
II. Determination of "detour driving" in legal practice
According to Article 812 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, and Articles 23 and 48 of the Regulations on the Management of Cruising Taxi Operation Services:
1. "Detour driving" refers to the act of a cruising taxi driver not driving along a reasonable route, and driving in a detour without justifiable reasons is illegal.
2. Circumstances where detour driving is permissible: when a passenger has a sudden illness, is giving birth, is in danger, or other justifiable reasons, and the cruising taxi driver detours to fulfill a rescue obligation; when a change in the driving route is necessary due to traffic jams, road construction, etc., the driver informs the passenger of the reason for the change and the distance, cost, etc., of the new route, and may detour with the passenger's consent.
3. The carrier shall transport passengers to the agreed destination via the agreed or usual route. Cruise taxi drivers shall provide services in accordance with national taxi service standards, choose a reasonable route based on the passenger's designated destination, and shall not deliberately take detours.
III. Determination of "consumer fraud" in judicial practice
1. Constituent elements of consumer fraud
Consumer fraud refers to, in the field of consumption, an operator intentionally providing false information to the other party, or intentionally concealing the true situation, inducing the other party to make a false expression of intent and thereby enter into a contract.
2. Determination of the operator's subjective fraudulent intent
The subjective state of the operator in fraud shall be intentional, not negligent, meaning the operator subjectively hopes that the consumer will fall into a mistaken understanding and make a false expression of intent. Regarding the allocation of the burden of proof for the operator's subjective intent, the consumer shall first prove that the operator objectively engaged in fraudulent conduct, after which the operator shall prove that they had no subjective fraudulent intent; if the operator fails to complete the proof, it shall be presumed that the operator had subjective fraudulent intent.
3. Determination of fraudulent conduct by business operators
Fraudulent conduct by business operators includes active fraud and passive fraud. Active fraud refers to intentionally providing false information; when a business operator knowingly makes false statements to consumers while providing goods or services, it constitutes active fraud. Passive fraud refers to intentionally concealing the truth; when a business operator has a duty to inform but deliberately fails to disclose or conceals facts, causing consumers to make erroneous expressions of intent.
4. Determination of consumers falling into cognitive errors due to fraud
The reason consumers fall into cognitive errors is caused by the fraudulent conduct of business operators.
5. Determination of consumer behavior
Consumer behavior refers to the purchase, use of goods, or acceptance of services by consumers for daily living needs, that is, the purchase, use of goods, or acceptance of services to meet daily needs such as food, clothing, housing, and transportation constitutes consumer behavior.
4. Whether a commercial vehicle detouring 1.5 kilometers constitutes consumer fraud or breach of contract
Under normal circumstances, consumer fraud occurs during the contracting stage when an operator deceives a consumer, while during the performance stage, if the operator fails to deliver the goods as agreed, it constitutes a breach of contract.
In light of the facts of this case, taxi driver Wang's detour of 1.5 kilometers occurred during the transportation process. It is inevitable that due to various factors such as excessive speed, being blocked by a large vehicle ahead, or being affected by other vehicles, he may have missed an exit or failed to switch routes in time, leading to a situation where, without obtaining the passenger's consent, the passenger might overthink and misjudge, firmly believing the driver intentionally detoured. In this case, Mr. Fu paid 216 yuan for the taxi fare and 24 yuan for the expressway fee. The additional cost incurred by the commercial vehicle's 1.5-kilometer detour in Mr. Fu's trip did not exceed 20 yuan. From the perspective of the commercial vehicle, the profit gained from the 1.5-kilometer detour is far less than the profit, cost-effectiveness, and safety of taking another order at the base fare. If the driver attempted to increase revenue by detouring 1.5 kilometers on this order, the potential loss from administrative penalties due to complaints would far outweigh the gain, and most commercial vehicle drivers would not take such risks or engage in loss-making ventures.
The author believes that taxi driver Wang's behavior being deemed as malicious fraud is unfair; at most, it is a minor detour.
5. Specific analysis of the taxi "consumer fraud" case
Considering the overall circumstances of this case, the defrauded party, Mr. Fu, only paid an additional 1.5 kilometers of taxi fare. Specifically, it is mainly based on the following circumstances:
1. Taxi driver Master Wang did not follow the navigation instructions; the vehicle should have turned left, but Master Wang insisted on turning right. Passenger Mr. Fu immediately asked Master Wang to follow the navigation route, but Master Wang flatly refused and retorted, "You don't understand, we drive this every day." Later, after testing by the Shanghai taxi company to which the taxi belonged, it was found that the driver had indeed taken a detour of 1.5 kilometers that day.
2. The trial court held that as a professional driver providing driving services, the taxi driver should have been aware of the optimal route. However, by deviating from the reasonable transport route, driving unnecessary mileage, and charging additional service fees accordingly, causing harm to the passenger's interests, his actions should be deemed as constituting fraud.
3. According to the case description, Master Wang insisted on turning right, rather than doing so intentionally or maliciously.
6. What remedies are available to passengers after a commercial vehicle takes a detour?
1. File a complaint with the taxi administrative department.
Traffic enforcement officers will retrieve the taxi's operational information, driving trajectory, and audio-visual system data from the taxi service management information system, conduct a comprehensive analysis of the retrieved electronic information, and in accordance with Article 47, Paragraph 1 of the "Regulations on the Administration of Cruising Taxi Operation Services," order the taxi administrative department to correct the violation and impose a fine of not less than 200 yuan but not more than 2,000 yuan.
If you encounter issues such as refusal to take passengers, detours, forced ride-sharing, or meter tampering when taking a cruising taxi or ride-hailing taxi, please promptly call the transportation service supervision hotline 12345 or 12328 for consultation or complaints.
2. Claim the carrier's liability for breach of contract from the judicial authorities.
According to Article 812 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the carrier shall transport passengers and goods to the agreed destination via the agreed or customary route. Transporting via the agreed or customary route is an obligation of the carrier. Under Article 813 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, if the carrier increases the fare or transportation costs by not following the agreed or customary route, passengers, consignors, or consignees may refuse to pay the increased portion of the fare or transportation costs.
3. After the trip ends, passengers should immediately communicate with the driver on-site to seek a negotiated solution, avoiding escalation or provocation of conflict that could worsen the situation.
7. Lawyer Li's opinion
When a cruising taxi or ride-hailing taxi driver accepts an order and, during the process of transporting the passenger, fails to follow the navigation route provided by the platform, or changes the route without the passenger's consent, choosing a route that is not the shortest, causing unnecessary detours that result in the passenger spending more time and paying higher fares, the driver fails to fulfill the carrier's legal obligations and should bear liability for breach of contract. If the passenger has already paid the fare, they have the right to demand that the driver's company refund the excess amount paid.
Of course, if the drivers of cruising taxis or ride-hailing vehicles encounter situations such as platform navigation delays, temporary road controls, or vehicle anomalies, it should be treated differently.
Taking Shenzhen as an example, as of January 2025, there were 27 ride-hailing platforms, 126,800 "Online Ride-Hailing Vehicle Transportation Certificates" issued, 340,354 "Shenzhen Taxi Driver Certificates" issued, the number of motor vehicles in Shenzhen exceeded 4 million, the total length of urban rail transit lines exceeded 500 kilometers, and the ride-hailing market has become saturated. With the booming development of the taxi industry, taxi drivers, as direct providers of travel services, must uphold the principle of integrity, operate legally, and strictly adhere to professional ethics. Taxi companies should also take on the responsibility of industry standards, strengthen professional ethics education for drivers, and enhance their service awareness. At the same time, passengers should remain vigilant when taking taxis, protect their rights legally and reasonably, avoid damaging their own rights, prevent excessive rights protection, and waste of judicial resources, and jointly contribute to the progress of the rule of law in society.
Motto: The wise are precise in law, the enlightened value teachers. With a selfless spirit, pursue profound expertise in the craft.
Li Zuolin, a member of the Communist Party of China, lawyer license number: 14403202110325450. Specializes in criminal defense and safety production management. Since 2000, has worked at a government-affiliated institution in Shenzhen. Over 20 years of work experience in Shenzhen has accumulated extensive social connections and a good reputation. Proficient in corporate criminal crime prevention, safety production management, as well as administrative disputes, civil compensation, and other legal matters. Currently serves as a perennial legal advisor for multiple companies.
