Lawyer Li Zuolin: A Brief Analysis of a Case Where a Passenger Obtained Compensation on Grounds of Consumer Fraud After an Operating Vehicle Detoured 1.5 Kilometers
On February 20, 2025, at 17:26, the official WeChat account of the Shanghai Pudong Court published an article titled "Taxi Maliciously Takes a Detour: Can Passengers Demand 'Refund One and Compensate Three' Based on the Fare?" The article was quickly reposted by numerous media outlets, providing clarity on the identification and application standards of "consumer fraud" in practice and offering guidance for adjudicating similar cases. A brief analysis of the relevant issues is as follows:
I. Case Review
1. A cruising taxi driver deliberately took a detour but failed to fool a regular passenger.
Mr. Fu lives in Shanghai. Due to work commitments, on the afternoon of April 14, 2023, he took a taxi as usual to head home. Shortly after the journey began, he sensed something was off. It turned out that the route taken by the taxi driver, Mr. Wang, not only deviated from the usual route Mr. Fu was familiar with but also differed entirely from the path planned by the in-car navigation system. According to the navigation instructions, the vehicle should have turned left, but the driver, Mr. Wang, insisted on turning right. Mr. Fu immediately requested that Mr. Wang follow the navigation route, but Mr. Wang flatly refused and retorted, “You don’t understand, we take this route every day.” Upon arriving home, Mr. Fu carefully compared and found that the mileage and corresponding fare shown on the receipt had increased significantly compared to usual.
That evening, Mr. Fu made a phone call to file a complaint. Later, after testing by a Shanghai taxi company to which the taxi belonged, it was found that the route on that day had indeed been detoured by 1.5 kilometers. The taxi company then called Mr. Fu, admitted the fact that Master Wang had taken a detour, and expressed willingness to refund and compensate Mr. Fu 20 yuan. Dissatisfied with the compensation proposal, Mr. Fu sued the Pudong Court, demanding “refund one and compensate three,” that is, a refund of 216 yuan for the taxi fare and 24 yuan for the highway toll, plus compensation of three times the taxi fare, amounting to 648 yuan.
The company argued that although the taxi driver took a detour, such conduct did not constitute fraud, and it was only willing to compensate the passenger 20 yuan in accordance with relevant regulations.
2. Court ruling: constitutes fraud, awarded 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 legal provisions, where a business operator commits fraud in providing goods or services, it shall, at the consumer's request, increase the compensation for the losses suffered by the consumer. The increased compensation shall be three times the price paid for the goods or the fee for the services. If the increased compensation is less than 500 yuan, it shall be 500 yuan. As for Mr. Fu's claim for a full refund plus three times compensation for all taxi fares, the court held that where the detour portion can be clearly distinguished within the entire journey, requiring a full refund plus three times compensation for the entire fare violates fairness, and the fare and toll fees for the non-detour portion are necessary expenses that Mr. Fu should bear and do not constitute his losses.
The court, at its discretion, determined that the taxi company should only refund and compensate for the extra 19.80 yuan fare charged for the detour. Since the compensation calculated at three times that base amount was less than 500 yuan, the court determined the compensation amount to be 500 yuan in accordance with the law. After the first-instance judgment, Mr. Fu was dissatisfied and filed an appeal, which was subsequently rejected. The judgment is now legally effective.
II. Determination of "Detour Driving" in Legal Practice
Pursuant to Article 812 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China; Articles 23 and 48 of the Provisions on the Administration of Cruising Taxi Operation Services:
1. "Detour driving" refers to the act of a cruise taxi driver failing to follow a reasonable route. Taking a detour without justified reason is illegal.
2. Circumstances under which detouring is permitted: When a cruise taxi driver detours to fulfill the duty of assistance due to legitimate reasons such as a passenger suffering a sudden illness, childbirth, or encountering danger; when the route needs to be changed due to traffic congestion, road construction, or other reasons, the driver shall inform the passenger of the reason for the change and the mileage and fare of the altered route, and may detour only after obtaining the passenger’s consent.
3. The carrier shall transport the passenger to the agreed destination by the agreed or customary route. A cruise taxi driver shall provide services in accordance with the national taxi service standards, choose a reasonable route to drive according to the destination designated by the passenger, and shall not deliberately take a detour.
III. Determination of "Consumer Fraud" in Adjudicative Practice
1. 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 Intent to Commit Fraud
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 Operators' Implementation of Fraudulent Conduct
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 Being Misled Due to Fraud
The reason consumers fall into cognitive errors is caused by the fraudulent conduct of business operators.
5. Determination of Consumer Conduct
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.
IV. Does a commercial vehicle detouring 1.5 kilometers constitute 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.
Based on the facts of this case, the taxi driver, Mr. Wang, deviated 1.5 kilometers during the course of transportation. It is inevitable that various factors, such as excessive speed, being obstructed by a large vehicle ahead, or being affected by other vehicles, may cause a driver to miss an intersection or fail to switch routes in time. This may force a situation where the passenger’s consent is not obtained, leading the passenger to overthink and misjudge, firmly believing that the driver intentionally took a detour. In this case, Mr. Fu spent 216 yuan on the taxi fare and 24 yuan on the highway toll. The additional cost incurred by the commercial vehicle’s 1.5-kilometer detour in Mr. Fu’s ride did not exceed 20 yuan. From the perspective of the commercial vehicle operator, the revenue gained from an extra 1.5-kilometer detour is less than what could be earned from taking another order at the base fare, which would be more cost-effective and safer. If one were to increase revenue by detouring an extra 1.5 kilometers on this order, it could result in an administrative penalty due to a complaint, with losses far exceeding the gains. Most commercial vehicle drivers would not take such a risk or engage in a losing proposition.
The author believes that taxi driver Wang's behavior being deemed as malicious fraud is unfair; at most, it is a minor detour.
V. Specific Analysis of the Taxi "Consumer Fraud" Case
Based on the overall circumstances of this case, the defrauded party, Mr. Fu, only overpaid for 1.5 kilometers of taxi fare. Specifically, this is mainly based on the following circumstances:
1. Taxi driver Mr. Wang failed to follow the navigation instructions. The vehicle was supposed to turn left, but Mr. Wang insisted on turning right. Passenger Mr. Fu immediately requested that Mr. Wang follow the navigation route, but Mr. Wang flatly refused and retorted, “You don’t understand. We take this route every day.” Subsequently, a test conducted by a certain Shanghai taxi company to which the taxi belonged confirmed that an extra 1.5 kilometers had indeed been driven that day.
2. The trial court held that as a professional engaged in driving services, a taxi driver should be fully aware of the optimal route. However, by deviating from a reasonable transportation route, driving unnecessary highway mileage, and charging service fees on that basis, thereby harming the passenger’s interests, the driver’s conduct should be deemed to constitute fraud.
3. According to the case description, Driver Wang insisted on making a right turn, rather than intentionally or maliciously turning right.
I'm ready to help translate your Chinese legal content into professional English for the Shenzhen Zhiming Law Firm website. Please provide the Chinese text you'd like me to translate.6. What remedies are available to passengers after a commercial vehicle takes a detour?
1. File a complaint with the competent department in charge of taxi administration.
Traffic law enforcement officers will retrieve operational information, driving trajectories, and audio-visual recordings from taxi onboard terminals through the Taxi Service Management Information System, conduct a comprehensive analysis of the retrieved electronic data, and pursuant to Article 47, Paragraph 1 of the Provisions on the Administration of Cruising Taxi Operation Services, the competent department of taxi administration shall order correction 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 carry passengers, detours, forced ride-sharing, or tampered meters while taking cruise taxis or ride-hailing taxis, please promptly call the 12345 or 12328 transportation service supervision hotlines for consultation or complaints.
2. Assert the carrier's liability for breach of contract before 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 order is completed, the passenger shall immediately communicate with the driver on site to find a solution, striving to resolve the matter through negotiation and avoid escalating or provoking conflicts that may lead to a deterioration of 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 in total, 126,800 Network Reservation Taxi Transportation Certificates issued, and 340,354 Shenzhen Taxi Driver Certificates issued. The number of motor vehicles in Shenzhen has exceeded 4 million, and the total length of urban rail transit lines in operation has surpassed 500 kilometers. The ride-hailing market has become saturated. With the vigorous development of the taxi industry, taxi drivers, as the direct providers of travel services, must uphold the principle of good faith, operate lawfully, and strictly abide by professional ethics. Taxi companies should also shoulder the heavy responsibility of industry regulation, strengthen professional ethics education for drivers, and enhance drivers’ service awareness. At the same time, passengers should also remain vigilant when taking taxis, safeguard their rights through lawful and reasonable means, and avoid harm to their own rights as well as excessive rights protection that wastes judicial resources, thereby jointly contributing 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.
Attorney Li Zuolin, member of the Communist Party of China, Lawyer's Practice Certificate No.: 14403202110325450. Specializes in criminal defense and work safety management. Since 2000, he has worked at a government-affiliated institution in Shenzhen. With over 20 years of work experience in Shenzhen, he has accumulated extensive social connections and a strong reputation. He specializes in corporate criminal crime prevention, work safety management, as well as administrative disputes, civil compensation, and other legal affairs. He currently serves as permanent legal counsel for multiple companies.
