Actor Ma Tianyu tweeted that Ctrip was “killed”, and the company was sentenced to “refund one for three”

On the evening of August 2, singer and actor Ma Tianyu tweeted that Ctrip was “killed”, “If you click on more than 3,000 tickets, it will become more than 6,000, and finally it will become more than 10,000.” In this regard, the customer service of responded that Ctrip will not be “killed”, and the specific reasons need to provide customer accounts for verification.

Nine Pai News search found that as early as March 2019, some netizens accused Ctrip of arbitrarily increasing the price of air tickets, and the same flight tickets were nearly 700 yuan more expensive than other platforms. At that time, Ctrip responded that there was absolutely no “big data killing” behavior. The problem reported by the netizen was caused by a program loophole, and the ticket price changed with the class.

According to a report by Zhejiang Legal News on July 8, 2021, Ms. Hu from Keqiao, Shaoxing paid 2,889 yuan online when booking a room on the Ctrip Travel APP , but when she went to the hotel front desk to issue an invoice, the hotel staff told her that the invoice amount was only 1377.63 yuan, and the booking price was more than double the actual price.

After that, Ms. Hu used Shanghai Ctrip Business Co., Ltd. to collect her personal Unnecessary information, on the grounds of “killing” big data, sued to the Keqiao District Court of Shaoxing City, demanding “one refund and three compensation”, and asked the Ctrip travel APP to add disagreement to the service agreement and privacy policy. options to use.

Finally, the court held that the Ctrip APP, as an intermediary platform, had an obligation to report the actual value of the target, but it did not report truthfully; Ctrip promised that Ms. Hu would enjoy the The preferential price of the diamond member was not fulfilled; when Ms. Hu complained, she was told the reason why she could not refund the full price difference.

Therefore, the court finds that Ctrip has committed false propaganda, price gouging and deception, supports the plaintiff’s “one refund and three compensation”, and the defendant Shanghai Ctrip Business Co., Ltd. compensates After the plaintiff Ms. Hu complained, Ctrip paid a total of 4,777.48 yuan in compensation for the price difference of 243.37 yuan and three times the price difference of 1,511.37 yuan for the reservation.

Jiupai News Intern Reporter Huang Yiting

[Breaking News] Please contact the reporter on WeChat: linghaojizhe

[Source: Jiupai News]

Disclaimer: The copyright of this article belongs to the original author. If the source is wrong or your legal rights are violated, you can get it from us by email Contact and we will deal with it in time. Email address: [email protected]