Baili'S "Sikatu" Is Accused Of "Selling Fake Products And Refusing To Return Goods"

Recently, a number of consumers have posted articles on social platforms saying that Baili's flagship store of "staccato" e-commerce is suspected of selling counterfeit goods and refused to give consumers a refund on the ground that the returned goods are imitations. According to the complaints from black cat, a third-party complaint platform, in the first half of this year alone, there were nearly 100 complaints about "refusing to return goods on the ground of imitation", and its flagship e-commerce stores were even accused of "cheating consumers with routines".

Consumer Ms. Wang complained that on July 3, 2020, she bought a pair of crystal sandals with a price tag of 1138 yuan (paid in 758.1 yuan) in an e-commerce flagship store in sicatu. After receiving the product on July 5, she applied for a refund due to improper fitting. On July 16, Ms. Wang's refund application was rejected by the e-commerce platform because the seller said that the shoes sent back by consumers were imitations.

"I sent the original shoes back in the original packaging. I don't know why I sent the imitations back." In the face of Ms. Wang's query, the customer service of the e-commerce flagship store of sigatou said that all the shoes normally produced by the company are chip coded, and each shoe has a size. If it is not found, it is a copy.

Due to repeated negotiations with merchants, Ms. Wang chose to reject the shoes returned by merchants and applied for customer service intervention of e-commerce platform. However, according to the chip encoding photos provided by the merchants, the customer service of the e-commerce platform once again determined that what Ms. Wang sent back was a copy. For this result, Ms. Wang said that she did not know the chip in the process of placing an order and receiving the goods. How does the customer service of the e-commerce platform determine that the shoes sent by the merchants are genuine shoes with chips? In response to this, the customer service of the e-commerce platform said that consumers should open the box to check the authenticity of the goods before signing in, and after signing for the goods, it means that the products are authentic by default.

Ms. Wang was dissatisfied with the statement of customer service of e-commerce platform. Ms. Wang said that as a consumer, she did not have professional equipment to test the shoe chip. How to judge the authenticity after receiving the goods? When it was impossible to check whether the shoes received had chips, the original shoes were returned but were told that they were imitations without chips. What's the justice? Ms. Wang thinks that Scarlett does not adopt the appearance of shoes It is unfair to label anti-counterfeiting codes or professional anti-counterfeiting clasps to let consumers check whether the products they receive are genuine and prove that the returned shoes must bear anti-counterfeiting marks such as chip code.

"The e-commerce platform customer service judges that the goods I send back are imitations based on the one-sided words of the merchants, which is a great insult to my personality."

According to a survey conducted by financial reporters from china.com.cn, the so-called genuine shoes contain chips, which are not reflected on the surface or outer packaging of the shoes, and the appearance of the shoes of the brand has not been printed with relevant chip coding information. In this regard, Si Jiatu said that the chip is inspected by the company's special personnel, and consumers can not see the relevant information.

Ms. Wang is not alone. In July this year, Ms. Li bought a pair of 668 yuan worth of cream shoes in the same e-commerce flagship store of sigatou. She felt uncomfortable after trying on the shoes, and the store supported 7-day return and replacement without any reason, and the freight insurance was guaranteed. Ms. Li initiated a return refund on the e-commerce platform.

A few days after the delivery of the express, Ms. Li received a call from the customer service of the e-commerce platform, saying that the merchant refused to refund, and the reason was that the returned shoes were fake.

"Where can I return the fake goods to the merchants?" Ms. Li indignantly said. She has been shopping on the e-commerce platform for more than ten years, and has never made any bad comments or wrangles with the merchants because of the commodity problems. "Returning fake goods" is the first time I have heard of such things.

Later, Ms. Li searched the Internet and found that complaints about "selling counterfeit goods and refusing to return goods" on social platforms such as Weibo and xiaohongshu were everywhere, and the reason for refusing to return the goods was the same as accusing consumers of returning imitations, even the comparison chart of genuine and fake products provided by the brand side was the same.

"As a brand of Baili group, a well-known enterprise in China, it's ridiculous to have such a bad management." Ms. Li said.

China net financial reporters searched the black cat complaint platform for relevant information of "Baili" and "sikatu". The results showed that the number of complaints of the two brands were 385 and 86 respectively, and a large number of complaints related to shop sales, consumer fraud and false publicity.

It is worth noting that in the 385 complaint records marked as Baili, Bailey customer service center has hidden all the replies. According to the disclosure of the supplementary complaint content by netizens, Bailey replied that "we are very sorry for the inconvenience caused by the product to you, and we will verify the event as soon as we receive it". However, the complaint problem has not been really solved, and there is a consumer's query about this Don't you dare to answer the complaint directly? "

According to the financial reporter of china.com, as early as the beginning of 2019, there was a super topic about "selling fake goods in the flagship store of sigatou". In the past year, although many netizens reported the experience of being refused to return goods by Scarlett on the ground of imitation under the post, there were few successful defenders.

In view of the above problems, the reporter contacted the e-commerce flagship store of sigarto for verification. The staff said that the online store is directly operated by Baili group, and the products are absolutely authentic and the quality is absolutely guaranteed. Referring to the complaint of "refusing to return goods on the ground of imitation", the staff member said he was not clear.

According to the information disclosed by the flagship store, the operator of the store is Belle e-commerce (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. According to Tianyan, the company was registered in April 2011 with a registered capital of US $50 million, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ligang (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd.

According to the administrative punishment record, Baili e-commerce (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. was fined 18000 yuan by Shanghai Hongkou District market supervision and Administration Bureau for "advertising operators acting, designing, producing and publishing false advertisements with the knowledge or should have known"; In March 2020, the company was fined 80000 yuan by the market supervision and Administration Bureau of Hongkou District of Shanghai city for "the type of prize, the conditions for cashing the prize, the amount of bonus or the prize and other prize sales information are not clear, which affects the cashing of prizes".

According to public information, scarcato was established in Hong Kong, China in 1998. It is a fashion shoe brand of Belle International. In addition to Scarlett, Belle International also owns more than ten own shoe brands, such as Belle Belle, Teenmix, tianmeiyi, tatata TA TA, Senda Senda, Basto Besto, etc.

On May 23, 2007, Belle International was successfully listed in Hong Kong. In 2013, the company was awarded the title of "the first generation of shoe king" with a market value of more than HK $150 billion. After that, due to multiple factors such as the sluggish shoe market and the failure of e-commerce transformation, Bailey announced its delisting on July 27, 2017.