Wang Xinliang, lawyer of Ji'nan, wrote the letter to the chairman of the CBRC.
Ji'nan daily
110 thousand yuan from a credit card with a credit card, and 5 years after the total penalty arrears increased to 440 thousand yuan. As a result, "one dollar has not yet been returned, but also according to the full interest rate" clause triggering users and netizens crazy Tucao. In November 6th, Wang Xinliang, a Ji'nan lawyer, wrote to Shang Fulin, the chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the CBRC), and asked the CBRC to rectify or abolish the banking sector's overlord clause involving credit cards. The CBRC has not yet responded.
reporter investigates credit card "lurking" 18 charging items
in fact, there are not many users who have similar experiences with Wang. Netizens "hollow sleepwalking" tells their own experience. In April, his credit card bill amount was 5605 yuan, the repayment period before the automatic deposit machine was 5600 yuan, thought that only 5 yuan money is not returned, can not produce much interest, but the first two days to check the Internet, even found that the bank interest has been owed 70 yuan. After the call to the bank customer service personnel only to know, although only 5 yuan is not paid, but has no interest free treatment, the 5600 yuan has to pay 5/10000 of the daily interest.
in October 11th, Miss Liu, who was carrying on the 50 thousand yuan transfer remittance, mistakenly deposited money in her bank credit card. Later, Miss Liu came to the bank. The customer service staff told her that according to the regulations of the bank, the ordinary credit card payment was collected and the service fee was charged at 1% of the cash withdrawal amount. Moreover, even if she is willing to pay the handling fee, Miss Liu can not take the money out at once, with a maximum of 2000 yuan a day. That is to say, to withdraw 50 thousand yuan, not only will be charged a fee of 500 yuan, but also run to the bank 25 times, the fastest 25 days to complete. In the first half of this year, the customer service committee of the China Service Trade Association conducted a special survey on
payment for payment of payment of credit card overflows. The results showed that 99.29% of the customers said that the bank should cancel the overlord clause.
reporter survey found that the average credit card fees of all banks exceeded 10 items. Among the 24 credit card charges listed by a bank, only 6 items are known by the consumer, such as annual fee, work cost, late payment, ATM's cross line withdrawal, and overlimit fee. The other 18 items, such as reset ciphers, notes, credit card credit certificate, supplement bill and overseas emergency service charge, are all potential fees. Eyes.
the media carried out an online survey of "overlord clause". 100% of the respondents said they had met the overlord clause. In a random interview with reporters, the public generally believed that the overlord clauses involving credit cards were rampant and had reached the point where they could not be ruled out.
the lawyer requested the CBRC to rectify or abolish the tyrannic clause
at 9:00 on November 6th. Wang Xinliang, the lawyer of the law firm of Shandong Da Zheng Tai and the law firm, sent to the chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission, Shang Fulin, the chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission, to ask the Banking Regulatory Commission to deal with the banking industry. The overlord clause of the card was rectified or abolished.
in an interview with reporters, Wang Xinliang said, in the near future, many media reports that credit card users failed to repay the full amount of interest on time. After consulting a large amount of information, Wang Xinliang drafted the "open letter to Chairman Shang Fulin of the China Banking Regulatory Commission". "Overdraft of 10 thousand yuan, repayment of 9999 yuan, even if there is not a piece of money, the bank also calculated at 10 thousand yuan, too unfair." Wang Xinliang said he looked up the regulations on credit card repayment by major banks and found that most of the other banks were in full interest, except that the ICBC clearly expressed the incomplete interest rate.
Wang Xinliang said in his letter, as we all know, banks are obviously in a strong position compared with ordinary consumers. And the banks are using this strong position, regardless of the relevant laws and regulations, infringement of the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, the formation of credit card repayment of the tyrant clause. Wang Xinliang said that he was both an ordinary credit card user and a lawyer, so he understood that this overlord clause had infringed on the interests of users. The vast majority of people do not know the law. In similar situations, they can only grumble and endure in silence. "What is the bullying of the people?" Wang Xinliang believes that this situation has existed for many years. As a regulatory unit of the banking industry, the CBRC can not make the banks invade the legitimate rights and interests of consumers again and again, and he requests the CBRC to rectify or abolish the unreasonable provisions of the bank's credit cards.
netizen voice "support you to a public interest litigation"
in written form to the Chinese Banking Regulatory Commission Chairman Shang Fulin a night before, Wang Xinliang in personal blog, micro-blog publicly published this open letter, by netizens.
at 17 November 6th, the reporter saw in Wang Xinliang's micro-blog that the open letter had been released less than a day, and 209 users had forwarded it, and another 28 had commented. In addition to directly expressing "top" and "support", many netizens expressed their views.
netizen "feathers" message, "the bank relies on monopoly position overlord"; the netizen "Gao Gao" said, "the credit card applicant's right to know, should be able to maintain! For our own interests." Netizens "Li Man research" also believe that the bank's related behavior "very unreasonable." "Huang Xu" is more acutely said, "the bank is now a robber of the robbers, since using credit cards, always have not finished accounts, not finished advertising text messages!"
"micro official" is a civil servant in Hubei Province, he told himself a few days ago because of the few dozens of Yuan "petty" and being less Deducting the 600 multiple interest experience, think "can not let them take the National People's resources to make their own money", and actively help the media to send micro-blog to ask attention, asking the other "Yuan Fang, how do you look?"
, but there are some netizens to Wang Xinliang's actions expressed concern. "Emei peak" in the message in the message inquired about the progress of the event, and said, "if there is no answer or answer is not satisfied, support you to a public interest litigation."
netizen Zhou Zhuo said, "writing letters is useless. Who can see the voice of the people? " Another netizen, Wang Haibin, described Wang Xinliang's action as "seeking the tiger".
industry point of view should be given a heavy penalty for the overlord clause
Wang Xinliang's final outcome is not yet known. Insiders say that the rule of law is fundamental in governing the terms of the overlord.
survey showed that 60% of the respondents reflected that, as the contract was formulated and provided by the operator, although he had objections, the individual was too weak to be forced to accept. 86% of respondents believe that even complaints are difficult to solve. Therefore, when most consumers are infringed on the terms of the overlord, they often "do not want to find a job and are forced to accept".
in real life, all kinds of overlord clauses appear in various forms, such as standard contracts, shop notices, and international practices. Driven by interests, some merchants have written the terms of the king into the format contract through various ways to let consumers unwittingly "recruit".
people in the industry believe that the key to govern the overlord is to raise the cost of the law, especially by perfecting the relevant laws, and aggravating the punishment of the overlord clause, so that the illegal cost is far higher than the profit. Legal experts suggest that the illegal income should be confiscated according to the anti monopoly law, and a fine of 1% to 10% of the turnover should be imposed to pay a heavy price for the illegal act. (newspaper reporter Hu Lei)
overlord clause suspected of three major violations of
in the letter, Wang Xinliang with the double identity of the lawyer and credit card user and the chairman of the Banking Regulatory Commission Shang Fulin, he thinks that the appearance of high credit card retention money is inseparable from the tyrant clause of the credit card industry. Wang Xinliang believes that the banking industry on the overlord clause of credit card mainly exists the following violations:
one, infringement of the right to know the consumer. When the consumer claims a credit card, it has not been clearly informed of the way to collect the interest of the credit card and the payment of the breach of contract, especially if it is not clearly informed of the repayment of the repayment, but the interest is charged according to the amount of the total repayment. However, in many banks' online applications for credit card business, there is no explicit way to inform them in the contract (or agreement).
two, violating the fair trading rights of consumers. When the consumer is inadvertently or incapable of repayment, the repayment of the repayment is part of the obligation that has already been fulfilled. It should not be taken into account in the full amount of interest. This act is a clear and fair act, which belongs to the tyrant clause.
three, contrary to the mandatory provisions of the CBRC's "measures for the supervision and administration of credit card business of commercial banks" concerning repayment of interest. The provisions of the thirty-seventh fourth paragraphs clearly stipulate that the banking industry should inform the consumer of the rules of the interest counting and the collection of the late payment by "important hints" in the application submitted by the consumer. However, many banks did not make detailed hints in accordance with this method.