In the first half of 2011, FAW Volkswagen ranked first in complaints

According to statistics, in the first half of 2011, the total number of effective consumer complaints for the motor vehicle industry was 1,014, an increase of 23.75% over the same period last year. Comprehensive statistics on consumer complaints in the motor vehicle industry in the first half of the year, the more concentrated issues are: problems with the public DSG gearbox, implementation of energy-saving subsidies for automobiles, quality problems of auto parts, and compensation for automobile auto-ignition.

In the first half of 2011, motor vehicle brand complaints ranked according to statistics. Among the consumer complaints in the motor vehicle industry from January to June 2011, the rankings of the top 10 car manufacturers were: FAW-Volkswagen, Changan Ford, Shanghai Volkswagen, and Shanghai General Motors. , Dongfeng Nissan, Chery Automobile, Beijing Hyundai, Changan Suzuki, BYD, and Dongfeng Peugeot. In complaints on motor vehicle consumption, auto consumer complaints exceeded 90%. Due to the CCTV 3.15 party, the incident of Kumho Tire's use of back-rubber instead of original rubber tablets caused widespread concern in the society. As a result, complaints about tires increased rapidly. The amount of complaints in March was the highest point of consumer complaints in the motor vehicle industry in the first half of 2011.

Auto parts and components are still subject to complaints from owners of vehicles. Car owners who are responsible for auto parts and components account for a large proportion of the auto parts problem. For the auto parts and accessories appraisal, they are still an obstacle to consumers' rights protection. In March 2011, Weiyin.com received a collective complaint from 43 owners of FAW-Volkswagen, Shanghai Volkswagen DSG transmission noise, jitter, and many other issues. Prior to this, the DSG transmission was recalled three times for various reasons, but it is currently reflected by the owners. The abnormal noise and jitter of the gearbox have not been well solved. In this regard, the owners have expressed their hope that the masses will issue effective solutions as soon as possible, instead of blindly testing the cars and slamming them on the ground of “normal phenomena”. If the "Product Quality Law" stipulates that two repairs cannot be used normally within the warranty period, the business operator shall be responsible for replacement or return. However, how to prove whether it can not be used normally, and the identification is usually difficult for consumers to do. This has also become the biggest obstacle for consumers to safeguard their rights.

The identification of auto-ignition issues as a barrier to rights protection has many causes due to auto-ignition, and the specific reasons are difficult to identify. However, consumers are still making regular maintenance at the manufacturer's special maintenance station, and have not undergone vehicle modification or normal driving. They still suffer from sudden spontaneous combustion of the car while driving or parked in the parking lot. The manufacturer is undoubtedly liable for compensation. However, at this point, in the incident of spontaneous combustion that the company had learned about, few manufacturers agreed to pay compensation. On April 5, 2011, a complaint from a Mercedes-Benz owner in Taizhou, Zhejiang Province indicated that the small trucks purchased in the Futian era were only 300 kilometers in 7 days, and spontaneous combustion occurred while driving. Subsequently, after Mr. Li’s firm protection of rights and rights protection network involved in multiple consultations, the dealer promised to use the humanitarian burden to partially repair the expenses.

A major reason why such complaints about spontaneous combustion are difficult to succeed is that when car manufacturers deny quality issues, the owner wants to prove that there are quality problems in the car, it is even harder to do so. He has to file lawsuits with big manufacturers, and consumers are both energetic and material. There is a wide disparity between the two, which makes it difficult for owners who encounter cars to spontaneously burn themselves.

The implementation of energy-saving subsidies for automobiles should be strengthened. Supervision In the first half of 2011, there were dozens of complaints from consumers complaining that consumers did not receive the corresponding subsidies after they purchased the models in the national automobile energy-saving subsidies catalog. Regarding the payment of energy-saving subsidies for automobiles, the three ministries and commissions of the People's Republic of China have clearly stated in the “Notice on Implementing the Subsidy Payment for Promotion of Energy-saving Vehicles”: The energy-saving vehicle promotion companies and their distributors must strictly distinguish between the sales incentives for enterprises and government subsidies. First, sell the energy-saving cars and issue sales invoices at the actual price after enjoying the business benefits, and then redeem the government subsidies to the consumers. However, there are still some car companies and distributors who have violated the regulations. For example, Chang'an Suzuki's manufacturers declare that the advertising price of most models includes the energy-saving subsidies for cars, which is in violation of the relevant provisions of the regulations on energy-saving subsidies for automobiles.

The gaps in the laws and regulations of the automobile industry urgently need to improve the comprehensive statistics. Consumers complained about the automobile industry in the first half of 2011 and found that the relevant laws and regulations in China have a blank on some aspects of certain matters, which is to make consumers suffer when their rights and interests are violated. Can not be dependent on, it is difficult to maintain rights.

For example, in China's relevant laws and regulations, there is no clear provision for the identification of auto-ignition and related issues of compensation. Most car companies have also drilled this loophole, making it difficult for consumers' rights and interests to be effectively protected. After the auto-ignition of the car, the owner suffered heavy losses, and it was even more difficult to bear the high costs of finding a third-party appraisal. As a result, after the auto-ignition incident, how to pay and how to solve was the final decision of the auto makers. Many consumers Said miserable.

In addition, in the course of the first half of 2011, the rights protection network for consumers safeguarded their rights. In some cases, even if consumers can provide corresponding evidence, it is still difficult for them to succeed. The reason is largely attributed to the existing laws and regulations in China. Not perfect, so that consumers can not rely on the corresponding issue. Such as the draft state of the automobile three packs method and the existing imperfect automobile parts and accessories appraisal system, and China's current "rejection management regulations for defective auto products" only in a batch due to design, manufacturing, etc. In the case of irrespective dangers of identity and property safety that are common in automotive products of type, type or category, or in cases where the national standards concerning vehicle safety are not met, the manufacturer shall take the initiative to recall it. In other words, when there are defects in the auto parts, but the defects do not cause potential safety hazards, the manufacturer can choose not to recall them. This makes it difficult for consumers to safeguard rights in the “common problem” of some auto parts.