According to the owner of Tesla’s mass buying campaign, the delivery staff from Tesla said that they had violated the prohibition of resale clause in Tesla’s terms of purchase because they suspected that their model 3 order was placed by pinduoduo or other businesses in the name of consumers, thus they cancelled the order and refused to deliver. According to the consumer, the vehicle was signed an order agreement with Tesla, and the consumer had no intention or intention to resell the vehicle for his own use. < p > < p > < p > pinduoduo second piner Lefu said it regretted Tesla’s refusal to fulfill its contract with consumers as a subsidy party. Lefu supports consumers to protect their rights according to law and will actively implement vehicle delivery. Does Tesla have the right to cancel orders? Xu Feng, senior partner of Shanghai Chuangyuan law firm, told radar finance and economics that if you breach the contract only by suspicion, how does the market operate and where is the integrity? Enterprises still need to have a sense of contract. If there is no evidence, the cancellation of the order will be liable for breach of contract, of course, consumers can also ask for continued performance of the contract. < / P > < p > on July 22, pinduoduo launched Tesla’s second killing campaign. After subsidizing, the price of the 2019 Tesla Model 3 is 2711500 yuan. After the event sponsor of pinduoduo provided a subsidy of 20000 yuan to consumers, the actual price was only 251800 yuan. < / P > < p > after a consumer grabs the subsidy qualification, he goes to Tesla’s official website to operate and pays a deposit of 1000 yuan, leaving the relevant car purchase information. < / P > < p > according to the chat records provided by the above consumers, after paying the deposit, a customer service personnel of Tesla Wuhan store contacted with him and sent the order and payment information. It is understood that in order to ensure that the subsidy provided by consumers is truly used for self purchase of cars, pinduoduo and Yiyi will pay 271550 yuan on behalf of consumers in the payment link of car collection. < / P > < p > the car purchase agreement also proves that the vehicle is placed by the consumer on Tesla’s official website, and the contract is signed between the consumer and Tesla. Pinduoduo and dealers should buy the car and only provide subsidies for consumers in the payment process. However, when it came to pick up the new car, Tesla refused to deliver the model 3 to the owners of pinduoduo’s group buying channel, claiming that these consumers were suspected of violating Tesla’s no resale clause, and Tesla would unilaterally cancel the order in accordance with the contract breach clause. This decision of Tesla makes this consumer feel helpless. The consumer said that he had signed an order agreement with Tesla to purchase the vehicle for his own use without any intention or intention to resell the vehicle, and he did not have any malicious intention to purchase the vehicle. < p > < p > < p > pinduoduo second Pinyin Lefu responded by saying that as an industry sophomore as a subsidy party for Tesla’s refusal to perform the contract signed with consumers, Lefu expressed regret for this, supported consumers to protect their rights according to law, and would actively implement vehicle delivery work. Is Tesla’s statement legal and reasonable? Tesla’s mere suspicion is meaningless and needs evidence. If you breach the contract only by doubt, how does the market work and where is the integrity? Xu Feng, senior partner of Shanghai Chuangyuan law firm, points out that enterprises still need to have a sense of contract. If there is no evidence, the cancellation of the order will be liable for breach of contract, of course, consumers can also ask for continued performance of the contract. < / P > < p > does pinduoduo and dealers’ payment behavior violate the prohibition of resale in the order terms? Zhao Zhancheng, a lawyer from Beijing Zhilin law firm, believes that consumers place an order on Tesla’s official website, and the final payment is paid by pinduoduo or platform merchants. This can not be regarded as a Resale Behavior in violation of Tesla’s order terms. < / P > < p > this payment method is to ensure the authenticity of platform subsidized consumers’ purchase behavior. In essence, what consumers have reached with pinduoduo and yibuyi is an advance payment agreement, and the act of paying for pinduoduo and suitable car is not illegal. Zhao said. < / P > < p > according to the analysis of many legal personages, as long as consumers place an order and complete the payment, Tesla should fulfill the agreement. There is no legal basis for canceling the order and refusing to deliver the vehicle, which constitutes a breach of contract. You Yunting, senior partner of Shanghai Dabang law firm, holds a similar view. According to the order terms, Tesla’s determination of resale behavior mainly includes two aspects: constitute resale, or other non bona fide orders. For orders with other non goodwill purposes, the explanation is more flexible. You Yunting said: Although Tesla can give a lot of non bona fide statements, such as unauthorized sales and unauthorized market activities, in order to maintain the security of transactions, China’s courts have always been very cautious about the termination of contracts that have been concluded. If one party wants to terminate the contract, it must give a very strong basis. You Yunting said that Tesla needs to prove that the order has caused significant damage to Tesla’s interests, which is quite difficult. I don’t think the court will support Tesla’s claim. Qiu Baochang, an expert of the expert committee of China Consumer Association and President of the E-commerce Law Research Association of Beijing law society, said that the relationship between pinduoduo and consumers is not the relationship between Tesla auto sales and purchase. Both parties are entrusted to pay the price, and pinduoduo is entrusted by consumers to pay the car price. After the establishment of the contract, Tesla’s unilateral cancellation of the order is a breach of contract. Article 49 of the e-commerce law clearly stipulates that the e-commerce operator shall not stipulate that the contract shall not be established after the consumer pays the price by means of standard terms; if the standard terms contain such contents, the contents are invalid. As can be seen from the contract on Tesla China’s official website, the original text of the clause reads: “for any order that we believe is for resale or for any other non bona fide purpose, we have the right to unilaterally terminate this agreement.” According to the analysis, we have the right to unilaterally terminate this Agreement for any order that we think has other non goodwill purposes in the latter half of the clause. There is excessive interpretation, which is to expand our own power with a legitimate reason, which is not reasonable from the perspective of contract terms. < / P > < p > any expression that our company thinks is too vague. From the perspective of rules, it is equivalent to all the powers are transferred to the enterprise, and non goodwill purpose is an expression that can not be defined. Industry lawyers said. A person in the industry said that the reason why Tesla set such a clause at the beginning was mainly to prevent malicious scalping and grabbing places. However, such a rule, which obviously violates Chinese laws, has existed for a long time, which also exposes Tesla’s deficiencies in consumer protection and respect for local rules. < / P > < p > some netizens have found that in terms of deposit, Tesla’s regulations in China are that we can cancel your order and deduct the first payment as liquidated damages without refund. But in the United States, the terms are “if you cancel your order, we will return it.”. < / P > < p > some consumers believe that Tesla, as an international enterprise, has failed to treat consumers in China and the United States equally, especially in the current environment, which is more likely to cause disputes. Once such a thing is discovered, it will destroy the long-term trust of consumers.