The underage stole his father s money and bought more than 8,000 Apple mobile phones, and his parent

Minors need parental supervision, so if this situation does not affect the secondary sales of the merchant, in principle, it can be refunded, but in reality, the merchant is generally unwilling to give a refund. As for how the merchant does it, it is very simple, the electronic products have been sold and used, and it is impossible to return them at the original price, and they can be depreciated according to the time of use of the mobile phone and the degree of damage to the appearance**.

To be honest, if parents want to return, there is no certain reason, it cannot be said that the underage child will not sell it to him if he takes the money to buy something, and the state does not have a legal provision in this regard.

As long as the purchased mobile phone does not have quality problems that meet the conditions for return and exchange, parents certainly have no right to return or exchangeEven emotionally speaking, children who lack self-control and the ability to distinguish between right and wrong need to be tolerant, but in the business environment, the formation of consumer activities is also protected by law, at present, the law only clearly prohibits the sale of tobacco and alcohol to minors, and there is no clear prohibition on other goods.

For merchants, children taking money to buy mobile phones are in line with normal transaction procedures, andThe merchant has no responsibility and obligation to judge how the child's money came from, nor does it have the ability to judge, so after the completion of the commodity transaction, the consumption activity will end, unless the mobile phone sold by the merchant has serious quality problems and meets the return conditions stipulated by law, it is obliged to accept the return request of the parentsOn the contrary, parents have no right to ask the merchant to return the goods, after all, the interests of the merchants also need to be protected by law.

Of course, because children are not familiar with the world, they secretly buy mobile phones behind their parents' backs, which will bring certain losses to the family economy, but this loss should be borne by parents who are not strict in discipline, in fact, the legal principle is very clear, but it is difficult for the public to accept it emotionally.

Parents' lax discipline and supervision of their children is the main reason for the theft of mobile phones, and the responsibility for the family economic losses caused by this cannot be shifted to the merchantsEspecially in today's society, minors have been very common in using mobile phones, and when merchants sell mobile phones, they cannot judge whether the child's purchase behavior has obtained the consent of the parents, so after the completion of the sales process, it should be determined that the formation of the transaction relationship cannot be changed by the will of the parents.

In my opinion, in the face of such a situation, parents have every right to apply for a return.

After reading this news, I don't know if you have noticed that the child who secretly bought a smartphone behind his parents' back is only thirteen years old, and he is only a minor, and the salesperson who sells the mobile phone sells the mobile phone to the child without confirming the identity of the child.

In fact, during the Chinese New Year, I also encountered something very similar to this incident, an 8-year-old child bought a few guns for his friends without his parents knowing. After the parents found out, they took their children back the guns that were issued, and then asked for a return with their children to the place where they bought the guns, and the store was willing to return them after understanding the situation.

Moreover, the point is that the owner of the mobile phone store in the incident is trying to recommend mobile phones to children, and as a child who does not have a strong ability to distinguish, it is difficult to resist the rhetoric of the boss or salesman, after all, even some minors are difficult to resist the salesman's strong recommendation when shopping. I suspect that the owner of the mobile phone store did this knowing that his children were still minors. I don't know if there are any other parents who have encountered such a situation.

Therefore, in my opinion, it is more hateful for mobile phone store owners to induce their children to make unreasonable purchases when they know that their children are not minors, than those who allow underage children to enter Internet cafes to play games.

All in all, I think that in this case, the boss is obliged to accept the request for the return of the child's parents. If the owner of the mobile phone store does not cooperate, parents can use the law to protect their legitimate rights and interests.

The child secretly bought a smartphone to play with behind the parents' backs, which in itself was enough to annoy the parents. However, when parents took their children to the mobile phone store to ask for a return, they were refused. Recently, Mr. Li (pseudonym), a citizen of Nanjing, encountered such an embarrassment.

Mr. Li argued that the merchant sold the mobile phone to an obviously underage child without the knowledge of his family and should return it.

What happened: Recently, Mr. Li, a citizen of Nanjing, found that his 13-year-old son Xiao Li bought a smartphone behind his back. "Probably to play games or social software, I told me before that I wanted to buy a mobile phone, but I didn't agree when I thought he was still young.

In mid-April, I found out that he was already playing on his phone. ”

At that time, the staff of the mobile phone store did not agree, they thought that the mobile phone had been used, and there was no packaging, and there was no way to return it as requested. Mr. Li told reporters that in order to conceal the purchase of a mobile phone, the child threw away the packaging box instructions on the same day, and only kept the mobile phone.

The child is only in junior high school, how can the store sell the mobile phone to such a young child, more than 1400 yuan is also a valuable, there is no inquiry when selling, and I don't care whether the family agrees, isn't this harming the child, too mercenary. Subsequently, Mr. Li not only contacted the consumer association, but also reported the matter to the police.

The staff of the Nanjing Consumer Association said that 13-year-old children can only carry out civil activities that match their age and intelligence, and mobile phones are not the standard or learning tools for children of this age after all, and parents have the right to return them according to the Contract Law.

In the end, under mediation, the merchant agreed to return the goods, but because there was no packaging, he had to pay a depreciation fee of 300 yuan, and reached an agreement with Mr. Li.

Legally speaking, a 13-year-old child who buys a mobile phone is obviously not of age, so the seller should not sell the mobile phone to the child. From this point of view, it is understandable for the seller to return the money to the buyer.

At present, the frequency and universality of teenagers' use of mobile phones is getting higher and higher, and we frequently see more and more teenagers among the low-headed people who appear on buses and subways. This is not only because teenagers themselves are a group with a high enthusiasm for electronic products, but also because with the development of smart devices themselves, the ** of mobile phones is becoming lower and lower. Many low-end mobile phones can even be purchased for only three or four hundred yuan.

In this situation, more and more teenagers can use their pocket money to buy mobile phones.

From my personal experience, in my junior high school and junior high school, many people in my class used mobile phones, and everyone in junior high school was probably poorer, and at that time, smartphones were not widely used, and most of them were feature phones. But in high school, the number of mobile phones skyrocketed. It is not an exaggeration to say that more than half of the more than 40 people in our class have mobile phones, and many of them are expensive Apples.

Therefore, merchants do not discriminate against the sales of mobile phones. As long as you have money, no matter how old you are, I can sell it to you. In the past, the sales of mobile phone cards were the same, but now it is different, and the sales of mobile phone cards today require real-name authentication.

So obviously, the state has begun to pay attention to the use of smart devices by minors.

So I believe that one day the sales of mobile phones will also enter a real-name mode, of course, which is not a small operation. But I personally think that when the age of smart device users tends to be younger and lower, smart devices will inevitably have many adverse effects on teenagers who lack the necessary self-control.

Pornography, both of these harms can be easily carried out on mobile phones. Not to mention the impact on daily classes and evening breaks, mobile phones are not necessary for teenagers. More often than not, mobile phones are an entertainment tool for teenagers.

Therefore, in terms of sales, I think it is necessary for the state and merchants to establish corresponding laws and regulations. In fact, China has never experienced such a generation, growing up with so many smart devices. So it's hard to say what the future generation will be like, and what kind of impact these devices will have on it, and the best way is to control it.

The influence of mobile phones is growing day by day, and I have always been very disgusted by the excessive entertainment phenomenon of adults and teenagers. At a time when mobile phones are becoming more and more game consoles, I don't think it's a good way to go about it.

In today's children buying products without hiding from their parents, many parents have a headache, and today I saw a news. A 13-year-old student bought a smartphone without a guardian, and his parents were very angry when they found out, and after asking which store to buy it from, the parents asked the store for compensation, but the store refused, because the phone had been used and there was no packaging. People have different opinions on this matter.

I also have a few views on this.

First of all, it seems to me that it is legally permissible for parents to ask for a refund from the store. Minors buying electronic products without their parents are in themselves deceptive to parents, and parents who are willing to spend their money without their knowledge, so I think they have the right to demand compensation from the store.

Secondly, from an emotional point of view, I think it is reasonable for parents to ask for compensation. I don't think there is a parent who wants their children to be addicted to the Internet, addicted to games, and unable to extricate themselves in the virtual world. As we all know, many college students are playing games, shopping, and rewarding, so these minors who have no ability to discern can't tell which ones are good and which ones are bad, in their opinion, as long as they are happy.

Finally, I think it's a lack of national law, which should require that minors are not allowed to buy high-value electronics without a guardian. I used to secretly save money to buy a mobile phone, and at that time, the salesman sold me all kinds of electronic products so that I could buy them, and in their minds, I just needed to make money, and the rest had nothing to do with me, which was an irresponsible attitude.

I hope that in the future, we can strengthen our supervision in this area.

Returns should be given without affecting secondary sales, and compensation should be made according to the actual situation if there is damage.

As long as the purchased mobile phone does not have quality problems that meet the conditions for return and exchange, parents certainly have no right to return or exchangeEven emotionally speaking, children who lack self-control and the ability to distinguish between right and wrong need to be tolerant, but in the business environment, the formation of consumer activities is also protected by law, at present, the law only clearly prohibits the sale of tobacco and alcohol to minors, and there is no clear prohibition on other goods.

For merchants, children taking money to buy mobile phones are in line with normal transaction procedures, andThe merchant has no responsibility and obligation to judge how the child's money came from, nor does it have the ability to judge, so after the completion of the commodity transaction, the consumption activity will end, unless the mobile phone sold by the merchant has serious quality problems and meets the return conditions stipulated by law, it is obliged to accept the return request of the parentsOn the contrary, parents have no right to ask the merchant to return the goods, after all, the interests of the merchants also need to be protected by law.

Of course, because children are not familiar with the world, they secretly buy mobile phones behind their parents' backs, which will bring certain losses to the family economy, but this loss should be borne by parents who are not strict in discipline, in fact, the legal principle is very clear, but it is difficult for the public to accept it emotionally.

Parents' lax discipline and supervision of their children is the main reason for the theft of mobile phones, and the responsibility for the family economic losses caused by this cannot be shifted to the merchantsEspecially in today's society, minors have been very common in using mobile phones, and when merchants sell mobile phones, they cannot judge whether the child's purchase behavior has obtained the consent of the parents, so after the completion of the sales process, it should be determined that the formation of the transaction relationship cannot be changed by the will of the parents.