Foshan people outbound travel was closed after the return of 400 thousand deposit but no fruit back yuanjiao

Foshan citizens travel by 400 thousand margin but after returning to reclaim the fruit of Foshan daily news reporter Zhou Longfeng correspondent Chan Xuan reports: travel back 400 thousand yuan from abroad, but not to recover the deposit. Chen Chen, Foshan will receive its deposit Huang and other three defendants to court, asking for a refund of $400 thousand. Reporters learned yesterday, the Chancheng court in accordance with the law Huang returned 396460 yuan and interest. Last September 25th, bank executives Mr. Chen to find colleagues wife Huang signed up tours, and signed the group travel contract with a travel agency, Mr. Chen and his parents agreed in October 11, 2015 to 21 days ago to Germany, Austria, Switzerland travel 11 days, after the discount tourist fare plus the total premium of 47997 yuan (travel agency the original price of 51537 yuan fare), another charge of 400 thousand yuan deposit. Out of the trust of his colleagues, according to the requirements of Mr. Huang, has four times to pay a deposit of $340 thousand Huang account. Since then, according to Huang, to colleagues of the accounts to pay membership fee and deposit 107997 yuan. Travel back, Mr. Chen to find Hwang returned 400 thousand yuan deposit, but Huang to excuse for various reasons, has not returned. After repeated fruitless, Mr. Chen Hwang, colleagues, a travel agency to court, requiring the return of 400 thousand performance bond. The travel agency argued that the only charge Mr. Chen’s travel fare, according to Mr. Chen of the work units to provide security, the travel agency that doesn’t need to charge any deposit, so never issued any notice required to pay the deposit to Mr. Chen, have not received any travel or other expenses margin. And Hwang said Chen’s prosecution without objection, saying he was a temporary travel agency employees, margin collection thing, travel agencies and colleagues are not informed. The colleague said that Hwang is indeed working in the travel agency, but also holds a travel agency work permit, but he did not know whether the two sides signed a labor contract. Chancheng court after hearing that, Mr. Chen and travel agency signed the "contract" in the tour group, did not need to pay the deposit agreement, Huang travel agency is not stipulated in the contract signing of authorized representative, and there is no relationship between the labor contract and Hwang admitted its travel agency, the travel agency did not give yellow a charge power margin. Therefore, the court found that Mr. Hwang charged to ensure that the metal in the personal behavior of Chen, Huang should assume responsibility for the return of individuals. After verification, Huang Chen to ensure the amount of money collected should be 396460 yuan, 51537 yuan for the rest of the membership fee and insurance. Accordingly, the court of Chancheng Huang returned to Mr. Chen 396460 yuan deposit and interest, and this debt occurred in the period of the existence of a husband and wife with his wife, the staff bear joint and several liability. Editor: GDN002相关的主题文章: