Fu Hui: Recall and Formalism

The recall drafts of China's various parties are hotly debated, because they have taken stringent measures in penalties for violations of the company and have received extensive attention. It changed the original face of such policy mild, if the company violates the rules may be subject to heavy fines, the fine may be higher than the company's assets.

After China became the world’s largest auto market with sales volume, such a policy was only introduced. In the world, this is yet another record with Chinese characteristics. In any case, this gives consumers considerable assurance in terms of policy provisions. At a minimum, when consumers face problematic products, there is a policy protection that can be found. If this policy allows consumers to turn over the old case, it can be tested to some extent whether this policy will protect consumers.

However, according to the inertia of the entire Chinese society, consumers cannot expect too much of this rule. The draft of the "Automotive Product Recall Supervision Regulations" still retains strong Chinese characteristics at the implementation level. It cannot be completely an umbrella for consumers. The promulgation of this policy will not be calm, it must be the result of numerous compromises between commercial interest groups.

Among them, the more concerned is that the investigation process of the problem product is required to be confidential. It can be said that this is the root of the problem. There is no good or bad policy. The key is what policy will be implemented. The confidentiality of the investigation process cannot prove the fairness of the investigation process. It is difficult for a disadvantaged consumer to have a dialogue with the investigation department, and the vehicle manufacturer involved may influence the investigation process. There is no shortage of such cases in the Chinese auto market.

In the 1990s, models such as Pajero, produced by Mitsubishi Motors, were recalled globally. As Mitsubishi Motors veiled the problem at the beginning of the problem, and with the constant emergence of problems, it triggered the recall scandal of the automaker. Mitsubishi Motors has been sluggish and has not yet returned to its pre-recall status. During this period, Mitsubishi Motors sold its Pajero V31 and V33 series of vehicles at the same time, and Mitsubishi Motors has only paid compensation for many consumers using legal protection. But this is not all that Mitsubishi Motors has dealt with in China.

Among them, the Lu Hui case is still pending. In December 2000, Changsha, Hunan's 30-year-old Lu Hui was hit by a Mitsubishi Pajero V31 off-road vehicle, resulting in a paralysed body that was certified as a Class 1 disability by a forensic physician. On February 16 of the following year, Hunan Provincial Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision stated in its report on the matter that the “Miscellaneous Mitsubishi car that caused the Luhui accident was the original Japanese Mitsubishi vehicle”. Subsequently, Lu Hui sent a letter claiming to Mitsubishi Motors Beijing. Lu Hui made a case. Mitsubishi Motors successfully escaped after fierce debates between the two sides. There is no need to assume most of the responsibility.

It is still not known what happened between the major roles of the Mitsubishi Motors and related quality supervision departments during the Luhui case's completion. The new car recall policy should not forget such ugliness. While China must be called globalization, it should be more transparent and fair in policy implementation.

In order to fully implement the system itself, the new car recall policy expressly stated that when there is a dispute in the investigation of the problematic product, a hearing may be held. However, the definition here is too vague. There is no precise standard for what kind of situation requires competition. At the same time, what qualifications are required for participants in the hearing.

In this rule, it is easy for many people to think of the hearing that Toyota President Tomomi Toyoda had just been forced to attend in the United States. This situation cannot happen in China. In an environment where people rule more than the rule of law, the possibility of holding such a hearing is zero. If the case prevails, then Guanghua Honda's wedding gate once was exceptionally suitable.

After the serious traffic accident occurred in the Accord sedan produced by Guangzhou Automobile Honda, the quality of the product reached unprecedented levels. However, after a long period of game, the instructions given by GAC Honda about the design of the Accord sedan are still difficult to convince. The role played by Chinese experts participating in it is also a mystery. Their combined energy far exceeds consumers. However, it is very difficult for consumers to find their own channels through their own ability.

It can be said that the absence of an independent and impartial third-party agency is the key to the questioning of the Accord wedding gates. However, it is impossible for China to establish such a third-party institution when excessively chasing commercial interests. Therefore, if such a hearing is held in time, it will only be a hearing.

Whether or not the recall policy can be transformed from policy to action is the key to the implementation and supervision of the recall policy. However, judging from the current policy content, it does leave a huge space for the operation of commercial interests. In a normal environment, it should be patched.