Why write “deposit” instead of “deposit”?

2022-04-27 0 By

Copyright: This article is for exchange and learning only. The copyright belongs to the original author. If the source is wrong or violates your rights and interests, please inform us, we will delete it immediately.From: Legal affairs home Source: Beijing Haidian Court, article/Mr. Huang Yang, Li Yanzhou and Ms. Tian in the process of negotiating about renting a house, transfer 10,000 yuan to Ms. Tian.After the two parties did not sign the rental contract, Mr. Zhou then sued Ms. Tian to the court, asking for a refund of the deposit.Haidian court after hearing, the judgment of Ms. Tian returned Mr. Zhou deposit 10 thousand yuan.The plaintiff Mr. Zhou claimed that he saw the rental advertisement on January 13, 2020, and contacted the lessor Ms. Tian to inquire about rental matters. The next day, wechat transferred 10,000 yuan deposit to Ms. Tian, and Ms. Tian agreed and accepted the transfer.After because both sides did not sign the rental agreement, the lawsuit to the court to put forward the above appeal.The defendant, Ms. Tian argued that she did not agree to refund 10,000 yuan.I have told Mr. Zhou that deposit should be paid before renting, not deposit, and Mr. Zhou turned over 10,000 yuan later.Transfer when write is deposit, at that time already put forward Mr Zhou to write is “deposit”, should be to write “deposit”, Mr Zhou said to write a typo.Although the two parties did not sign the rental contract, but Ms. Tian believes that Mr. Zhou is the deposit, so do not agree to return.During the trial, after checking the wechat and SMS chat records of both parties in court, it was shown that Mr. Zhou used the words “deposit” twice when talking about the payment of 10,000 yuan with Ms. Tian, and Ms. Tian did not object to this;And the parties have not explicitly agreed on the nature of the payment.After hearing the court, the court held that, first of all, when Mr. Zhou transferred 10,000 yuan to Ms. Tian, there was no definite agreement between the two parties to sign the lease contract within a certain time in the future, so there was no specific act that needed to be guaranteed.Secondly, in the text message and wechat, Mr. Zhou will write the 10 thousand yuan “deposit”, rather than “deposit”, it should be said, whether from the literal meaning of understanding, or from the transaction habits to explain, the meaning of the two are obviously different.Tian never raised any objections and accepted the 10,000 yuan immediately.Therefore, in the case that Ms. Tian could not provide evidence to prove that both parties had clearly agreed on the penalty conditions for the deposit on the nature of the 10,000 yuan when the money was delivered, her defense of claiming the right to deposit is not legally valid.Now Mr. Zhou’s claim for ms Tian to return the 10,000 yuan deposit has factual and legal grounds and should be supported.In the end, the court ruled that Ms. Tian returned Mr. Zhou’s deposit of 10,000 yuan.Neither party appealed the verdict, which is now in effect.The judge said that “deposit” and “deposit” although only one word difference, but the corresponding legal consequences are completely different.Deposit has the nature of guaranteeing the performance of the contract, while deposit is only an idiomatic expression, not a legal concept, and does not have the function of guarantee.Article 587 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China stipulates: where the debtor performs the debt, the deposit shall be set off against the price or recovered.Where the party paying the deposit fails to perform its obligations or rendered non-conforming performance, thus making it impossible to realize the purpose of the contract, it shall not be entitled to request the return of the deposit.If the party receiving the deposit fails to perform its obligations or does not perform in conformity with the agreement, thus making it impossible to realize the purpose of the contract, it shall return the deposit in double.Deposit as a form of debt guarantee, it has at least the following two characteristics: first, deposit should be clearly agreed in written form.When the deposit penalty condition that the droit of deposit agrees from achievement, produce transfer namely or become the standard of claim for compensation.Second, what the deposit guarantees is the specific behavior of both parties.Any party does not perform the contract or there are other contractual provisions of the event, will incur the corresponding deposit penalty.However, the 10,000 yuan involved in this case does not meet the above two characteristics, and Ms. Tian cannot provide evidence to prove that both parties clearly agreed on the deposit penalty conditions for the nature of the 10,000 yuan when the money was delivered.Therefore, the defense of deposit right is not tenable in law.