Industrial Bank Beijing Dongwai Branch Wealth Management Dispute Case Selected as one of the Top 10 Typical Judicial Cases for Consumer Rights Protection in 2025

Headline: Good News | A Case by the Beijing Financial Court Has Been Selected as One of the Top 10 Typical Judicial Cases for Consumer Rights Protection Across China in 2025 【Download the Black Cat Complaint Client】

Source: Beijing Financial Court

Recently, the China Consumers Association released the 10 most typical judicial cases for consumer rights protection nationwide in 2025. These include a case filed by the Beijing Financial Court—“Case of Financial Delegated Wealth Management Contract Dispute: the Responsibility Determination for ‘offline marketing and promotion and online completion of transactions’ to evade the ‘dual recording’ supervision when wealth management products are promoted to elderly consumers”—written by Wang Sisi and Shi Yubing from the filing division of the Beijing Financial Court.

Case Overview

Mr. Wang (over 65 years old) subscribed to three funds totaling 1.06 million yuan in succession upon recommendations from a client manager at the Beijing Dongwai sub-branch of Industrial Bank Co., Ltd. When he redeemed the investments, he incurred a loss of 219,000 yuan. Mr. Wang argued that he purchased the products with risk assessments operated on his behalf by the client manager, and that he was not provided with a “dual recording” (audio and video recording) during the purchase process. Industrial Bank argued that the above purchasing actions were all conducted by Mr. Wang himself online, and that the “dual recording” supervision requirements applicable offline do not apply to online sales. The court found that Industrial Bank had defects in fulfilling its suitability obligations to elderly customers, and that there was a situation of “offline marketing and promotion and online completion of transactions” to evade “dual recording” supervision, which clearly went beyond the scope of consumers’ independent purchases. In the first instance, the court ordered the bank to bear 30% of the compensation responsibility for Mr. Wang’s investment losses, and pay 63,000 yuan. The second-instance court upheld the original judgment.

Typical Significance

At present, with the rapid development of financial technology, online wealth management sales are becoming increasingly common. In some cases, certain financial institutions have evaded regulatory requirements such as “dual recording” through online channels, thereby infringing upon consumers’ rights and interests. In particular, elderly consumers are relatively vulnerable in financial consumption due to factors such as age and cognitive ability, and therefore require special protection.

This case has the following typical significance: First, it clearly defines the special protection principle for elderly consumers. It establishes, in the form of judicial adjudication, that financial institutions owe elderly consumers suitability obligations that are “different from those owed to ordinary investors, more targeted, and more prudent.” It requires financial institutions to fully consider factors such as the customer’s age, investment experience, and cognitive ability, and to fulfill the obligation to disclose risks in a manner that is sufficient to draw attention and enables understanding. Second, it substantively recognizes the regulatory requirements for “dual recording.” It clarifies that even if a transaction is completed online, as long as there is marketing and promotion behavior by sales personnel, it should be transferred to the sales专区 to conduct “dual recording.” This case serves as a warning to financial institutions that online channels are not a regulatory loophole. If a financial institution evades “dual recording” supervision through online channels, it will bear corresponding legal liability, which is of important guiding significance for regulating the sale of financial products. Third, it establishes a reasonable standard for dividing responsibility. Following the principle of “responsibility proportionate to fault,” when the financial institution has fault but the primary cause of loss is market volatility, the court reasonably apportions responsibility based on factors such as the degree of fault of the parties and the investor’s experience. This both protects consumers’ rights and interests and avoids excessive protection, reflecting the principle of fairness and reasonableness.

Rights Protection Guide

Before elderly consumers purchase wealth management products, they should ask about risks, the investment term, and fees, and understand product information; when purchasing, they should insist on operating themselves, insist on audio and video recording, and pay attention to retaining evidence. When financial institutions sell wealth management products on behalf of elderly consumers, they should fully consider factors such as the consumers’ age, wealth management experience, and cognitive ability, and fulfill suitability obligations that are distinct from those owed to ordinary investors—more targeted and more prudent. Regulators and financial institutions should refine the standards for fulfilling suitability obligations for elderly consumer groups, and establish a dedicated risk assessment and product-matching mechanism for elderly consumers.

The Beijing Financial Court will seize this as an opportunity, adhere to a development-oriented value philosophy, make trial judgments establish rules and work in coordination to promote governance, and fully leverage the exemplary demonstration effect of the “two special” initiatives, so as to serve and safeguard the high-quality development of the economy and finance with high-level financial judicial practice and high-quality research work.

Contributed by | Liao Qingshun

Edited by | Zhang Lulul

Endless information and precise analysis—available in the Sina Finance APP

责任编辑：Qin Yi