Selling a house to provoke a lawsuit and carry a bank card as a “flowing water” but was controlled by an intermediary

  • time:
  • Browse: 138
  • Source: Dongyang Information Network

    Summary: Recently, this newspaper received a letter from an elderly reader, reflecting that at that time people sold a house and provoked a debt. Through interviews, reporters found that in the face of carefully set traps, the victims often lacked the ability to protect people at the time in English with the law , and had disadvantages in providing evidence.

    Copies of relevant materials such as the Real Estate Loan Mortgage Contract, the Mortgage Loan Agreement, and the Shanghai Public Security Bureau Yangpu Branch Bureau's Notice of Initiating a Case. Photo by our reporter Shen Tongrui

    For some time, frauds in real estate transactions and private lending have occurred frequently, the means have been constantly renovated, and the masses have responded strongly.

    Recently, this newspaper received a letter from an elderly reader, reflecting that at that time, people sold a house and provoked a debt. Through interviews, reporters found that in the face of carefully set traps, the victims often lacked the ability to protect people at the time in English with the law, and had disadvantages in providing evidence.

    Everyone hopes to expose similar scams through reports to arouse the attention of relevant departments. At the same time, they remind the masses that when dealing with large amounts of property properly, they must strengthen their awareness of the rule of law. Diverse criminals have every opportunity.


    In 2016, Ms. Zhou Lihua, a Shanghai resident, intends to sell stores in Yangpu District, Shanghai. The intermediary told her that buyers and sellers can only pay very high taxes. As a result of changing to a real estate mortgage loan contract, not only can the house be sold, but also "tax avoidance". Therefore, Zhou Lihua signed a loan agreement through an intermediary, thinking that the creditor would take away the house when it was not repaid at the time of the loan. At that time, people received the loan, and the income was the same as the sale of the house. Unexpectedly, not only did the borrowing reach the account in full, but at the time, the person had also become a defendant and a dishonest performer because of the loan.

    So is it possible that something strange is going through? The reporter went to Shanghai and Jiangsu to conduct field investigations.

    One transaction resulting in two different mortgage loan contracts

    "I was deceived by this group of people in collusion with each other. Now that the real estate is not available and the money is not available, I have become a breach of trust." When selling a house , she was carrying a debt. 62-year-old Ms. Zhou Lihua mentioned this Disputes are emotional.

    Zhou Lihua said that she used years of savings to buy stores 63, 65 and 67, Hejian Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai. In October 2016, Zhou Lihua planned to sell the shop. Through the intermediary Yang Moyun who had dealt with the people at the time, Zhou Lihua approached a buyer named Lan Yuanmoufa. The two sides agreed that Zhou Lihua could get 14.3 million yuan after the transaction was completed.

    However, the reporter found that the two did not necessarily sign a house sales contract or a real estate mortgage loan contract. Zhou Lihua said: "I don't care about the intermediary, the shops pay a high tax, and the mortgage method is recommended." The specific plan is to borrow 14.3 million yuan from Zhou Lihua to Yuan Moufa, and Hejian Road 63, 65 No. 67 is used as collateral. After the five-month loan period expires, Zhou Lihua does not need to repay the money, and the shop transfers to Yuan Moufa in accordance with the terms of the liability for breach of contract. At that time, Zhou Lihua agreed to the other party's plan.

    But Zhou Lihua discovered that things did not necessarily go as smoothly as they said. Yuan Moufa did not call Zhou Lihua in detail at one time, nor did it start on November 22, 2016, intermittently or by her person or through the account of the person at that time. As of January 26, 2017, Zhou Lihua had only received 7.7 million yuan. You and your number are far from the 14.3 million yuan that was set at the time. Zhou Lihua had to continue to seek Yuan Moufa and Yang Mouyun to urge.

    By May 2017, the money had not been fully received, but Zhou Lihua had received another unfamiliar call. "Another person named Chen Mouwei said that I should repay the interest of the boss Wang Mougang." Although Zhou Lihua was inexplicable, to say that borrowing also exists between her and Yuan Moufa, you and your name Chen Who is Mou Wei? Why is there a relationship with someone named Wang Mougang? Where does interest come from?

    Zhou Lihua asked Yuan Moufa to talk about it, but Yuan Moufa only said that it was the fault of the intermediary Yang Mouyun. However, Yuan Moufa said that since he promised to guarantee Zhou Lihua's 14.3 million yuan in hand, he would pay Chen Mouwei's interest in addition to paying the full amount of the house, but the funds in his hand could not be opened for the time being. When the funds are in place, they will be compensated in full.

    Zhou Lihua once again listened to Yuan Moufa's sentence, "The agreed 14.3 million yuan is guaranteed, and the new details of the interest always require someone to help repay it, so I have not delved into the source of this interest." As a result, Zhou Lihua paid 12.3 million yuan in interest to Wang Mougang.

    It was not until July 2017 that the person named Chen Mouwei sent a loan agreement of 300,000 yuan to Zhou Lihua, and she clearly realized that in addition to the exchange of funds with Yuan Moufa at the time, there was a sum of money. Large debt. At this time, although Zhou Lihua was fooled at that time.

    I have a bank card for "flowing water", but it is controlled by intermediary personnel

    Zhou Lihua believes that the question came on the day of November 12, 2016, when she and Yang Mouyun went to the Yangpu District Real Estate Trading Center in Shanghai to do the mortgage certificate procedures. According to her recollection, at the time, you and your name were yours at the trading center. Yang Moyun said that because of the call, you need to sign the contract as soon as possible, read a three-page agreement, and turn directly to the last page. It is required that Zhou Lihua sign at the borrower's office, but the lender's signature office is blank and the date is the same.

    Yang Moyun explained that after signing this agreement, can China make a 300,000 loan to Malaysia, and after the "flow of water", it will call the remaining 4.3 million yuan to Zhou Lihua. Zhou Lihua said that once the agreement was signed, Yang Mouyun was taken away, and she looked at the details. In order to "run the river", Yang Mouyun also took her to Pudong Development Bank in the afternoon on the day of signing the agreement and issued a bank card in the name of Zhou Lihua. Since then, this card and U shield have been kept by Yang Moyun.

    Zhou Lihua read the first two pages of the agreement that Party B Zhou Lihua borrowed a total of RMB 300,000 from Party A Wang Mougang. The loan period was from November 12, 2016 to November 11, 2017, and monthly interest was borrowed. The total amount is 2%, nor is it RMB 300,000. The agreement also wrote: "Party B voluntarily provided a mortgage guarantee for the principal and interest of the above borrowings with all its real property." The mortgaged real estate is "the second floor on the ground floor of No. 63, 65, 67, Hejian Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai", nor is it Zhou Lihua's plan to sell to Yuan Moufa.

    "I think everyone in Yang Moyun also has a company, and I think all of them are very formal. I was negligent at the time." Zhou Lihua said distressedly.

    "Borrowing" entered the bank card and was transferred to a third party that he did not necessarily know on the day

    At the beginning of 2018, Zhou Lihua from time to time received summonses from the People's Court of Taicang City, Jiangsu Province. At that time, Wang Mougang brought Zhou Lihua to court on the grounds that Wang Mougang paid a total of 300,000 yuan to Zhou Lihua on November 22 and 23, 2016. When the borrowing period expires, Zhou Lihua will return the principal of the loan in addition to paying interest on schedule. He asked Zhou Lihua to repay the loan of 300,000 yuan and pay interest at an annual rate of 24% from November 12, 2017 to the actual payment date.

    "I've been to Taicang so much, why did I become a defendant in Taicang?" Zhou Lihua was puzzled. The judge explained that the 300,000 yuan mortgage loan agreement stated that any disputes would be heard by the People's Court of Taicang City, Jiangsu Province. Zhou Lihua was even more puzzled. "It was clearly signed in the trading hall in Shanghai. Why did you write it in Taicang?" Zhou Lihua said, "There is something tricky on the top."

    On July 10, 2018, the case was heard in the Taicang Court.

    That 300,000 yuan mortgage loan agreement, and Zhou Lihua's record of paying interest to Wang Mougang have become evidence confirming the loan relationship between the two parties. The court's decision ultimately supported Wang's claim, demanding that Zhou Lihua return the borrowings and unpaid interest.

    "Shouldn't be so sentenced." Although Zhou Lihua, she and Wang Mougang did not necessarily have a loan relationship. The bank transaction details submitted by Wang Mougang to the court showed that he transferred funds to Zhou Lihua's SPDB bank account in four separate transactions of 2.3 million yuan on November 22 and 23, 2016, totaling 300,000 yuan. At that time, Zhou Lihua said that the Pudong Development Bank card used to receive the money has always been in front of people at that time and the money was so obtained. Earlier, the 7.7 million yuan she got was Yuan Yuanfa's credit into her Industrial and Commercial Bank and Construction Bank accounts, and it had nothing to do with the 300,000 yuan.

    In order to prove that people did not get the money at that time, Zhou Lihua provided the counterparty inquiry report of the Pudong Development Bank card in her name. This form shows that although Wang Mougang actually credited this card with a total of 300,000 yuan on November 22 and 23, 2016. At that time, each payment was transferred out on the day the bank card was credited. Of these, 9.9 million were transferred to another person named Li Mouqing, and another 300,000 were transferred back to Wang Mougang. And you, your name Li Mouqing, Zhou Lihua said she didn't know it at all.

    The reporter took you and your name, and interviewed the trial judge Gao Ping in the Taicang court. Gao Ping said that during the trial, although Lihua Zhou claimed that the bank card of SPD Bank was not in front of the people at that time, she also received 300,000 yuan in money, so she "provided that kind of evidence." The reporter's examination of the court transcript also confirmed you and your name.

    Zhou Lihua said that she had played a lawsuit so much that she thought that the judge would collect relevant evidence on her own.

    Due to Shanghai police filing, the house was auctioned by the Taicang court

    When she lost her case, Zhou Lihua realized the seriousness of the matter and reported it to the Shanghai Public Security Bureau's Yangpu Branch on August 2, 2018, reflecting the people's request to sign a mortgage loan contract at that time. On August 7, the Yangpu Sub-Bureau decided to open the case, and issued a notification letter to Zhou Lihua.

    Because Zhou Lihua failed to repay the loan and interest as scheduled, Wang Mougang applied to the Taicang court for enforcement. The Taicang court filed for execution on November 1, 2018, and issued an execution ruling on January 24, 2019, ruling: "Auction (sale) Zhou Lihua's real estate in No. 63, 65, 67 Hejian Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai (Housing Property Certificate No .: Yang 20304221) to pay off debts. "

    Twenty-one days before the court issued the enforcement ruling, that is, January 3, 2019, Zhou Lihua sent the Shanghai Police's notification of the filing of the case to the Taicang Court, hoping that the execution could be postponed in accordance with the principle of "priority before the people", pending the investigation progress.

    On March 21, 2019, the properties at 63, 65, 67 Hejian Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai were successfully auctioned. However, the housing price was not enough in English to pay off the debt, which was still 5.3 million yuan. On June 24, the court included Zhou Lihua in the list of those who were executed.

    The same group and the same tactics have been spotted by the Shanghai court.

    Zhou Lihua hopes that people's affairs at that time can be further investigated

    The reporter also found in the investigation that the victim's bank card was controlled, and a lawsuit was filed after the account was taken. After encountering you and you, Zhou Lihua and many other people encountered it.

    In August 2016, Liu Jianmin, who was based in Shanghai, provided a loan guarantee to his classmate Wu Mouxing at the request of his classmate, and the lender was not the same as Chen Mouwei in the Zhou Lihua case. Chen Mouwei also took the money from Wang Mougang. Liu Jianmin and Chen Mouwei signed a house sales contract as a guarantee, and in the name of Liu Jianmin, opened a new bank card at the Agricultural Bank of China (3.300, 0.01, 0.28%). At that time, Chen Mouwei transferred RMB 900,000 in two, but then transferred the money to Wu Mouxing's account and printed out the transaction details list.

    Liu Jianmin said that the password for this card was set by Chen Mouwei, and the reserved mobile phone number was also Chen Mouwei. He didn't care about the status of the funds in the card.

    In December 2016, Chen Mouwei filed a lawsuit with the Qingpu District Court in Shanghai asking for the termination of the house sale contract and a refund. The court's decision did not support it.

    In September 2017, Chen Mouwei also filed a lawsuit against Liu Jianmin in the Putuo District Court in Shanghai on the grounds that the loan had not been repaid. At the first instance, the court confirmed the flow of funds based on bank card transaction details and other evidence, determined that there was a real loan fact between the defendants, and rejected Chen Mouwei's detailed lawsuit.

    Zhou Lihua said that now that she could not contact Yang Mouyun and Yuan Moufa, she hoped that people's affairs at that time could be further investigated by the public security and the court, thereby restoring the truth.

    • Beware of green fraud in paint
    • Wuhan will focus on investigating and penalizing price fraud in various home building materials markets
    • Wuhan will focus on investigating and penalizing price fraud in various home building materials markets
    • Guangdong Consumers' Committee: Paying deposit when buying a house needs to be careful of developer contract fraud
    • Online renting fraud investigation: 90% of victims pay money before viewing

    Key words: