Ms. Wang, a Shanghai citizen, was riding a Hello Bike when the wheels suddenly locked. She fell heavily to the ground and suffered facial injuries. Calling the police, seeking medical treatment, and safeguarding rights only resulted in a rejection by the first-instance court. She's not the only one. In Beijing, Wuhan, Foshan, and Tianjin, more and more cyclists are encountering vehicles that lock their bikes without warning while waiting for red lights, going uphill, or stopping for a short time, resulting in injuries ranging from minor abrasions to serious fractures. This is not a cycling accident, but the system is "killing people."
There are at least 41 clearly reported cases of falling injuries across the country, behind which is the collective uneasiness of 600 million users. Platforms such as Hello, Qingju, and Meituan all admit that there is a mechanism for "automatically locking the car when stationary for a long time", but the rules are vague and prompts are missing. Hello says that the car will be locked if it is not used for 30 minutes, while Qingju and Meituan set it from 20 minutes to 1 hour. But if a user chats for a moment or waits at a red light, he or she is judged to have "forgotten the vehicle"? Mr. Liu from Tianjin stayed in the car seat for 20 minutes, and the system
Ms. Wang, a Shanghai citizen, was riding a Hello Bike when the wheels suddenly locked. She fell heavily to the ground and suffered facial injuries. Calling the police, seeking medical treatment, and safeguarding rights only resulted in a rejection by the first-instance court. She's not the only one. In Beijing, Wuhan, Foshan, and Tianjin, more and more cyclists are encountering vehicles that lock their bikes without warning while waiting for red lights, going uphill, or stopping for a short time, resulting in injuries ranging from minor abrasions to serious fractures. This is not a cycling accident, but the system is "killing people."
There are at least 41 clearly reported cases of falling injuries across the country, behind which is the collective uneasiness of 600 million users. Platforms such as Hello, Qingju, and Meituan all admit that there is a mechanism for "automatically locking the car when stationary for a long time", but the rules are vague and prompts are missing. Hello says that the car will be locked if it is not used for 30 minutes, while Qingju and Meituan set it from 20 minutes to 1 hour. But if a user chats for a moment or waits at a red light, he or she is judged to have "forgotten the vehicle"? Mr. Liu from Tianjin stayed in the car seat for 20 minutes, and the system remotely locked the car without issuing any effective warning. The platform later changed its name to "brake failure," but was unable to explain the source of the lock command in the order record.
Technology was originally meant to be a convenience, but now it has become a tool for deflecting blame. The platform often excuses the use of "returning the car by mistake" or "remotely locking the car by the previous user", but actual testing proves that locking the car cannot be completed while on the move. What's more serious is that Wuhan Urban Management Bureau seized dozens of vehicles with "one code, multiple vehicles" - the same QR code is bound to multiple vehicles, causing confusion in system recognition and misjudgment of riding status. This is a blatant illegal expansion, sacrificing the bottom line of safety in order to seize the market. The algorithm runs silently in the background, but users bear the cost of their mistakes with their bodies on the streets.
Judicial cases have shown that platforms are not blameless. The Beijing Chaoyang District Court once ruled that a shared bicycle company should compensate users for 70% of their losses due to brake failure. Although the Shanghai Minhang Court rejected Ms. Wang’s appeal, it clearly stated that the platform must bear responsibility if it can prove vehicle defects or system failures. The problem is that the data is in the hands of the platform and it is difficult for users to provide evidence. Every response that "the system has no abnormal records" is a disregard for consumers' rights to know and safety.
This is not a simple service defect, but a public safety incident. The tools that 600 million people rely on for daily travel should not become a source of mobility risks. The platform must stop using "the user has picked up the car" as a universal exemption sign. It is just an unfair format clause expressly prohibited by the Consumer Rights Protection Act. Algorithm design must be "security first" and retain user control when the status is unclear, rather than unilaterally terminating services.
We ride on city streets and should not ride on corporate data black boxes. Establish a third-party data verification mechanism and formulate mandatory safety standards so that every time you lock your car, there are traces to follow and responsibilities to be pursued - this should not be an extravagant wish, but a bottom line. When technology loses its respect, it is not just the cyclists who are injured, but also the public’s last vestige of trust in the sharing economy.
