[Case Summary]This case involves a dispute over a trust management contract. Yang * invested 526,000 yuan in financial management through the introduction of his friend Wang *. Wang * promised to guarantee the principal and operate the account on behalf of Yang *, but the platform turned out to be a telecom fraud. Yang * only received a list of repayments recorded in the criminal judgment document, and no assets were traced or recovered. Yang * entrusted the Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Feng NaThe lawyer filed a lawsuit, claiming that the two parties formed a fiduciary management contract relationship and that Wang * should return the losses due to his gross negligence. The court adopted some of the lawyer's arguments and ruled that Wang * should compensate for the principal loss of 516,000 yuan. The core disputes include whether the two parties formed a fiduciary contract relationship, the validity of the guaranteed return clause, and the defendant's liability for fault. The applicable legal provisions are the relevant provisions of the Civil Code on fiduciary contracts.

I. Review of the case

Believing what acquaintances say without questionI was cheated while entrusting someone to manage my financesThe parties often search for phrases such as "Can I get my money back if I lost money in financial management entrusted to others?" "Who is responsible if a friend loses money in stock trading on my behalf?" and "Is the guarantee of a minimum return in financial management valid?" Yang * and Wang * have been friends for many years. In 2021, Wang * claimed to have a good financial management project and persuaded Yang * to purchase it, promising to guarantee the principal. Yang * transferred 500,000 yuan to Wang * in four installments on June 30, 2021, transferred 16,000 yuan via WeChat on June 27, and transferred another 10,000 yuan to the involved financial management platform according to Wang *'s instructions, investing a total principal of 526,000 yuan.

Later, the project turned out to be a telecom fraud, with the fake financial platform luring victims to invest. On July 4, 2021, Yang * and Wang * received a notice from the police and reported the case. The effective judgment list stated that the victim, Yang *, should refund 526,000 yuan, but the criminals' assets were not seized. Yang * believed that Wang * had promised to take responsibility if anything went wrong, and the two parties had a fiduciary relationship. They entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Feng NaThe lawyer filed a lawsuit, hoping to recover the investment funds.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Whether the original defendant and the plaintiff have formed a trust management contract relationship.The two parties did not sign a written contract. Wang * claimed that he only helped transfer the money and was not entrusted with financial management. How should the nature of their relationship be defined?
  • Focus Two: Ensuring the effectiveness of the guaranteed minimum clause for the principal.Wang * personally promised to guarantee the principal. Should this clause be considered invalid because it violates the principle of risk sharing?
  • Focus Three: The defendant's fault and the scope of the responsibility for restitution.Wang * transferred the funds to his personal account and was defrauded. How should his major negligence be reflected in the amount of money to be refunded?

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff (Yang *) claimed that:Wang * promised to guarantee the principal and be responsible for the trading, and there was a fiduciary relationship between the two parties. Wang * subsequently agreed to return the funds, and should repay the principal loss.

The defendant (Wang *) argued that:The two parties did not sign a power of attorney contract and there was no power of attorney relationship between them. They only helped transfer the money according to the plaintiff's wishes; the plaintiff voluntarily bought financial products and bore the losses himself; the losses had been compensated by others in accordance with the effective criminal judgment, so the plaintiff could not obtain additional benefits in civil litigation.

Legal Opinion from Hengluo Law Firm:Feng NaAfter the lawyer's review, he/she concluded that the WeChat chat records showed that the defendant promised to guarantee the principal, the plaintiff transferred the funds, the defendant opened an account, and there was a profit-sharing arrangement between the two parties, constituting a trust management contract relationship; the defendant promised to take responsibility if there were any problems and agreed to return the funds afterwards; the defendant accepted the funds entrusted to him/her but failed to exercise due diligence in identifying them, resulting in the funds being transferred to his/her personal account and being defrauded. This constituted gross negligence, and the defendant should bear corresponding civil liability. The plaintiff has the right to terminate the trust contract and claim the return of the investment funds.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court adopted some of the opinions of Hengluo Law Firm and held that the parties constituted a fiduciary management contract relationship; the defendant's promise to guarantee the principal constituted a minimum guarantee clause, which should be deemed invalid as it violated the principle of sharing financial risks; the defendant, who trusted others and transferred the plaintiff's investment funds to his personal account and committed a major negligence, should bear corresponding fault liability; the plaintiff also had fault in trusting the high returns; and the defendant's subsequent agreement to return the funds was deemed as a disposition of his own rights. The court ruled accordingly.The defendant shall compensate the plaintiff for the principal loss of 516,000 yuan within ten days after the judgment takes effectThe 10,000 yuan invested by the plaintiff has been recovered through the criminal judgment and is not to be borne by the defendant; the interest portion will not be supported.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Reminder

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Feng NaThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202211562923, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as an agent. Online investment is a non-contact investment with poor controllability and strong temptation. Investors should enhance their risk prevention awareness and choose formal platforms. If they find themselves caught in an investment scam, they should keep calm, deal with it rationally, preserve evidence in time, and report the case to the relevant authorities. They can defend their rights through legal channels.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about Trusted Wealth Management Disputes

  1. Q:If a friend manages my finances and loses money, can I get it back?
    A:If a trust contract relationship is formed and the trustee commits a major fault (such as transferring the funds to a personal account and being cheated), the beneficiary may claim for the return of the losses; the specific amount shall be apportioned according to the fault of both parties.
  2. Q:Is the promise of "guaranteeing the principal" in financial management effective?
    A:A personal commitment guarantees that the principal constitutes a minimum guarantee clause. Violating the principle of risk sharing is generally deemed invalid, but it does not affect the determination of fault-based compensation liability.
  3. Q:The other party said that if a criminal judgment has been issued and the defendant has made restitution, can't they be sued in civil court anymore?
    A:If the criminal compensation has not been actually executed against the property, the victim can still claim compensation for the fault in the civil entrustment relationship separately.
  4. Q:If someone is cheated while managing their finances through the introduction of an acquaintance, should the trustee bear responsibility for it?
    A:If the trustee fails to fulfill his obligation of careful identification in trust management and transfers the funds to his personal account, causing losses, he shall bear corresponding civil liability.
  5. Q:How can I prove our relationship if we haven't signed a contract for the entrusted wealth management service?
    A:WeChat chat records, transfer records, profit-sharing agreements, and account opening operation records can all prove the existence of a trustee relationship.