[Case Summary]This case involves a private lending dispute (special service). In early 2022, Xiaoyu and Zhangqiang met online and started a romantic relationship. Zhangqiang claimed that he needed 30,000 yuan for working capital, and Xiaoyu transferred the money to him, but when she asked for the repayment, Zhangqiang refused to pay it back. Xiaoyu then entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for her.Yuan HangThe lawyer safeguarded the client's rights. Based on the WeChat chats, audio recordings, and transfer records, the lawyer confirmed the existence of a loan agreement and the delivery of the funds. The lawyer assisted in collecting evidence, drafting a lawsuit, applying for property preservation, and filing a lawsuit. The court fully accepted the lawyer's arguments and ordered Zhang Qiang to repay the principal of 300,000 yuan and the overdue interest (based on 300,000 yuan, calculated at an annual interest rate of 3.65% from January 20, 2023) within ten days. The core disputes were the determination of the loan agreement and the overdue interest. The applicable legal provisions were the relevant provisions on loans in the Contract Chapter of the Civil Code.

I. Review of the Case Facts

The parties often search for terms such as "Can I recover the money if my online lover refuses to repay it?", "What should I do if my boyfriend refuses to repay the money?", "Can I sue for a loan with only transfer records?", and "How to calculate the overdue interest on private loans?" In early 2022, Xiaoyu and Zhangqiang met online and quickly developed into a romantic relationship. During their relationship, Zhangqiang claimed that he was short of funds and borrowed 300,000 yuan from Xiaoyu on March 18, 2022. Xiaoyu transferred the money to Zhangqiang's bank account. However, after the relationship broke down, Xiaoyu demanded repayment, but Zhangqiang remained adamant and refused to acknowledge the debt.

Xiaoyu decided to seek legal protection and entrusted Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for herYuan HangThe lawyer provided assistance. The lawyer pointed out that the difficulties in civil lending lie in fact determination and evidence investigation. It's easy to get into a dilemma just with the transfer of funds, so it's necessary to combine chat recordings to determine the lending agreement and the burden of proof. After investigation, Xiaoyu had WeChat chats, dialogue recordings, and bank transfer records, which could prove that the two parties reached a lending agreement and the funds had been delivered, forming a lending contract relationship. Zhang Qiang's refusal to repay the loan infringed her rights and interests.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Determination of the loan agreement.When there are only transfer records, can WeChat chats and recordings prove that a loan relationship exists?
  • Focus Two: Allocation of the burden of proof.The plaintiff claims the loan based on the transfer records and chat logs, but the defendant denies it. How should the burden of proof be allocated in this case?
  • Focus Three: Calculation of overdue interest.For loans without a fixed term, the starting point for calculating overdue interest and the interest rate standard.

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff (Xiaoyu) alleges that:Please request the court to order Zhang Qiang to repay the principal of 300,000 yuan and pay the overdue interest (based on 300,000 yuan, from January 20, 2023 to the actual repayment, calculated at an annual interest rate of 3.65%), and the litigation fees, announcement fees, and preservation fees shall be borne by Zhang Qiang.

The defendant's (Zhang Qiang) position:He/she did not appear in court, did not give a defense, and denied the loan agreement.

Legal Opinion by Hengluo Law Firm:Yuan HangThe lawyer assisted the client in collecting key evidence such as WeChat chats, recorded conversations, and bank transfers, drafted the complaint, prepared the list of evidence, and applied for property preservation before filing the lawsuit with the court. The lawyer argued that Xiaoyu's statements, WeChat chats, recordings, and transfer records could prove that the parties reached a loan agreement and that the funds had been delivered, making the loan contract valid. Zhang Qiang acknowledged the loan in the chats but failed to repay it, and should bear the responsibility for repayment and overdue interest. As the parties did not agree on a repayment deadline, Xiaoyu sent a reminder via WeChat in October 2022, but Zhang Qiang still failed to repay the loan by the time Xiaoyu filed the lawsuit in February 2023, which exceeded the necessary preparation period. According to the law, the overdue interest should be supported.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court fully adopted it.Yuan HangThe lawyer's opinion and all claims argue that the existing evidence is sufficient to establish the legal relationship of private lending and the validity of the parties' true intention of expression. Xiaoyu transferred and lent 300,000 yuan, and Zhangqiang acknowledged it in the chat but failed to repay it. Support the repayment of the principal of 300,000 yuan. Due to the absence of an agreed upon repayment deadline, Xiaoyu demanded repayment in October 2022, but Zhangqiang still failed to repay it when he sued in February 2023. The overdue interest meets the regulations. Verdict: Zhangqiang shall repay the principal of 300,000 yuan within ten days and pay the overdue interest (based on 300,000 yuan, from January 20, 2023 to the actual repayment, calculated at an annual interest rate of 3.65%); the case acceptance fee, preservation fee, and announcement fee shall be borne by Zhangqiang; and in case of overdue performance, double the interest on overdue performance shall be paid.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Advice

We should be vigilant about loans arising from "matchmaking and dating" relationships in daily life. When the two parties in an online relationship do not know each other well enough, it's best not to engage in transactional dealings. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law FirmYuan HangAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101202110286151, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ). Attorney's advice: When entering into a loan, it is necessary to draw up a written loan note and preserve evidence such as chat records, transfer records, and audio recordings; if there are only transfer records, it is easy to fall into the dilemma of proving the loan. Therefore, it is necessary to systematically fix the evidence of the loan agreement and, if necessary, apply for property preservation.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions about Private Lending

  1. Q: If someone who met online asks for money and fails to repay it, can I still get the money back?
    A:Yes. With WeChat chat records, audio recordings, and transfer records to prove the lending agreement and the delivery of the funds, you can sue to demand repayment of the principal and interest.
  2. Q: Can I only sue the borrower based on the transfer records?
    A:Yes, but the transfer receipt alone is not a strong enough proof of the loan agreement. You should provide additional evidence such as chat records and audio recordings to prove the existence of a loan agreement. Otherwise, it may be deemed as a gift or other form of relationship.
  3. Q: How is the overdue interest calculated for private lending?
    A:If no interest rate is agreed upon during the loan period, the overdue interest can be calculated by referring to the one-year loan market quotation rate (LPR) at that time, and the calculation shall start from the date of the reminder or the date of the lawsuit.
  4. Q: Can I win the lawsuit even without a promissory note?
    A:Yes. Electronic chats, recordings, transfer receipts, etc. can form a chain of evidence and establish the lending relationship, but it's more reliable to have a written IOU.
  5. Q: Will the court issue a verdict if the other party fails to appear in court?
    A:Yes. If the defendant refuses to appear in court without a valid reason after being summoned, the court may hold a trial in his absence and make a judgment according to the existing evidence in accordance with the law.