[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, if a seller institution sells funds without conducting a risk assessment and causes investors to suffer losses, it shall bear corresponding compensation liability. According to Article 72 of the "Memorandum of the National Court Civil and Commercial Trial Work Conference" (No. 254 of 2019, issued on November 8, 2019), if a seller institution fails to fulfill its suitability obligation and causes financial consumers to suffer losses, it shall compensate them; the "Measures for the Management of Suitability of Securities and Futures Investors" (effective from July 1, 2017) also require operating institutions to understand investors' information, conduct risk assessments, and match products with corresponding risk levels. Failure to conduct risk assessments, mismatch of assessment levels with products, or failure to fully disclose risks are all typical violations of suitability obligations. Investors may claim compensation for principal and corresponding interest losses, and financial legal services may refer to this for reference.\nFinancial capital and cross-border transactions involving foreign entities.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

Such disputes often occur in several situations: First, when banks' counter staff or client managers promote funds, they skip the risk assessment questionnaire and directly guide clients to sign and purchase them; Second, they let others take the assessment and answer the questionnaire on their behalf, making the assessment a formality; Third, investors with a risk assessment rating of moderate or even conservative are recommended high-risk equity or private equity products; Fourth, during the sales process, only the historical returns are mentioned, but the drawdown risks are not explained, and the double-recording process is just a formality; Fifth, online platforms default to selecting options and one-click purchases, without enforcing the completion of the risk assessment. After discovering losses, investors in Beijing often first complain to the sales institutions, then report the matter to the regulatory authorities, and finally proceed to litigation or arbitration.

II. Key points of contention

The dispute focuses on five aspects. Firstly, the content of the obligation of suitability, including four levels: understanding the client, understanding the product, risk matching, and disclosure and explanation. Risk assessment is the basic step in understanding the client. Secondly, the allocation of the burden of proof. The selling institution should bear the burden of proof that it has fulfilled the obligation of suitability, and bear the adverse consequences if it cannot provide assessment records and double-recording materials. Thirdly, the boundaries between "buyers bear their own risks" and "sellers fulfill their due diligence obligations". Normal losses caused by market fluctuations should be distinguished from losses caused by illegal sales. Fourthly, the calculation of losses, which typically includes principal losses and interest calculated according to corresponding standards. Fifthly, the sharing of responsibility for investors' own mistakes, such as actively requesting to purchase products beyond their risk tolerance. Specifically, the current effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings shall prevail.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Judging from the practical experience of lawyers handled by our firm, the key to winning or losing such cases lies in the traceability of sales. In the judicial practice of Beijing courts, the court usually requires banks, securities companies or fund sales institutions to submit risk assessment questionnaires, dual-recording videos, product risk disclosure documents, and client follow-up records; if the institutions are unable to provide these documents or the records contain obvious flaws, they are often deemed to have failed to fulfill their due diligence obligations, and the court will award compensation for the principal and part of the interest according to the degree of fault. There are three common misunderstandings among investors: First, they only focus on the amount of losses and ignore the need to request sales records from the institutions and fix evidence through regulatory complaints; Second, they delay claiming their rights, making it more difficult to obtain materials as time passes; Third, they attribute all losses to the sales process without considering their own mistakes of chasing highs and selling lows. Generally speaking, the lack of risk assessment is one of the most powerful breakthroughs for investors. For matters involving recovery and enforcement, investors can also refer to the relevant provisions of the Securities Law and the Investment Fund Law.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcement casesColumn.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action recommendations: First, apply to the sales agency to retrieve the risk assessment questionnaire, the video of the dual recording, and the purchase process records as soon as possible. If necessary, file a complaint with the regulatory authority at the same time to fix the evidence through administrative procedures. Second, check whether the assessment level matches the product risk level, and keep the product brochures and promotional materials. Third, calculate the losses and distinguish between the principal and the claimed income. Fourth, negotiate with the agency or apply for industry mediation first, and then sue or arbitrate if necessary. In terms of legal basis, the "Measures for the Appropriateness Management of Securities and Futures Investors" (effective since July 1, 2017) establish the basic requirements for understanding clients, risk assessment, and product matching; Article 72 of the "Minutes of the National Court Civil and Commercial Trial Work Conference" (issued on November 8, 2019) clarifies the compensation liability of sellers for failing to fulfill their suitability obligations; the "Securities Investment Fund Law of the People's Republic of China" (amended on April 24, 2015) has corresponding provisions on fund sales activities. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective version and judicial adjudication.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Risk Warning: First, not undergoing a risk assessment does not mean that investors will necessarily receive full compensation. The court will determine the compensation ratio based on the investor's own investment experience and degree of fault; Second, the statute of limitations is three years, starting from the date when the investor knows or should have known that his rights have been infringed. It is advisable to claim compensation as soon as possible. Complaining to the institution does not necessarily replace litigation; Third, private equity funds also involve the review of qualified investors, and the process is slightly different from that of public offering products; Fourth, do not believe any promises of "guaranteed recovery of principal" or "safe and profitable returns", as these are suspected of illegal sales. It is recommended to develop a claim plan with the assistance of a professional lawyer, and you can consult for more information.Beijing Henglue Law FirmThe same category on the official website.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If a fund salesperson fails to conduct a risk assessment before selling funds, can investors get compensation?

There is a possibility of compensation. The obligation of appropriateness requires that the sales institution first evaluate, then match, and finally sell. If the seller institution fails to conduct a risk assessment or if the assessment does not match the product's risk level, resulting in losses, the seller institution shall bear compensation liability. In judicial practice, the court will require the institution to submit the evaluation and dual-recording records. If the institution is unable to provide them, it will bear adverse consequences, but the compensation ratio will take into account the investor's own fault, and it is not necessarily fully supported.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare to claim compensation?

Key evidence includes: purchase receipts and contracts, product manuals; risk assessment records or proof of their absence, such as videos showing that the assessment process was not included in the signing process; dual-recording videos and follow-up records; sales promotion materials and chat records, used to prove exaggerated returns or promises of guaranteed returns; and loss reconciliation statements. You can first request the documents from the institution. If the institution refuses to provide them, you can apply to the court to order their submission. For related recourse paths, please refer to the guidance provided by the court or relevant authorities.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcement cases.

Q3: How much does it cost to file a claim for a fund?

The litigation fees are paid in stages based on the amount of the claim, and the portion of the successful claim is shared proportionally; the attorney's fees are negotiated based on the complexity of the case and the subject matter, with no uniform standard. Such cases are often similar batch disputes, and the costs are relatively controllable; if the case goes to arbitration, the fee structure will be different. It is recommended to first estimate the amount of the claim and the strength of the evidence, and then decide on the scope of the entrustment and budget arrangements.

Q4: How long does it take to litigate a fund sales dispute?

The first-instance ordinary procedure generally lasts no more than six months, the summary procedure lasts three months, and the second-instance procedure lasts about three months. Cases involving retrieving trace materials from institutions, appraisals, or batch cases for combined trials will take longer. If the case is first resolved through industry mediation or reconciliation with the institution, it can usually be resolved within a few months. The overall duration depends on the institution's cooperation and the completeness of the evidence.

Q5: What should I do if I find that a fund is being sold in violation of regulations?

The first step is to immediately apply for and save sales records such as risk assessments and dual recording to prevent their loss. The second step is to file a written complaint with the sales institution and keep the response. The third step is to report the matter to the regulatory authorities and use the verification results to strengthen the evidence. The fourth step is to sue or arbitrate promptly if no agreement is reached, and claim the principal and interest losses. The fifth step is to pay attention to the three-year statute of limitations and seek legal advice when necessary.\nFinancial capital and cross-border transactions involving foreign entities.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The adjudicative opinions in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situations.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Financial capital legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.