[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the photocopies of IOUs are considered duplicates and cannot be used alone as the basis for determining the facts of the case. According to Article 90 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings" (amended on December 25, 2019 and implemented on May 1, 2020), copies that cannot be verified against the originals cannot be used alone to determine the case; if the originals are lost, destroyed or damaged, the copies may be submitted in accordance with Article 111 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" (amended in 2022) and corroborated with other evidence. It is recommended to first recover the originals or have the other party confirm them in writing before suing. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes and enforcement cases.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

The original document is lost, only leaving copies; the IOU is withheld by the other party and refused to be returned; the original document is damaged by fire or water stains; and the electronic IOU only has screenshots left. All these scenarios will lead to a question: are the copies valid? The answer is hierarchical — copies can be submitted as evidence, but their probative force is weaker than that of the original; if they cannot be verified with the original, they cannot be used as the sole basis for judgment. However, if they are corroborated by other evidence, they may still be accepted comprehensively. The real risk lies in treating copies as the only evidence and ignoring corroboration, ultimately losing the case due to insufficient evidence. Relevant evidentiary rules can be referred to for more details.Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes and enforcement cases.

II. Key points of contention

The controversy focuses on four points. Firstly, the status of evidence: documentary evidence should be submitted in the original form. If it is truly difficult to submit the original, a copy can be submitted, in accordance with Article 73 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on September 1, 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024). Secondly, the verification rules: if the copy can be verified against the original, it has corresponding probative force; if it cannot be verified, it cannot be used alone as the basis for determining the facts of the case. Thirdly, the solution when the original has indeed been lost: the copy can form an evidence chain with transfer records, chat records, and collection records, and corroborate each other. Fourthly, if the other party controls the original and refuses to submit it, the court may order it to submit it. If it refuses to submit it without a valid reason, the court may determine that the content of the documentary evidence is true. In the judicial practice of the Beijing area, the outcome of cases involving only copies varies greatly, depending on whether the supporting evidence is solid.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The civil loan dispute handled by Attorney Tian Jiaoyan demonstrates the standard procedure of corroborating written evidence and delivery receipts. Liu * and Li * were friends. Since the beginning of 2022, Li * borrowed money from Liu * multiple times on the pretext of opening a pet store and paying rent. Liu * made the loans through bank transfers, Alipay, and WeChat, totaling 662,000 yuan. On November 3, 2024, the two parties signed a loan agreement stipulating that Li * would repay the full amount of 662,000 yuan by January 1, 2025, and would bear the costs of litigation fees, attorney's fees, transportation expenses, and preservation guarantee fees if the repayment was overdue. On November 26, 2024, Li * explicitly stated that she would be unable to repay the loan on time. After taking on the case, Attorney Tian Jiaoyan pointed out that it was necessary to supplement the loan agreement corresponding to the WeChat transfer and complete records of collection efforts. Subsequently, she comprehensively organized the bank, Alipay, and WeChat transfer records, and cross-checked them with the loan agreement to confirm the legitimacy and validity of the loan relationship. Based on the provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021) regarding breach of contract liability, she determined that Li *'s failure to repay on time constituted a breach of contract and she should bear the principal and overdue interest, as well as attorney's fees. Considering the long enforcement period and difficulty in locating assets after the judgment, the attorney prioritized mediation while insisting on strict breach of contract clauses, ultimately facilitating a settlement: Li * would repay 480,000 yuan in two installments. If she failed to make full and timely payments, Liu * would be entitled to claim the remaining principal and attorney's fees totaling 712,000 yuan according to the original loan agreement. The court issued a Civil Mediation Agreement to confirm this. The lesson of this case is that when large-scale loans are delivered in multiple installments and through multiple channels, verifying and corroborating each transfer with written evidence is the essence of the "copy rule" - without verification and corroboration, no single piece of evidence can stand alone. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm. 田娇艳律师代理的民间借贷纠纷，示范了书面凭证与交付凭证相互印证的标准动作。刘某与李某系朋友，2022年年初起，李某以开办宠物店、支付房租等为由多次向刘某借款，刘某通过银行转账、支付宝、微信陆续出借，累计662000元。2024年11月3日，双方签订借款协议，约定李某于2025年1月1日前偿还全部662000元，逾期承担诉讼费、律师代理费、交通费、保全保函费等损失；2024年11月26日，李某明确表示到期无力偿还。田娇艳律师接案后指出，需补充微信转账对应的借贷合意凭证及完整催款记录，随后全面整理银行、支付宝、微信转账流水，与借款协议逐笔核对，确认借贷关系合法有效；结合《中华人民共和国民法典》（2021年1月1日施行）关于违约责任的规定，认定李某逾期未还构成违约，应承担本金及逾期利息、律师费。考虑到判决后执行周期长、财产线索难找，律师以调解优先，同时坚持设置严格违约条款，最终促成调解：李某分两期偿还48万元，若未按期足额履行，刘某有权按原借款协议主张全部剩余本金及律师费共712000元，法院出具《民事调解书》确认。该案的启示是：大额借款分多笔、多渠道交付时，书面凭证与每一笔转账相互核对、彼此印证，正是复印件规则的精髓——没有核对与印证，任何单一凭证都难以独挑大梁。本案由北京恒略律师事务所代理。Tian Jia YanThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202111381309, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis includes Article 73 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on September 1, 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024): "The original of a document shall be submitted. Where it is difficult to submit the original, a copy may be submitted"; Article 111 of the Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2022): "Circumstances where it is difficult to submit the original"; Article 112: "Order to submit the document"; Article 90 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Procedure (amended on December 25, 2019 and implemented on May 1, 2020): "A copy that cannot be verified with the original shall not be used as the sole basis for a case"; Article 679 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (implemented on January 1, 2021): "The time of the establishment of a loan contract between natural persons". Action list: First, make every effort to retrieve the original, focusing on checking mobile phone albums, cloud backups, old phones, home archives, and custodians; Second, if the original cannot be found, clarify the source and custody history of the copy; Third, organize transfer records, chat logs, collection records, and the copy to corroborate each other; Fourth, confirm the fact and amount of the loan through chats or recordings, or supplement the repayment agreement; Fifth, if the document is withheld by the other party and refused to be submitted, apply to the court to order its submission, as detailed in the relevant provisions.Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes and enforcement cases.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Advice

Copies are not scrap paper, but you should never just bring copies to court. When it comes to electronic IOUs, it's important to preserve the original carrier. Screenshots, photos, and forwarding can all alter the form of the evidence. Having the other party confirm the debt in writing is the most cost-effective and legally binding way to strengthen the evidence. Once the original is lost, the sooner you take remedial action, the more proactive you will be. If you wait until the other party responds to the lawsuit, it will be much harder to fix chat records and transaction records. When handling similar cases in the Beijing area, it is recommended to do the following:Beijing Henglu Law FirmUnder the guidance of professional lawyers, build a chain of evidence and don't take risks unnecessarily.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can I win the lawsuit even if I only have a copy of the IOU?

It's not possible to make a ruling based solely on the copy, but there's still a chance of winning the case if it's corroborated by other evidence. Copies that cannot be verified against the originals cannot be used as the sole basis for determining the facts of the case. If you can provide transfer records, chat records, collection records, and recordings of the other party admitting the debt, and these copies corroborate each other to form a complete chain of evidence, the court can comprehensively determine the facts of the loan. Conversely, if there are only copies and the other party completely denies them without any corroborating evidence, the risk of losing the case is very high. The outcome of the case depends on the evidence and the court's determination, and no lawyer can guarantee victory or defeat on their own.

Q2: What alternative evidence do I need to prepare?

The organization of evidence around the three layers of agreement, delivery, and unpaid debts is as follows: 1. **Delivery evidence**: Bank transfer receipts, WeChat or Alipay transaction records, and cash withdrawal vouchers. 2. **Agreement and corroborating evidence**: Chat records mentioning the loan, recorded phone calls or messages from the other party acknowledging the debt, and repayment agreements signed retroactively. 3. **Evidence of creditor's rights persistence**: Collection notices, text messages, lawyer's letters, and delivery records. 4. **Source evidence**: Copies of documents with explanations of their copying time, cloud backup records, and witness statements. When the evidence pieces interlock with each other, the weight of the copies will be significantly enhanced.

Q3: How much does it cost to file a lawsuit?

The litigation fees shall be paid in accordance with the "Measures for the Payment of Litigation Fees" (Decree No. 481 of the State Council, implemented on April 1, 2007), which stipulates that the fees shall be paid cumulatively in stages based on the amount of the subject matter. In summary proceedings, the fees shall be halved, and the losing party shall ultimately bear the responsibility. For applications for property preservation, additional preservation fees shall be paid, with a maximum limit; applications for the court to order the other party to submit documentary evidence shall not be charged separately. Lawyer's fees shall be determined through consultation between the law firm and the client, and shall be charged based on the amount of the subject matter or on a per-case basis, without a unified government pricing. For cases with weak evidence, it is recommended to first strengthen the evidence before deciding whether to sue, so as to avoid wasting costs.

Q4: How long do such cases usually take?

If the evidence is sufficient and the defendant cooperates, the case will be concluded within three months under the simplified procedure, and within six months under the ordinary procedure. If it requires public notice for service or the initiation of a procedure for ordering the production of documentary evidence, the timeframe will be extended accordingly. If the court strengthens the evidence before the trial and encourages the other party to confirm the debt, the case may be resolved quickly through mediation, and the mediation agreement will also have enforceable force. Overall, most cases will have results within a few months, but the strengthening of evidence and enforcement stages may prolong the timeframe. It is recommended to initiate the litigation as soon as possible within the three-year statute of limitations, and the trial period will be even longer if there are many disputes over documentary evidence.

Q5: If the original document is lost, what should I do first?

Four steps to proceed: First, comprehensively search for the original documents, focusing on mobile phone albums, the cloud, old phones, home archives, and co-handlers; Second, confirm that the documents cannot be retrieved, and fix the chat records and transfer records, marking the nature of each payment; Third, use WeChat, phone calls, and other methods to let the other party confirm the fact and amount of the loan, leaving a record of the entire process; Fourth, entrust a lawyer to organize the evidence chain, and, if necessary, apply to the court to order the other party to submit the documentary evidence under its control. If no agreement can be reached, promptly initiate legal proceedings and apply for property preservation.

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

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes·Attorney He Ningning·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open 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 you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.