After being injured and hospitalized, a "law firm clerk" came to the door and said that the injury was not up to standard and promised to "help with the compensation."
The rider settled the claim on his own but was charged 10,000 yuan in liquidated damages, and the court rejected the law firm’s claim
Lawyers remind that similar agreements contain clauses that unreasonably increase the rider’s liability, such as unusually high liquidated damages.
Report from this newspaper (Reporter Wang Xianru) "I was found in the hospital. The other party said that my injury did not meet the disability standard, and the compensation amount would not be too high, and promised to provide legal services." On November 11, Wang Liang, a takeaway rider from Wuhan, Hubei, told reporters that he thought he would get professional compensation help, but he did not expect to get into a lawsuit.
On August 15, 2025, Wang Liang fell and was hospitalized after falling and returning to his residence after delivering orders. While he was hospitalized, a salesman who claimed to be from a law firm in Hubei entered the ward and said he could help with the claim settlement. After being discharged from the hospital, Wang Liang went to the law firm to sign two civil agency contracts with the other party. The two parties agreed that if the subject matter of the case reaches more than 30,000 yuan, the portion exceeding 30,000 yuan will be used as the law firm’s agency fee; if the amount does not reach 30,000 yuan, the law firm will not charge agency fees.
Later, Wang Liang felt that the law firm was not actively promoting claims settlement, so he tried to settle claims on his own through the platform. Soon, a claims adjuster from an insurance company contacted him and proposed a claim amount that was significantly higher than the law firm's plan. "The process was very smooth, and we did not encounter any difficulties or obstacles mentioned by the law firm. All the compensation has been paid into the account." Wang Liang suspected that the law firm was deliberately misleading or concealing.
On October 21, 2025, Wang Liang sent the "Notice of Termination of the Agency Contract" to the law firm. What he didn't expect was that on March 19, 2026, he received a text message from the court, asking him to pay 10,000 yuan in liquidated damages.
After checking the information, Wang Liang realized that the other party was at fault first and the contract was invalid, so he decided to respond to the lawsuit on his own. During the actual trial, the court finally determined that one of the agency contracts was invalid; although the other agency contract was valid, the law firm made mistakes during its performance and the rider did not breach the contract in bad faith and rejected the law firm's claim for liquidated damages.
"The law firm did not provide substantive services, so it has no right to claim compensation, let alone a basis for liquidated damages." Lin Wei, a lawyer at Beijing Zeying Law Firm, analyzed that the entrustment contract is centered on the trustee handling the entrusted affairs. In the above-mentioned cases, the law firm did not actively follow up after signing the contract. The rider completed the claim settlement on his own through the platform. The law firm did not produce actual agency results, nor did it provide substantive legal services.
Lin Wei pointed out that such entrustment agreements often contain invalid format clauses, such as setting abnormally high liquidated damages, agreeing that "the rider's own handling of claims constitutes a fundamental breach of contract", and agreeing that "the final right of interpretation belongs to the institution", etc., which unreasonably increases the liability of the rider and exempts the institution from its own responsibility.
Xi Yongxiang, a rider insurance service operator at Meituan, said that injured riders often encounter various people who come to their homes under the banner of "professional claims settlement", claiming that they are familiar with the claims process and can help riders obtain higher compensation. "On the surface, the rider has received legal services, but in fact he may have signed a high-risk agency agreement without knowing it." Xi Yongxiang said that once the rider chooses to settle the claim on his own or is unwilling to pay the agreed fee, he may encounter disputes such as being sued and demanding liquidated damages.
Lin Wei reminded that when encountering such lawsuits, riders should stabilize their mentality, respond resolutely, and sort out the chat records with the other party, platform claim records, hospital medical records, original contracts and other materials, and simultaneously complain to the judicial department or financial regulatory authorities through multiple channels.
