This wizard compares statutory trial numbers; it does not promise a refund
Chinese prepaid consumption disputes around gym cards, beauty stored-value cards, and training lesson packs still recur after Interpretation SPC 2025 No. 4 took effect on 1 May 2025. People usually search after a shop quotes a low refund or even claims the consumer owes extra money. Nearby free tools answer a different job: a gym-card “is it worth buying” calculator, a general rights-defense script, or a Taiwan contract refund estimator. This page is a mainland ordered wizard: choose the refund reason, choose session card versus time card, describe discount / gift amount / gift sessions, enter prepaid and used figures plus the merchant quote, then read a comparison table.
The comparison table shows the statutory trial refund, any contract figure that is more favorable to the consumer, the merchant quote, the gap, and an Article 20 no-overdraft warning when original-price redemption exceeds the prepaid amount. It never auto-deducts Article 15 “reasonable expenses” (staff commissions are not reasonable expenses) and never auto-values Article 21 heterogeneous gifts. Multi-purpose prepaid cards are out of scope under Article 26. Interest under Articles 16–17 and punitive damages under Article 23 are explained on the FAQ path list only.
How it works, in order: classify the reason; check the two seven-day exceptions; pick the card type; pick the privilege form; fill the numbers including optional contract math and market price the user supplies; export the comparison plus evidence and 12315 / consumer-association / small-claim paths. Next: how-to · FAQ · use cases.
Sources to re-read before you negotiate: the SPC publication page, the Zhangping personal-training case write-up, the 2026 typical closed-gym case, and the 2026 news investigation about refunds that first demand extra payment. This site is not affiliated with any court, gym, or law firm.