商品房降价补差广告:要约,抑或要约邀请

House Advertising: Are Sellers' “Price Match” Statements Offers or Invitations to Offers?

伴随限房、限贷、房产税等政策出台,我国商品房市场价格一直涨跌不明。商品房降价补差广告引起不少争议:购房者认为这是商家的承诺,在房屋降价时应当兑现;房产商仅将其视作宣传手段,不承担任何责任。降价补差广告的特殊性决定需要借助理性人客观评价标准分析法律属性。文章建议,在限制降价补差广告的基础上,将其定性为要约列入买卖合同,并明确其与欺诈性广告的区别,以保护消费者的信赖利益以及合理预期,促进商品房市场良性发展。

Real estate taxes and tighter mortgage lending standards as well as policies limiting purchase have contributed to changes in Chinese housing market, including unpredictable price fluctuation. Prospective buyers regard ＂price match or price adjustment＂ advertisements as a promise of sorts-that if the property in question goes under transacted price - the sellers agree to refund money. However, sellers view the terms solely as attractive advertising - not committing them to any guarantee. Classic principles of contract law view real estate advertisements as ＂invitations to offers＂, not actual contract offers, unless the circumstances are exceptional. Because ＂price match＂ or ＂price adjustment＂ terms in real estate advertising are quite special, this paper argues that the law should treat them as actual contact ＂offers＂ binding for sellers. In this way, the law will protect the reasonable expectations and reliance interests of buyers and prevent fraud or misleading in advertising.