China Consumers Association Takes on AI Customer Service

China’s Consumers Association (CCA) has responded to a surge in complaints about AI-powered customer service systems, flagging unfulfilled promises, difficulty reaching human agents, and inaccurate AI-generated content as the most pressing issues facing consumers. The association’s response, published in its first-half 2026 complaint analysis report, comes as internet services complaints reached 122,922 cases, ranking first among all service categories, according to Xinhua News.

A Growing Problem

The complaints highlight a fundamental tension as generative AI becomes deeply embedded in consumer services. AI customer service has become an essential tool for operators conducting product consultations, fee explanations, marketing promotions, and after-sales support. But as its use expands, so do the problems.

A case in point: In April 2026, consumer Mr. Gong purchased a used car through a second-hand car app, paying a 2,000 yuan deposit. Before payment, the platform’s official AI customer service “Xiaogua” explicitly stated that the 28,700 yuan vehicle price included transfer and license plate fees. However, during the transaction, a salesperson demanded an additional 1,000 yuan transfer fee. Gong filed a complaint through the 315 platform on May 5, arguing that the AI customer service and staff provided contradictory information that led him to make a transaction decision based on incorrect information.

Three Key Problems Identified

The CCA identified three main problems with AI customer service systems:

Difficulty transferring to human agents. Some platforms use loop responses and multi-layer redirects to delay or block consumers from reaching human service. Complex issues such as returns, refunds, and liability determination cannot be handled promptly, increasing the cost of protecting consumer rights.

Unfulfilled AI promises. AI customer service makes clear commitments about fees, promotional activities, and after-sales policies. After consumers make transaction decisions based on these commitments, operators refuse to honor them, citing reasons such as “AI answers don’t represent company position” or “algorithm-generated content has no legal effect.”

Inaccurate AI-generated content. Generic AI systems produce factual errors or misinterpret rules, potentially misleading consumers in scenarios like flight ticket changes and refunds, legal rights protection, and financial services, causing property losses.

Broader Complaint Landscape

The AI customer service issues are part of a wider consumer protection picture. In the first half of 2026, national consumer associations received 985,928 consumer complaints, down 1.01% year-on-year, resolved 567,926 cases, and recovered 447 million yuan in economic losses for consumers, as China Daily reported. The association also received 257,000 consumer visits and consultations.

Notably, service-related complaints rose to 46.76% of all complaints, up 5.92 percentage points from the first half of 2025, while commodity complaints fell to 49.41%, reflecting the growing importance of service-related consumer issues in China’s economy.

CCA’s Position on Liability

The CCA took a clear stance on who bears responsibility for AI customer service output. According to the association, while AI customer service deployed by operators does not have independent civil liability capacity, it is an important tool deployed by operators for business service activities, and its output content is part of the operator’s service. Operators providing AI customer service should establish smooth and convenient human customer service transfer mechanisms.

This position is significant because it clarifies that operators cannot simply disclaim responsibility for what their AI systems tell consumers. The CCA’s guidance, as reported by 21st Century Business Herald, effectively treats AI customer service output as binding on the operator.

Consumer Advice and Forward Look

The CCA also cautioned consumers about relying on third-party generic AI responses. Such responses generally cannot represent official platform or merchant commitments, the association said. Consumers using third-party generic AI to check critical transaction information should verify through the operator’s official website, official customer service, or other channels, and should not blindly trust third-party AI responses to avoid unnecessary property losses.

The Shandong Provincial Consumers Association has previously warned about AI customer service “passing the buck,” noting that intelligent customer service can appear responsive but gets stuck in “loop scripts” when facing complex issues, consuming user patience and leading to abandoned after-sales requests, as reported by Dazhong News.

As AI customer service continues to proliferate across China’s digital economy, the CCA’s response signals a growing regulatory focus on ensuring that automation does not come at the expense of consumer protection. The association’s call for mandatory human transfer mechanisms and its stance on operator liability could set important precedents for how AI-powered services are held accountable in the consumer marketplace. Consumers and businesses alike will be watching to see how these guidelines translate into enforcement and practice in the months ahead.