We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

dry cleaner gave my suit away

2»

Comments

  • halibut2209
    halibut2209 Posts: 4,250 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    arenaman wrote: »
    And accidentally taking something and failing to return it is also theft.

    No it isn't. Accidentally taking something and refusing to allow the owner to get it back might be, but "failing to return" isn't theft by any definition
    One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.
  • CoolHotCold
    CoolHotCold Posts: 2,158 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Definition of Theft

    A person is guilty of theft if they: dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

    Reference: Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968.


    That is the definition, right now you can't say exactly what the situation is with the dry cleaning as there is clearly not enough information in the OP's posts to say one way or another. The op should take it up with the Dry Cleaning company to provide a reasonable solution (either recover the suit within a reasonable time or pay compensation towards the lost suit).
  • arcon5
    arcon5 Posts: 14,099 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    arenaman wrote: »
    No, the dry cleaners isn't the loser in this though they could provide vital info as to the circumstances.

    Yes they are.

    The dry cleaners as bailees have a duty of care, they have breached this, thus are responsible for either recovering goods are reimbursing op the value of the goods.
  • fluffnutter
    fluffnutter Posts: 23,179 Forumite
    arcon5 wrote: »
    It's likely they will be liable for the value of the old suit, not the price of the new suit.

    The value of the old suit will be based on the original price less any value lost over time due to wear and tear. Anything more would either be betterment or consequential loss depending on what the claim is for (e.g. transportation).

    Their terms and conditions and wholly relevant, it should outline each parties obligations and liabilities, it should if drawn up professionally outline a procedure for making a claim and how that claim would be calculated. These terms should be fair to both parties of course.

    I'm not sure about this. Realistically you won't be able to buy a suit for the same value; you'll only be able to replace it with new. I think you'd have a great case for arguing that they need to reimburse you for a new suit (of similar quality of course - you can't go in with your Asda £35 suit and expect them to fork out for a Savile Row tailor-made one).

    That's the concept of insurance after all - new for old. And the dry cleaners should be insured against this (they're fools if they're not).
    "Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.
  • You can't say the dry cleaners have to give monetary compensation automatically. The OP probably never asked or enquired what to do if the husband needed a suit.

    You can't just purchase a new suit without talking to the dry cleaners first. It could be a logistical problem that the Dry Cleaners were having retrieving the suit and they would of provided either a loan or rented one until the original one is retrieved.
  • arcon5
    arcon5 Posts: 14,099 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    You can't say the dry cleaners have to give monetary compensation automatically. The OP probably never asked or enquired what to do if the husband needed a suit.

    You can't just purchase a new suit without talking to the dry cleaners first. It could be a logistical problem that the Dry Cleaners were having retrieving the suit and they would of provided either a loan or rented one until the original one is retrieved.

    Hence why I said they are responsible for recovering the goods or the value of the goods. If the former isn't an option then the latter is the only remaining option
  • arcon5
    arcon5 Posts: 14,099 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    I'm not sure about this. Realistically you won't be able to buy a suit for the same value; you'll only be able to replace it with new. I think you'd have a great case for arguing that they need to reimburse you for a new suit (of similar quality of course - you can't go in with your Asda £35 suit and expect them to fork out for a Savile Row tailor-made one).

    That's the concept of insurance after all - new for old. And the dry cleaners should be insured against this (they're fools if they're not).

    Then op will need to contribute to a new suit, this contribution should represent the use prior to the item going missing (being taken). Nothing unfair about this. If I buy a £20k car and it gets written off after 50k miles, I wouldn't expect the insurance company to buy me a brand new car
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 347.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 251.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 451.8K Spending & Discounts
  • 239.5K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 615.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 175.1K Life & Family
  • 252.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.