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.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Is this worth going to Small Claims Court
Comments
-
Spot on, unless the garage was negligent (in the legal sense) then they have no liability.
If one of the mechanics had set fire to the garage whilst welding then that's negligent but you might struggle to prove negligence if it was external arsonists.
Don't agree with this. The garage was responsible for the safe custody of the OP's property. Bailment.
The garage ought to have had insurance against the material risk of a fire, theft, etc. They didn't.
As others have said, enforcing rights against an individual with no insurance will be difficult. Worth investigating further though.0 -
Spot on, unless the garage was negligent (in the legal sense) then they have no liability.
If one of the mechanics had set fire to the garage whilst welding then that's negligent but you might struggle to prove negligence if it was external arsonists.
Rubbish. Negligence has nothing to do with it. They would be responsible for the goods whilst in their possession irrespective.0 -
Bailment only places a duty to take reasonable care of the bike, I still think the OP is going to struggle given that the damage was caused by external arsonists.0
-
Exactly, no one is saying the garage owner doesn't have a duty of care to the OP, but in order for them to be found liable a court must show they didn't take reasonable care, or in this case the "bailee" can show that the loss or damage to the OP's goods was not their fault.Bailment only places a duty to take reasonable care of the bike, I still think the OP is going to struggle given that the damage was caused by external arsonists.0 -
I would have thought that having no insurance is negligence and lacking in due care in itself.
Whether they would have any assets worth suing for is another matter.0 -
Whatever, OP, if you do decide to punt £50 on small claims action, get in before everyone else - the other peoples insurance companies won't leave a lot for you to chew on if they get there first.0
-
I'm pretty certain it isn't.I would have thought that having no insurance is negligence and lacking in due care in itself.
The question that has to be asked is purely related to the damage/loss itself, ie, was the garage owner negligent or didn't act reasonable in preventing the goods in his possesion from being damaged or lossed. The fact that they had insurance or not doesn't come into it.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards