small claims court or what?

[Gill]

Jesse Nowells <[email protected]> wrote:

>I left my bike locked up in the basement parking lot at work, in the special bike area, & when I
>went to retrieve it, found that the top tube was crushed. Of course, the parking management people
>fed me their line about how they're not responsbile blah-blah-blah, but I suspect that some work
>people, who I saw in the bike area with their SUV, backed up into my bike & either didn't noticed
>what they did or they just blew it off. On top of that, the bike area is right next to the
>attendant's booth. I just left the bike locked up there. How should I go about handling this
>situation?

Talk (nicely and asap) to the owner of the SUV, tactfully offer to split the cost (so, take pictures
on location and then get an estimate on repair/frame replacement first) if you are absolutely sure
that that's the guilty party. If s/he doesn't assume responsibility, forget the whole thing. The
police isn't going to do detective work on the SUV and the small claims judge will just laugh at you
if you you don't have any evidence or witnesses, not to mention a proper suspect.

 

[Raymo853]

"Jesse Nowells" <[email protected]> wrote in message
newsine.BSF.4.31.0305250948420.21797-100000@localhost...
>
> & why kick the dog on the leash, when you can fine the owner?
>

You are not trying to find the owner, but looking to blame the guy down the street without a dog.

 

[Raymo853]

"Jesse Nowells" <[email protected]> wrote in message
newsine.BSF.4.31.0305250948420.21797-100000@localhost...
>
> They may be responsible for what contractors do to property on their
lot
> while the contractors are working for them. It's not possible that
any
> other driver was involved. It has to be a vehicle that was being
used by
> contractors or whomever the lot permited in the special bike area.
That's
> the situation.
>

That is true. When the contractor is on site and on cotract things change.

 

[Blech]

[email protected] (gill) wrote in message news:<3ed19e96.36358660@news>...
> Jesse Nowells <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I left my bike locked up in the basement parking lot at work, in the special bike area, & when I
> >went to retrieve it, found that the top tube was crushed. Of course, the parking management
> >people fed me their line about how they're not responsbile blah-blah-blah, but I suspect that
> >some work people, who I saw in the bike area with their SUV, backed up into my bike & either
> >didn't noticed what they did or they just blew it off. On top of that, the bike area is right
> >next to the attendant's booth. I just left the bike locked up there. How should I go about
> >handling this situation?
>
> Talk (nicely and asap) to the owner of the SUV, tactfully offer to split the cost (so, take
> pictures on location and then get an estimate on repair/frame replacement first) if you are
> absolutely sure that that's the guilty party. If s/he doesn't assume responsibility, forget the
> whole thing. The police isn't going to do detective work on the SUV and the small claims judge
> will just laugh at you if you you don't have any evidence or witnesses, not to mention a proper
> suspect.

Why bother with any of this when a bike that has any value should be insured through a persons
homeowners or renters insurance.

I'm sure the OP was smart enough to have it insured.

 

[Mrbubl]

If it were a car how would the companies handle the situation? Why don't they handle yours
the same way?

"Jesse Nowells" <[email protected]> wrote in message
newsine.BSF.4.31.0305241718590.65047-100000@localhost...
>
>
> On Sat, 24 May 2003, waxxer wrote:
>
> > Joshua summed it up very nicely. Except for the possibility of it being
a
> > vehicular accident or hit and run. The police (will only) write a
property
> > damage case if you are lucky and assign a non crime case number. Why?
Its
> > not a vehicular accident, it hard to prove the damage was malicious and
no
> > one has stepped for claiming responsibility or wittiness account.
>
> I don't necessarily assume any malicious intent. Why should I? I witnessed people working in the
> bike area with a parked SUV. The kind of damage done to the bike looks like a vehicle was
> involved. The crushed area looks like it was twisted. The crushed area was where the lock was.
> (We're not talking about paint damage. We're talking about a totaled bike.) Probably what happened
> was that these people backed up slowly & the bike got wedged.
>
> > You may be able to pursue the land owner and see if his insurance will cover it. Chances are he
> > will go and tell you to pound salt. Unfortunately, you have little recourse and be careful
> > pointing your finger at someone just out of suspicion
>
> I'm not interested in accusing any individual. There are 3 entities involved here: A major
> corporation. a parking managment contractor & a building contractor. Somebody's going to write me
> a check.

 

[Barry Gaudet]

S. Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
: "Barry Gaudet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
:> It wouldn't be a slam dunk but if you could convince a judge that there level of due diligence
:> was lacking you might win. If the damage did indeed occur very close to the attendants both then
:> you might have a case.

: I doubt it. You're at the mall and somebody is speeding negligently and hits your car,

I don't own a car.

: killing a passenger in your car. What odds of success will you have if you try to sue the mall
: owner for this accident??

Leaving aside the difference between property damage and death of a person: If you could
demonstrate that the mall's security was negligent in allowing an activity that a reasonable person
would consider dangerous then, yes, you might have a case.

As I said it's not a certainty and would depend on the details. As well I was trying to point out
that regardless of disclaimers that a business might have; they still have an implied warrantee of
merchantability of any good or service they sell that can not be voided by the disclaimer

--
'They paved paradise And put up a parking lot' -Joni Mitchell

 

[S. Anderson]

"Barry Gaudet" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I don't own a car.

This was a hypothetical situation.. ;-)

> : killing a passenger in your car. What odds of success will you have if you try to sue the mall
> : owner for this accident??
>
> Leaving aside the difference between property damage and death of a person: If you could
> demonstrate that the mall's security was negligent in allowing an activity that a reasonable
> person would consider dangerous then, yes, you might have a case.

Indeed, that is possible. Similarly, if you could prove that there was some flaw in the design of
the parking lot such that it consituted some type of unusually dangerous situation you might also
have a case. But in this case we're more likely looking at a more common, run'o'the'mill
hit-and-run, like someone backing into your (hypothetical) car and taking off. Actually, we have
absolutely no idea what happened other than a lot of supposition and hypothesizing by the OP.

>
> As I said it's not a certainty and would depend on the details. As well I was trying to point out
> that regardless of disclaimers that a business might have; they still have an implied warrantee
> of merchantability of any good or service they sell that can not be voided by the disclaimer

And, of course, you're absolutely right. There ARE unusual circumstances that can make any
disclaimer void. I'm not sure this is the case here, but it IS possible.

> --
> 'They paved paradise And put up a parking lot' -Joni Mitchell

Cheers,

Scott..

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"blech" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Why bother with any of this when a bike that has any value
should
> be insured through a persons homeowners or renters
insurance.
>
> I'm sure the OP was smart enough to have it insured.

A lot of otherwise smart people don't have their bikes insured -- probably most of them.

Matt O.

 

[Joshua Putnam]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> "blech" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Why bother with any of this when a bike that has any value
> should
> > be insured through a persons homeowners or renters
> insurance.
> >
> > I'm sure the OP was smart enough to have it insured.
>
> A lot of otherwise smart people don't have their bikes insured -- probably most of them.

Many people do but don't realize it. A bicycle is personal property, and is therefore covered under
the personal property limits of your homeowners or renters insurance. But personally, I wouldn't
file a claim for most of my bicycles. Most of them aren't worth much more than the deductible on our
insurance, and the recovery after the deductible probably wouldn't pay for the loss surcharges for
the next three years.

Homeowners insurance is for catastrophic losses, not inconvenient ones.

--
[email protected] is Joshua Putnam <http://www.phred.org/~josh/> Updated Infrared Photography Books
List: <http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/irbooks.html

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:MPG.193f38c9e93748059896d2@localhost...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >
> > "blech" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > Why bother with any of this when a bike that has any
value
> > should
> > > be insured through a persons homeowners or renters
> > insurance.
> > >
> > > I'm sure the OP was smart enough to have it insured.
> >
> > A lot of otherwise smart people don't have their bikes insured -- probably most of them.
>
> Many people do but don't realize it. A bicycle is
personal property, and
> is therefore covered under the personal property limits of
your
> homeowners or renters insurance. But personally, I
wouldn't file a claim
> for most of my bicycles. Most of them aren't worth much
more than the
> deductible on our insurance, and the recovery after the
deductible
> probably wouldn't pay for the loss surcharges for the next
three years.
>
> Homeowners insurance is for catastrophic losses, not
inconvenient ones.

You're probably right about that.

One thing not to be overlooked is the insurance that comes with a credit card, especially a Gold or
Platinum one. Make your major purchases with these cards, and they're covered for a year -- or more.
You can pay off the balance, and still have the coverage.

Matt O.

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <Pine.BSF.4.31.0305231955210.12941-100000@localhost>, [email protected] says...
>I left my bike locked up in the basement parking lot at work, in the special bike area, & when I
>went to retrieve it, found that the top tube was crushed. Of course, the parking management people
>fed me their line about how they're not responsbile blah-blah-blah, but I suspect that some work
>people, who I saw in the bike area with their SUV, backed up into my bike & either didn't noticed
>what they did or they just blew it off. On top of that, the bike area is right next to the
>attendant's booth. I just left the bike locked up there. How should I go about handling this
>situation?

Unless you have witnesses to the actual crushing of your bike, you will probably not get any money
out of the parking company. It's hard to prove who did the damage unless the guilty party confesses.
That's one reason why the bike I ride to work sits in my office and not in a public bike rack.

-----------------
Alex __O _-\<,_ (_)/ (_)