"Can you only admit that you are unlucky when you lose your car?" On the 5th of this month, this edition reported that the security of supermarket parking lots needs to be strengthened, which aroused strong repercussions in the society. Many readers have called this newspaper to express their confusion. Many readers reported that in front of some business outlets and private shops, there appeared a "warm reminder" similar to "Please take care of your car, and our store does not assume the responsibility of keeping it". Does it constitute an exemption clause for merchants to post or place these obvious "warnings" in a conspicuous position at the business point? In this regard, the reporter interviewed the Municipal Consumer Council and the legal profession respectively, and distinguished three types of situations.
Standardized management of free parking lot
"Whether the owner's car is lost in the parking lot depends on whether there is a custody contract relationship between the owner and the parking lot. Once this custody contract relationship is established and the customer's car is within the manageable range of the parking lot, the parking lot must fulfill the custody responsibility. But whether the owner should be responsible for the parking lot where the car is lost should be distinguished from' paid parking' and' free parking'. " Lawyer Yang of Rongjiang Law Firm said that from the case reported by this newspaper, the supermarket issued a "parking card" to every customer who parked, which actually declared the establishment of the custody contract relationship between the supermarket and the customer, and the "parking card" was the proof of this relationship. However, since supermarkets provide parking spaces free of charge, according to the provisions of China's contract law, as the custodian of the contract for free storage, whether the supermarket should bear the responsibility if the vehicle is lost depends on whether there is gross negligence in the process of keeping the owner's vehicle. If the supermarket has evidence to prove that it has no gross negligence, it can be exempted from the liability for compensation for lost vehicles.
"The' warm tips' listed by merchants belong to the exemption clause stipulated in the form of store notices, which violates the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law and is invalid." Lawyer Yang said. Subsequently, the reporter called the Municipal Consumer Council for consultation. Director Xie also said that as long as the customer gets the "parking card" or "parking sign" of the merchant, it means that the merchant has the responsibility to keep the customer, so the so-called "tips" and "warnings" of the merchant are actually suspected of "overlord clauses", which are unreasonable and should be considered invalid.
Temporary parking space in front of ordinary shops
In the open space in front of many business halls and private shops in our city, natural and open temporary parking lots have been formed, and their management forms are also different. However, many merchants invariably post "tips" or "warnings" in front of the shops to remind consumers to take care of their vehicles, and once they are lost, they will not be responsible. Similar to this kind of "notice", Mr. Yang believes that merchants transmit two levels of information: first, they are not responsible for keeping goods for customers; Second, we are not responsible for the customer's loss of goods.
Lawyer Yang told reporters that there is a big difference between customers with cards and customers without cards. Once the customer stops, he takes over the "parking card" issued by the merchant, which means that the customer's car has been placed under the management and control of the merchant, and the customer needs to obtain the parking right with the "card" when parking, and also with the "card" when picking up the car. However, like the phenomenon of free parking in front of some merchants, because the parking environment is completely open, not closed, that is, the parking and access of vehicles are very free, and there is no need for a "card" to pass, it is difficult to determine that there is a custody contract relationship between the two parties, and it is even more difficult to ask the merchants to bear the liability for compensation.
Director Xie also believes that it is difficult to identify the responsibility for customers losing their cars in the open free parking lot in front of the merchants, because from the perspective of "no card", the custody contract relationship between merchants and customers is not established. At this time, the "notice" of the merchant only plays the role of reminding consumers and cannot be included in the "overlord clause".
Paid parking places such as parking lots in property communities.
Should the property company bear the responsibility for the frequent theft of vehicles in residential areas? This is also a concern of many citizens. "When a property company collects property management fees from the owners, it shall bear the obligation of property management. The owner pays the storage fee for the vehicle parked in the community. There is no doubt that there is a custody contract relationship between the owner and the property management company. According to the property management measures, the property management company has the responsibility to remind the owners to take care of their vehicles, but if the owners lose their vehicles in the community and the property management company is at fault, then the property management company should bear certain responsibilities. " Director Xie said. Lawyer Yang also clearly pointed out that as long as there is negligence in the custody process, the residential property management should bear the responsibility. When determining negligence, paid and unpaid lies in judging whether there is "gross negligence".
In our life, the phenomenon of providing paid parking spaces can be seen everywhere. This kind of parking lot, which specializes in parking business activities, can generally be divided into professional parking lots with standardized management (generally paid by car owners on a monthly or annual basis), paid temporary parking spaces provided by public places such as tourist attractions or service institutions such as hospitals. There is an obvious custody contract relationship between the owner and the operator, and the operator should bear the fault liability for the loss of his vehicle. In addition to reminding them to help the owner take care of the vehicle, the clause suspected of exemption cannot be used.
People in the legal profession believe that we should correctly understand and understand the legal responsibility for the loss of vehicles in parking lots. The parking lot can neither be exempted from liability by unilaterally declaring "free" or "prompt", nor can it be considered that the parking lot should bear all the liability for compensation. Only in accordance with the relevant provisions of the law, concrete analysis of specific issues and rational judgment can we make accurate judgments. A clear division of responsibilities is the premise of clear accountability for lost vehicles.