Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Nightclub Cloakroom Loss.
Late last year, at a nightclub, my leather jacket (containing housekeys and gloves) was not at the cloakroom when I went to collect it. The attendant (a sweaty, spotty, late-teen lad; irrelevant, I know) who had taken my coat and fee earlier on, apologised and said that he didn't know where it was.
The following day, I wrote to the nightclub (claiming £180) and, subsequently, I filled out a 'Item Loss' form.
Today I have received a letter from the company, enclosing a copy of the disclaimer that is on show at the cloakroom, which states that, after the loss of an item, "the company's liability.......shall be limited to a maximum sum of £65". They enclosed a cheque for £65.
Where do I stand?
The following day, I wrote to the nightclub (claiming £180) and, subsequently, I filled out a 'Item Loss' form.
Today I have received a letter from the company, enclosing a copy of the disclaimer that is on show at the cloakroom, which states that, after the loss of an item, "the company's liability.......shall be limited to a maximum sum of £65". They enclosed a cheque for £65.
Where do I stand?
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Arti. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Sadly, you have no further claim, if the notice was clearly displayed, then by taking out a contract, by leaving your coat, you undertook to be bound by that rule.
In fact, you are lucky because most venues accept no rsponsibility at all for lost property, so to get anything back is a bit of a bonus.
Of course, hardly anyone does read these dlisclaimers, but when you try and claim, as youhave, the club will, and have, point it out.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but any court will regard the club's response as more than generous, and within the terms of its entitlement, given that the disclaimer was there for you to read.
In fact, you are lucky because most venues accept no rsponsibility at all for lost property, so to get anything back is a bit of a bonus.
Of course, hardly anyone does read these dlisclaimers, but when you try and claim, as youhave, the club will, and have, point it out.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but any court will regard the club's response as more than generous, and within the terms of its entitlement, given that the disclaimer was there for you to read.
true as to zhukov's and andy h's comments. The only exemption would be if the attendant made a promise to look after your coat specially - and you would need a couple of witnesses to that, preferably a neutral one (Thomson vs W.End Parking Co being the defining case on oral contracts overriding written ones).
"Tuff" I know - but be more careful with your keys next time.
"Tuff" I know - but be more careful with your keys next time.
This is all nonsense. Even with a disclaimer the club has a duty of care to look after your coat. Unless they can prove that they didn't make a mistake, they must replace or reimburse you with the full value of the jacket.
Otherwise, I will open a coat check area and "lose" any coat worth over £65. Give you back £65 and keep your £180 jacket. Easy way to make a quick buck.
Otherwise, I will open a coat check area and "lose" any coat worth over £65. Give you back £65 and keep your £180 jacket. Easy way to make a quick buck.
Hmmm.
I'm not sure whether I agree with Andy or not. He is correct in stating that you can enter into a legal contract by an action (or inaction) and that you're normally bound by any clearly-displayed signs indicating the terms of any such contract.
However the law states:
"(2)In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
(3)Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude or restrict liability for negligence a person’s agreement to or awareness of it is not of itself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any risk".
[Section 2, Unfair Contracts Act 1977]
So the essential test is one of 'reasonableness'. If a nightclub tried to limit their liability to (say) a tenner in respect of any loss of property from their cloakroom, a court would almost certainly rule that the contract term was unreasonable by virtue of the fact that most items stored in the cloakroom would be worth more than £10.
Conversely, if a club placed a £1000 limit on their liability, a person who left a diamond-encrusted jacket in their cloakroom would be unlikely to get a court to rule in their favour (on the grounds of 'unreasonableness') if that amount was all they were offered when it went missing.
The only way to find out whether a court would rule that the £65 limit is 'unreasonable' is to place a claim before the court. The first step would be to write a formal demand for the £115 which you think that you're owed, stating the reason why (and citing the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977). Your letter should be addressed to 'The Company Secretary', at the registered address of the company. It should also show your name and address, and be dated. Further it must clearly indicate that, unless payment is received within a specified period of time (I suggest 14 day), you will commence legal proceedings. The letter should be sent by recorded delivery (and you should ensure that you retain a copy).
If no payment is received, you should then commence proceedings using the online claims system:
https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome
However there can be no guarantee that a court would rule in your favour. You could simply end up further out of pocket through the court fees.
Chris
I'm not sure whether I agree with Andy or not. He is correct in stating that you can enter into a legal contract by an action (or inaction) and that you're normally bound by any clearly-displayed signs indicating the terms of any such contract.
However the law states:
"(2)In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
(3)Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude or restrict liability for negligence a person’s agreement to or awareness of it is not of itself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any risk".
[Section 2, Unfair Contracts Act 1977]
So the essential test is one of 'reasonableness'. If a nightclub tried to limit their liability to (say) a tenner in respect of any loss of property from their cloakroom, a court would almost certainly rule that the contract term was unreasonable by virtue of the fact that most items stored in the cloakroom would be worth more than £10.
Conversely, if a club placed a £1000 limit on their liability, a person who left a diamond-encrusted jacket in their cloakroom would be unlikely to get a court to rule in their favour (on the grounds of 'unreasonableness') if that amount was all they were offered when it went missing.
The only way to find out whether a court would rule that the £65 limit is 'unreasonable' is to place a claim before the court. The first step would be to write a formal demand for the £115 which you think that you're owed, stating the reason why (and citing the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977). Your letter should be addressed to 'The Company Secretary', at the registered address of the company. It should also show your name and address, and be dated. Further it must clearly indicate that, unless payment is received within a specified period of time (I suggest 14 day), you will commence legal proceedings. The letter should be sent by recorded delivery (and you should ensure that you retain a copy).
If no payment is received, you should then commence proceedings using the online claims system:
https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome
However there can be no guarantee that a court would rule in your favour. You could simply end up further out of pocket through the court fees.
Chris
More answers on your duplicate thread here:
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1116293.html
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1116293.html
I think the decision you must make is are you going to risk court action, which will be on the basis of reasonableness, for a loss of £115, when your losses in going to court may be far higher. They probably have a duty of care so you would need to prove negligence, a good test is to consult a solicitor and ask if they will take the matter to court on a conditional fee agreement (no win no fee) I think you will find they will not take that risk, because they will not be sure which way the court will decide, usual practice is to only accept CFA where the chance to win is high.
Another possibility is to check your home insurance policies to see if you are covered
Another possibility is to check your home insurance policies to see if you are covered
Why not claim on your household insurance for the lost jacket? That's partly why we take out insurance isn't it, to pay out when we lose things.
To those who said that other companies had paid up the full amount (on the OP's other duplicate thread) when pressed, they probably said this was an ex gratia payment and didn't admit liability, so it really wouldn't set a precedent.
To those who said that other companies had paid up the full amount (on the OP's other duplicate thread) when pressed, they probably said this was an ex gratia payment and didn't admit liability, so it really wouldn't set a precedent.
1 to 11 of 11
Latest Posts
News5 mins ago
ChatterBank6 mins ago
Are The West In The Grip Of The Woke...
News10 mins ago
Crosswords17 mins ago