Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I may not win it, but I won't go down this easily.
And it's NOT "just like I parked on the street and found a dent in my car." We paid for valet parking - we left our vehicle in THEIR CARE for safekeeping. We specifically paid them to park our car (without damaging it) in order to AVOID a scenario like parking in the street, or parking in a common area where just anyone, not only valet attendants, can zip through and damage vehicles.
The valet company told us that there are not cameras in the parking garage, but I am going to ask the Hilton about that FOR SURE. If they have cameras, I want to see the tapes. Someone in that garage seriously damaged our vehicle while it was in the custody of a valet service and on Hilton property. That's not the same as parking on a public street at all.
What I meant was you can't prove one way or another what happened. Think about this for a minute. Anyone with damage to their vehicle could just go use a valet somewhere and then claim they damaged the vehicle. If you can't prove they did it there is no difference between what you are trying to do and the some schmo claiming the same thing to get someone else to pay for their repair.
I'm not saying what happened is right. It sucks. But you have to have some kind of proof to win.
The moral of this story is to ALWAYS walk completely around your vehicle doing a visual inspection when it is returned to you and do it BEFORE driving off. That is where the court may find fault on your part because you didn't exercise due diligence in inspecting the vehicle when it was returned to you. I'd find it hard to miss a dent that big while getting into the vehicle if it were my truck.
Simply based on that the inference is the damage had to have occurred while it was at the parking garage. Unless the Garden Inn can prove otherwise. Its their problem.
Hotel does not have to prove anything. OP has the burden of proof, and so far Plaintiff's testimony is the only evidence. "Her word against his word" basically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon
The valet company told us that there are not cameras in the parking garage, but I am going to ask the Hilton about that FOR SURE. If they have cameras, I want to see the tapes.
Correct. I work for a company that owns hotels and Valet attendant damaging vehicles happens. If we get a complaint we make a good-faith effort to look at the video. As a policy we do not allow guests looking at our video, but there may be exceptions.
Ask the hotel, not attendant, for the video.
Not to Monday-morning QB you -- but I hope you learned not to valet your vehicle anymore. I never valet mine.
No it's not. When a valet takes possession of your car in exchange for money, they become responsible for its safekeeping.
Nonetheless... to the OP, it's a pretty weak case since you had already driven off before noticing the damage. It shouldn't be an "at fault" accident since it's the equivalent of a hit-and-run. But that doesn't mean your rates might not go up anyway.
Yes, I hate that we drove off before noticing the damage.
That being said, so what if we had noticed the damage before picking up the vehicle? If they're going to lie about it (which obviously they are), what would have stopped them from saying right then, "No, that damage was there when you dropped off the vehicle." I mean, they're lying to us right now - why not right then?
Maybe I've been watching too much CSI on TV but maybe the only way to prove your case is to find evidence of where they damaged your truck in their parking lot.
Maybe there is evidence of your paint on a wall or pillar there?
I once returned to a friend's car that had had a brick put through the window and a worthless plastic bag taken from the rear seat.
I tracked the miscreant down and he was hauled off to a local London police station where one of the items from the bag was found in his pocket.
The point I'm making is that there might be something you can do about it yourself.
Yes, true, but we live five hours away - and we had to leave Austin immediately to get back for my husband's job, so at the time we couldn't take the time to look at all the pillars between the valet parking area and the pickup point. But I am DEFINITELY going to ask the Hilton about cameras in the garage.
Yes, true, but we live five hours away - and we had to leave Austin immediately to get back for my husband's job, so at the time we couldn't take the time to look at all the pillars between the valet parking area and the pickup point. But I am DEFINITELY going to ask the Hilton about cameras in the garage.
It takes 20 seconds to walk around a vehicle.
Every vehicle is "inspected" before its taken away, and the damage is marked on the valet ticket kept in the office. Since the vehicle left the property before the damage was noticed, the valet company/hotel have ZERO liability. Whos to say it didnt happen between when you left, and when you came back?(I am not calling you a liar, they probably did damage your vehicle)
Best bet like others have said, is to call your insurance company, and let them deal with the valet company,
I am sorry that this happened, and you can try the small claims route to remedy the situation.
What I do now is whip out the trusty phone or tablet and make a quick 20-second walk around video when dropping off a vehicle. I will also walk around upon pickup to make sure that the vehicle was not damaged. I do this with rental cars as well upon commencement of the rental, photographing any existing damages in addition.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
Hotel does not have to prove anything. OP has the burden of proof, and so far Plaintiff's testimony is the only evidence. "Her word against his word" basically.
Has it occurred to you that the testimony of the poster and her husband is evidence and is proof?
The car was in the total control of the hotel while the OP went about business as intended. The OP doesn't have to prove how the damage occurred. What she has to prove is that the damage occurred while the car was in their possession.
Stop and think about what you just said for a moment. The business created a contractual relationship based on the notion that you have to pay to park in their parking lot. Than it wants to assert its not responsible when the article in their care is damaged? Gee, just what did the business agree to do ? Why does this business provide a valet to park the vehicle if it won't take responsibility for this sort of damage?
Look up the legal term "bailment" and read the description through carefully.
Further, there is a legal doctrine in negligence cases known as "res ipsa loquitur" or the thing speaks for itself. A party is entitled to prove negligence in a case by showing that (1) an instrument was solely in the hands of the defendant (2) injury occurred while it was in the hands of the defendant; and (3) the only way injury could have occurred is by negligence.
Quote:
Ask the hotel, not attendant, for the video.
A video would be very helpful, obviously, if it depicted damage. However, the hotel may not provide it and one of the problems with Small Claims Court is that you don't get 'discovery" which is something you would get in an ordinary civil case filed by an attorney.
I'm saying that the video isn't essential. What is essential is that believable testimony be presented about the condition of the car before it was left with the parking garage and that the OP be able to also say authoritatively under oath that the car could not have been damaged after she took possession of it again. One of the problems I have with videotaped evidence is simply the fact that now that this technology exists, some people expect everyone to be able to show it. We are a long ways from that point in life and we may never get there because cameras everywhere equals no privacy.
If that is the case, what other conclusion could be drawn than that the vehicle was damaged at the Hilton Garden Inn? It wasn't damaged by aliens from outer space.
One of the issues we are getting here is that of "level of proof". Some people apparently believe things need to be proven "absolutely". That isn't true and never has been true in civil court. What is required is "proof by a preponderance of evidence". In other words, the plaintiff's version of the case must be shown to be slightly more likely than not. I believe she has shown that based on what she has said.
The only thing that would change my mind, is if the car was out of her eyesight in any place where it could have been struck by another vehicle after they took possession of it from the garage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
