The security command owner was unsuccessful when he stopped the car. Who was responsible?The court was sentenced →

Because the security command was improper, the owner gave the car next to him, so he brought the security company to the court to court. Who should be responsible? Recently, the Haicang Court released a case.

One evening in March last year, Xiao Chen drove a new car back to his community. Because the car skills were not skilled, the community security guard Lao Zheng helped to direct when parking. Unexpectedly, when the car is reversing, the vehicle is stunned with the vehicle of others, and both vehicles have different degrees of damage. After the traffic police issued an accident, Xiao Chen was responsible for the accident.

Xiao Chen believes that the operator of the property company as a parking lot should bear the losses caused by the accident and sue the property company to the court.

"Because the head of the security guard was missing, it caused my car and someone else's car. As a parking lot manager, the property company should bear the loss of more than 5,000 yuan due to the loss of this accident." Xiao Chen said.

The property company argued that Xiao Chen's self -driving vehicle had an accident, and he should be responsible and should not be unreasonable to unreasonable personnel, and he should reject his appeal.

After hearing, the court believed that the existing evidence failed to prove that Lao Zheng was in command Xiao Chen's parking; "Hui" behavior, without evidence to prove that Lao Zheng had fault, the plaintiff Xiao Chen, as an operator of a vehicle, should also be responsible for the occurrence of the accident.

In summary, the first trial rejected all Xiao Chen's claims.

【Judge's saying】

The behavior of "good intentions" is also called friendship, that is, the actor is engaged in the purpose of establishing, maintaining or enhancement of the relationship with others, and love. It does not have legal constraints, and the consequences of the consequences to directly profit if they are unpaid.

The community security command and assistance of parking behaviors are not the duty of security and guarantee for property management companies. They belong to "good intentions and benefit" behavior. Except for intentional or severe loss, they should not bear the liability for infringement. As a driver's vehicle operator, the plaintiff Xiao Chen should be responsible for the occurrence of the accident. This is the "steering wheel" principle.

(Xiamen Daily reporter Tan Xinyi Correspondent Haifa Xuan)

- END -