Stolen Bike

cat_xx

Hi all,

My brothers brand new bike was stolen this morning from the student accommodation he lives in. It was kept in the underground car park they provide which they claim in their brochure is 'secure.'

Im just wondering how likely it would be for them to accept liability? Clearly it is false advertising to advertise the car park as secure when anyone can access it from outside the building? Would it be true to say that they owe their residents a duty of care in this respect?

Thanks

Mikros

Very unlikely they will accept liability. Short of making specific assurances and arrangements about the security of the bikes and some obvious negligence that you can prove they cannot be held responsible for the criminal act of a 3rd party. If it was obvious anyone can access it from outside the building you can't really turn around afterwards and express surprise!

Sorry to hear about your brothers bike though, I'm afraid he will likely have to suck it up unless he had it insured.

slimjimmc

Even if the car park was secure from outsiders what to say it's secure from other residents and their visitors? You'd probably have to prove the thief wasn't entitled to be there.

cat_xx

One of the managers said that his bike was stolen from in there aswel. Should they have not tried to make it more secure when they knew that this could happen again?

Peregrinus

Possibly they did try to make it more secure; we don't know.

Advertising a secure car park does not constitute a guarantee that your car or bike will not be stolen.

If there was to be a claim here, it could be in misrepresentation - the car park was represented to prospective tenants as "secure". If you rely to your detriment on a statement that turns out to be a misrepresentation, in certain circumstances you can recover damages.

The problem here, though, is that your brother lives in the place. Presumably he knows from his own observation and experience how "secure" the car park is, or is not. He knows whether people need a key to get in, whether there is a 24-hour watch kept, etc. Given what he knows, it will be hard to show that he placed reliance on the representation of the car park as "secure" when he chose to leave his bike there. Unless he can show that the building management created some insecurity that he could not be expected to observe - e.g. there's a lock on the gate but thousands of keys have been issued to present and former tenants and their visitors, friends and relations and none have ever been recalled - I don't think the mere description of the car park as "secure" gives him a remedy.