Who will bear the compensation if the owner's car is stolen or damaged in the community?

Most of the parking spaces in the community are purchased or rented by owners, who will sign contracts with property management companies. Should the property management company be held responsible for the theft or damage of the owner's car in the community? The following small series will give you a detailed introduction.

In the first case, the property management company and the owner agree that the management of the vehicle is a contractual relationship of paid custody.

The paid custody contract here refers to the contract that the owner and the property management company agree that the property management company will take care of the owner's vehicle and be responsible for the loss or damage of the owner's vehicle, and the owner will pay the vehicle management fee to the property management company. It should be noted that the custody contract will take effect only after the depositor delivers the deposit to the custodian for possession control.

If the owner parks the vehicle in the designated parking space, the custody contract will come into effect, and the property management company will assume the custody responsibility. If the vehicle is stolen, the property management company shall bear the responsibility. There is no agreement to park the vehicle in the designated parking space. Unless both parties handle the delivery procedures, the property management company will not be responsible for the theft of vehicles. If the property management company violates the obligation of public security management and is at fault for the theft of vehicles, it shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation for the stolen losses.

In the second case, the property management company and the owner agree that the management of the vehicle is a contractual relationship of free custody.

According to the relevant provisions of the contract law, if the custody contract is free, the custodian only bears the responsibility for the loss of the custody. In other words, only the property management company is liable for gross negligence in vehicle theft.

In the third case, the property management company and the owner have not agreed that the management of the vehicle is a custody contract.

At this time, if according to the rules and regulations of vehicle management, the owner must go through the handover procedures when parking the vehicle, and then release it after checking that the parking certificate is completely consistent with the vehicle, then the behavior of parking the vehicle constitutes a deposit. Based on this management fact, it should be presumed that the contractual relationship between the two parties is the custody of the vehicle. If this relationship is paid, if the vehicle is stolen at this time, the property management company should bear the responsibility. If the vehicle handover procedures are not handled, or the parking procedures are not strictly checked, it does not constitute a custody contract relationship, and the property management company will not be responsible for the theft of the vehicle. Of course, if the property management company violates the obligation of public security management and is at fault for the theft of the vehicle, it shall bear the corresponding liability for compensation for the stolen losses.