Young children's rental house fell to death, and the landlord was sentenced to 1.5 million. Why blame the landlord?

A 2-year-old boy from Guangxi climbed security window and fell to his death from the fourth floor of his rental house. The landlord was sentenced to 1.5 million. Many people find it strange. What is the relationship between the death of a boy falling from a building and the landlord? Normally, the landlord should not be responsible for this tragedy, but parents think that there are security risks in the window, which leads the boy to fall from the building and bear joint responsibility. Should the landlord be responsible? Let's discuss it from the following aspects:

1. Causes and consequences of tragedy

2. Should the landlord be jointly and severally liable?

Is the compensation of 3.65438+0.5 million reasonable?

4. Real related cases

5. Comprehensive analysis

First, the cause and effect of the incident Ms. Qin from Guangxi charged her mobile phone in the bedroom and neglected to take care of the children. Who knows her 2-year-old son climbed into the living room window, accidentally escaped from security window and fell, and died on the spot. Judging from the main body of this tragedy, as the first guardian of the child, Ms. Qin, the boy's mother, obviously bears unfavorable guardianship responsibilities. However, Ms. Qin took the landlord to court on the grounds that there were security risks in the window and the escape was not locked.

Second, whether the landlord should bear joint and several liability in this case, personal opinion:

1. It is not a day or two for Ms. Qin to rent this house. She should know a lot about this house. If she finds any safety situation, she should inform the property and landlord in time. As far as the current situation is concerned, this rented house has living conditions.

2. Suppose that the landlord did not maintain the building in time and did not contact the property maintenance in time when he knew that the escape exit outside the building window was unlocked and there was a potential safety hazard. Then in the event of an accident, the landlord will bear the responsibility.

Third, whether the compensation of 6.5438+0.5 million is reasonable. In this case, the court found that the landlord was at fault for the accident, because the escape door was not locked because of the window safety hazard, which led to the tragedy. Therefore, the landlord was sentenced to bear 20% of the joint liability, and the compensation amount was150,000. Personally, I think it is unreasonable to pay too much compensation. The boy and his mother were the first responsible persons of the accident, and failed to perform their guardianship duties, resulting in the death of a 2-year-old boy.

Fourth, the real related case case 1: A pair of twins in Beijing drowned at the seaside in Qingdao, because the mother of the child was playing with a mobile phone at the seaside, and the harm of two children playing at the seaside was underestimated. In the end, tragedy happened and two children drowned. In this case, many people blame their parents for not taking good care of their children and neglecting their care. In other words, the parents of the child are the main responsible persons for this tragedy.

Case 2: Coincidentally, a similar tragedy happened in Shanghai. A 2-year-old boy stepped on a stone in the fire escape window on the fifth floor and tried to climb up the window. Unfortunately, he fell to his death. Because the stone was set by the neighbor, the neighbor also took joint responsibility for the tragedy.

Case analysis: From these two cases, it can be seen that the subject of the case is a tragedy caused by the poor supervision of the children's parents. But as the management of Qingdao seaside, as a neighbor, there are more or less faults. For example, the stone that the neighbor put on the fire escape on the fifth floor would not have caused the child to fall, and the same is true of Qingdao seaside, which shows that there is a causal relationship with the tragedy.

Five, combined with the above analysis, the landlord's responsibility is that security window escaped without a lock. No matter how long Ms. Qin borrowed it, whether she found this potential safety hazard or not, it seems that the landlord is determined:

The Diecai District Court of Guilin City held that the escape window on the window sill of the rented house provided by the landlord was not locked, and there was a certain safety hazard in the height of the window sill.

The window height escape window is not locked, which has a causal relationship with the 2-year-old boy falling from the building. Generally speaking, if it is locked, or the windowsill has a safe height, then the tragedy will not happen. Therefore, it is reasonable for Ms. Qin to list the landlord as one of those responsible for this tragedy, and the landlord can't escape the blame.

To sum up, in recent years, tragedies of children falling from buildings and drowning have occurred frequently. As parents of children, we must do our duty of guardianship, without any negligence. Similar to the above case, it is obvious that Ms. Qin's guardianship ability is weak, and she lives in a house that has not solved the safety hidden danger and looked after the children, which eventually leads to tragedy. Instead, she blamed the landlord. I think it's a little far-fetched. Do you think the landlord in charge of this case is wronged?

Text: Love Unknown Map: Source network, if there is any infringement, please contact the author to delete it.