Security Company Liability for Vehicle Loss and Negligence
1d. Kobkitch Company, operating a department store, employed Khumpai Company to provide security services at the department store. The company had established procedures for individuals wishing to park vehicles in the company’s parking lot, which did not incur a fee. However, security was stipulated, with the message on the back of the card stating that the company would not be liable for the loss or damage of vehicles arising in any way, and that when removing vehicles, a pass must be presented to the security personnel at the exit before the vehicle could be removed. If no pass was presented, security personnel would not permit the vehicle to leave. Proof of vehicle ownership and identification must be presented on the day the incident occurred. On that day, Mr. In drove his vehicle into the parking lot as described. Before entering, he received a pass from the security personnel at the exit. He went into the company to purchase goods and, upon completion of his purchases, returned to find his vehicle missing from the parking lot. He inquired with Mr. Jan, the security personnel who maintained the passes at the exit, who had no knowledge of the disappearance of Mr. In’s vehicle, due to a lack of strict adherence to pass verification.
Mr. In will seek to claim damages from whom?
The procedures for individuals parking vehicles in the parking lot are applicable to Kobkitch Company, as the principal, and Khumpai Company, as the agent responsible for maintaining security of vehicles parked therein. If strict verification of passes is conducted, Mr. In’s vehicle will not be permitted to leave. The failure of Khumpai Company’s employee, Mr. Jan, to maintain adequate security, constitutes negligence, resulting in the loss of the vehicle. Mr. Jan’s actions constitute a violation of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 42o, which is a breach of contract in that he was employed and the company must jointly be liable with Mr. In.
According to the Civil and Commercial Code, Kobkitch Company, as the principal, must jointly be liable with Mr. In, as the party causing the damage, and Khumpai Company, as the agent, must jointly be liable for the consequences of the breach committed by the agent. This is in accordance with the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 42w.
Regarding Criminal Procedure Law, Civil Procedure Law, and Evidence Law,
This matter was contested by Mr. Chai, who resides in the same village.