New and Used Car Talk Reviews Hot Cars Comparison Automotive Community

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Hybrid View

  1. Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,386
    #1
    Note that the bill outlaws the absolute waiver of liability now written on the terms and conditions of the parking tickets.

    If something happens to the car while in the carpark, the carpark operator cannot just wash their hands like what they are doing now.

    This bill, if it becomes law, should ensure that these carpark owners/operators do their part in keeping the vehicles of their patrons safe and secure.

    In my case, I parked at Robinsons Pioneer some years back and one headlamp washer of the MS was stolen. Talagang naiwan nalang ay butas. Mukhang na pag tripan lang siguro. Vehicle was parked near the entrance and within full view of the guard. I complained to the car park / mall operator. Guess what? Walang nangyari. Hugas kamay sila. Hindi puede yun. Na perwisyo na ako, nagbayad pa ako sa car park at ako pa ang nawalan. Never went back to that place and luckily never had to.

    This bill is timely and should be passed.

  2. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,205
    #2
    but what about mis-deeds that can be successfully accomplished in just a few seconds, simply by twisting the object of their intent?
    i mean, even if the guard was just a meters away, perhaps at the rear of the vehicle, the guard might not even notice the act.

    laws should be enforceable and should be fair to all concerned.

  3. Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,386
    #3
    Quote Originally Posted by dr. d View Post
    but what about deeds that can be successfully accomplished in just a few seconds, simply by twisting the object of their intent?
    i mean, even if the guard was just a meters away, perhaps at the rear of the vehicle, the guard might not even notice the act.

    laws should be enforceable and should be fair to all concerned.
    I agree. This is all a matter of evidence already. Whoever is liable should pay. That is the fair resolution.

    What the bill addresses is the waiver of liability of these carparks even if it is clearly their fault either due to negligence or fault.

  4. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,205
    #4
    Quote Originally Posted by 111prez View Post
    I agree. This is all a matter of evidence already. Whoever is liable should pay. That is the fair resolution.
    .
    i think this is the crux of the matter.
    "who is liable?"
    is it the carpark operator and its guard, who are tasked with guarding each and every vehicle in the park?
    is it the car manufacturer, who designed that car part as to be very easily remove-able with a simple flick of the wrist?
    is it the car owner, who carelessly left his laptop on the car seat, to be ogled at by potential robber?

    many years ago,
    the object of souvenir collectors' affections, was the windshield wiper!

  5. Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    45,927
    #5
    kaya bawat car slot dapat may dedicated cctv para malinaw kung sino may kasalanan

    if the carpark owner will be made responsible for damage and/or loss he should do everything to protect his interest

    so kailangan niya gumastos para sa additional surveillance equipment and personnel tapos ipapasa niya sa customer ang additional cost

  6. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,205
    #6
    Quote Originally Posted by uls View Post
    kaya bawat car slot dapat may dedicated cctv para malinaw kung sino may kasalanan

    if the carpark owner will be made responsible for damage and/or loss he should do everything to protect his interest

    so kailangan niya gumastos para sa additional surveillance equipment and personnel tapos ipapasa niya sa customer ang additional cost
    i can see it now...
    "parking fee 400 pesos per first 3 hours."

    breakdown:
    200 for the park operator.
    200 for the individualized guard who will sit beside the car all the time.
    Last edited by dr. d; June 4th, 2021 at 12:24 PM.

  7. Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    45,927
    #7
    Quote Originally Posted by dr. d View Post
    i can see it now...
    "parking fee 400 pesos per first 3 hours."

    breakdown:
    200 for the park operator.
    200 for the individualized guard who will sit beside the car all the time.

    yes yan ang gusto ng customer eh

    gusto ng customer sagutin ng mall owner pag may nangyari sa kotse niya

    so sisiguraduhin ng mall owner wala mangyayari but it comes with high cost

  8. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    21,413
    #8
    If this law will be passed, dapat covered din mga paid street parking being operated by LGUs. Nagbabayad din naman tayo so dapat wala din silang waiver of liability.

    Also, does this mean kapag free ang parking, wala ng liability mga car park operator?
    Signature

  9. Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    6,212
    #9
    Mixed feelings about this.

    If it's valet or a parking facility that requires you to surrender your car keys, you have technically relinquished control of your vehicle. In which case, the valet operator or facility is liable for anything that will happen to the vehicle while it's in their custody or care. This is so because the valet parking is usually blocked off from public access.

    If it's just a regular parking facility, no. In this case, you are paying to lease a parking space that may or may not include reasonable, "best effort" security. As a car owner, you bear the burden of proof that the parking facility were intentionally negligent.
    Last edited by oj88; June 4th, 2021 at 12:34 PM.

  10. Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,726
    #10
    Quote Originally Posted by 111prez View Post
    Note that the bill outlaws the absolute waiver of liability now written on the terms and conditions of the parking tickets.

    If something happens to the car while in the carpark, the carpark operator cannot just wash their hands like what they are doing now.

    This bill, if it becomes law, should ensure that these carpark owners/operators do their part in keeping the vehicles of their patrons safe and secure.

    In my case, I parked at Robinsons Pioneer some years back and one headlamp washer of the MS was stolen. Talagang naiwan nalang ay butas. Mukhang na pag tripan lang siguro. Vehicle was parked near the entrance and within full view of the guard. I complained to the car park / mall operator. Guess what? Walang nangyari. Hugas kamay sila. Hindi puede yun. Na perwisyo na ako, nagbayad pa ako sa car park at ako pa ang nawalan. Never went back to that place and luckily never had to.

    This bill is timely and should be passed.
    i agree on this bill.. pero lawmakers should also consider the business viability of a parking service... if the rates are too low, then parking operators might use the lots for commercial establishments instead of making a parking facility.. just like how a toll way operator considers the long term business in investing in operating an express way.

    correct me if im wrong but commercial establishments like malls have "insurance" for building related accidents, right? say there's a malfunction in an elevator or escalator causing injury to a patron..

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Bill Outlawing Waiver of Liability for Carparks