Marriage rental wedding car, damage of luxury car causes dispute
In April 2019, Zhang Mou rented an Audi R8 car as his wedding car from a car rental Co., Ltd. in Hangzhou for the purpose of marriage. The two parties signed a lease contract, stipulating that the lease term is from May 11 to May 12, and the rent is 3000 yuan / day In case of traffic accident or accidental damage during the period of vehicle leasing, the lessee shall pay the rent caused by the vehicle during the period of maintenance on time and bear all the expenses for vehicle maintenance.
On May 12, Zhang held the wedding ceremony as scheduled, and the appearance of the luxury car really added to the whole wedding ceremony, making Zhang and the bride have a lot of face. After the wedding, Zhang asked the best man to help him return the leased Audi, but the car rental company found that the car was damaged. Therefore, the car rental company took out the car rental contract, and asked Zhang to pay the rent during the vehicle maintenance period and bear all the repair costs according to the terms of the accidental damage during the vehicle rental period in the contract.
After the car was repaired, the car rental company provided Zhang with some relevant invoices for vehicle maintenance, with a total maintenance fee of more than 170000. The car rental company proposed that Zhang, as the car lessee, should not pay less than 170000 yuan for maintenance, and compensate for the car rental during the vehicle repair period, totaling 260000 yuan.
For this amount of compensation, the two sides negotiated for many times, but couldnt reach an agreement. Finally, the car rental company sued Zhang.
The reason for the failure of luxury cars is unknown, so there are different explanations for the liability of compensation
After receiving the courts litigation materials, the defendant Zhang Mou applied to add the best man as the co defendant, because although the wedding car was rented by Zhang Mou, Audi was finally returned by the best man on behalf of Zhang Mou, and the best man may operate improperly during the return process, resulting in vehicle damage, so the compensation for vehicle loss should also be borne by the best man. However, after the judge contacted and inquired about the plaintiffs car rental company, the car rental company expressed its unwillingness to add the best man as the defendant, so the judge immediately listed the best man as the third party in this case to participate in the lawsuit.
Has the final say, Zhang Hao said that he had never done any special operation on the luxury car, and he also promised the best man when he returned the car. The man in the street also repeatedly promised that he did not see any abnormal hints. Besides, what causes the vehicle to cause the malfunction and how much money it had repaired, which should not be counted by the plaintiff. Zhang said that the 260 thousand expensive compensation was not. Willing to undertake. The third best man in this case, Fang, said he was wronged. He was just kind enough to help his friend return the car, and there was no improper operation. He should not bear any responsibility.
The court heard and found that the vehicle involved in this case suddenly stalled on the way back. After contacting the staff of the plaintiff company, the plaintiff contacted the trailer to drag the vehicle away. Now the vehicle has been repaired and continues to undertake the car rental business. Therefore, in the first trial of our court, the plaintiff failed to provide evidence to prove that Zhang Mous improper use or improper storage of Audi vehicles during the lease period, and it was unable to prove that the damage of the vehicles after flameout and the loss of the existing repair costs were caused by the defendant. The plaintiff should bear the consequences of the failure to provide evidence, so the court rejected all the plaintiffs claims.
In case of failure of the leased vehicle, the lessee shall only be liable for damages in case of improper use or storage.
In this regard, the judge reminded that in the process of car rental, the lessee does not need to bear the corresponding responsibility for the failure maintenance and other related losses caused by the vehicles own reasons; however, if the lessee has improper use or storage, the lessee needs to bear the liability for vehicle loss compensation, and the above way of bearing the responsibility is more in line with the original intention of the contract and the principle of legal fairness. In this case, the car rental company, as the lessor, failed to submit evidence to prove the improper use or improper storage of the lessee in the process of leasing the vehicle, and did not determine the cause of the failure by means of evaluation and appraisal after the failure of the vehicle involved in the case, and the vehicle continued to undertake the car rental business after maintenance, so the cause of the failure involved in this case has objectively failed to pass the appraisal Find out in a certain way. Therefore, the car rental company can not require the lessee Zhang to bear the corresponding liability for compensation.