Home Products & Services

Haikou the stolen man sued the property in the district; the court did not support the people’-sugus

Haikou: residential property theft man sued   the court shall not support — people.com.cn Hainan channel — people.com.cn people.com.cn Hainan channel in Haikou in October 10, the morning of August 22, 2015, living in the city of Haikou Liwan District Friends of Mr. Zhaonan (Israeli citizenship) went to the police station. Mr. friend’s home has been stolen, lost two apple mobile phones, a Mac Book Air 13 inch Apple laptop computer; Mr. friend before sleep two bathrooms and windows an office room window is not locked, other doors and windows in the house without moving traces. In August 27, 2015, Mr. friend paid the property management fee from September 2014 to August 2015 to Siu Nan property company. In September 1, 2015, Haikou city red border police station to sign the south property company issued a rectification notice. In September 2, 2015, Zhao south property companies to develop a corrective plan, and reply to the Haikou Municipal Public Security Bureau red border police station. The Haikou Municipal Public Security Bureau police station did not determine the red border theft suspects, the case was not detected. Then, the friends of Mr. Siu south property company to court, which called for the lost mobile phone, computer, need to apply for a bank account security issues and the purchase of a new laptop computer, re submit the missing documents back to Israel. Mr. friend claims that Siu Nan property company should pay for the airfare and accommodation fee of this flight, but Mr. friend failed to provide evidence that the trip was related to theft. Mr. friend also failed to provide evidence of other property losses. The court held that Mr. Zhao Haikou friends the South Bay residential and office use, pay during the lease of property management fees to the South trillion trillion south property companies, property company also provide property services to the friends of MR, the two sides formed a fact of property service contract relationship. Siu Nan property company has the obligation to ensure the safety of residential areas. According to the three aspects of the Haikou Municipal Public Security Bureau red border police station of the rectification notice and Zhaonan property company Liwan District in the south of visible sign Reply of prevention and protection and defense are a security risk, security measures of property companies do Zhaonan defects, fulfill the safety guard obligation in the district. Mr. friends lost mobile phones, computer goods accident occurred and Siu Nan property company does not reasonably perform security obligations exist a certain relationship, and because of inadequate security measures, in the event of the south property company also failed to provide clues to criminal suspects. The property loss of Mr. friend is directly caused by theft, and Siu Nan property company undertakes minor responsibility in the scope of its security. In the light of the specific circumstances of the case, it is determined that the Siu Nan property company undertakes 20% civil liability for compensation, and Mr. friend is responsible for 80% of the liability. The friends of Mr. Zhang because of its main theft accident to handle the fund bank account security matters, submit documents to Israel lost due to theft incidents, causing other losses, but the friends of Mr did not provide evidence to prove, so the trial court on compensation for friends of the petition of Mr. Zhaonan property company lost mobile phone, in addition to other losses computer and computer shell part, does not support. The court of first instance decided that the company should compensate Mr. friend for RMB 3696 yuan 海口:小区内失窃男子状告物业 法院不予支持–人民网海南频道–人民网 人民网海南频道海口10月10日电 2015年8月22日上午,居住在海口市兆南丽湾小区友先生(以色列国籍)前往派出所报案。友先生的家里发生了失窃,丢失两部苹果手机,一台mac book air 13寸苹果手提电脑;友先生睡觉前两个卫生间的窗户和一个办公室房间窗户没有上锁,家里其他门窗没有撬动痕迹。2015年8月27日,友先生向兆南物业公司缴交了2014年9月至2015年8月期间的物业管理费。2015年9月1日,海口市红岛边防派出所向兆南物业公司下发了整改通知书。2015年9月2日,兆南物业公司制定了整改方案,并复函给海口市公安局红岛边防派出所。现海口市公安局红岛边防派出所未确定该盗窃案件犯罪嫌疑人,亦未侦破该案件。 随后,友先生将兆南物业公司诉至法院,其称因丢失手机、电脑,需要办理银行账户安全事宜并购置新的笔记本电脑,回以色列补办丢失证件。友先生主张兆南物业公司应支付其本次行程的机票费用和住宿费用,但友先生未能提供证据证明其此次行程与盗窃事故发生有关。友先生亦未能提供证据证明其存在其他财产损失。 原审法院认为:友先生承租海口市兆南丽湾小区居住并办公使用,向兆南物业公司缴纳承租期间的物业管理费,兆南物业公司亦向友先生提供物业服务,双方形成了事实物业服务合同关系。兆南物业公司负有保证小区安全的行为义务。根据海口市公安局红岛边防派出所的整改通知书以及兆南物业公司的复函可见兆南丽湾小区在物防、技防和人防三方面均存在安全隐患,兆南物业公司所做的安全措施存在不足,履行小区安全保卫义务不到位。友先生丢失手机、电脑物品事故的发生与兆南物业公司未合理履行安全保卫义务存在一定关系,且因安保措施不足,在事后兆南物业公司亦未能提供犯罪嫌疑人线索。友先生的财产损失是由盗窃事故直接造成的,兆南物业公司在其安全保卫范围承担负有较小的责任。综合本案的具体情况,确定兆南物业公司承担20%的民事赔偿责任,友先生自行承担80%的责任。友先生主张其因盗窃事故的发生前往办理银行账户资金安全事宜、前往以色列补办丢失证件事宜,因盗窃事故的发生产生了其他损失,但友先生均未提供证据加以证明,故原审法院对友先生诉请兆南物业公司赔偿除丢失的手机、电脑及电脑壳外的其他损失部分,不予支持。一审法院判决兆南物业公司须赔偿友先生人民币3696元; 宣判后,兆南物业公司不服原审判决,向海口中院提起上诉。 海口中院认为,友先生是以色列国公民,本案属涉外合同纠纷案件。本案合同履行地在中华人民共和国海南省海口市,依照《民事诉讼法》规定,海口中院对本案有管辖权。友先生通过与作为出租人的业主订立《房屋租赁合同》,因业主向其交付了出租的物业而成为物业使用人并交纳了相应的物业管理费,友先生是物业服务合同项下权利的实际享有者,原审法院认定双方当事人之间形成事实上的物业服务合同关系并无不当。本案中,友先生所提供的证据仅能证明其曾购买过手机、电脑、电脑壳以及曾向公安机关报案称其丢失了两部苹果手机和一部苹果电脑这些事实。除此之外,因盗窃案尚未侦破,现阶段并无其他证据证明友先生所遭受的具体财产损失数额。友先生主张及诉请缺乏事实依据,应予驳回。原审判决所作出的事实认定证据不足,应予纠正。原审法院认定事实不清,适用法律错误,海口中院最终判决撤销一审民事判决。(王海云 胡坤坤) (责编:吴占桂、蒋成柳)相关的主题文章: