Loren Pechtel

Far too hard a test. That's no 35 mph collision.

Loren Pechtel

The car is old enough that that amount of damage is probably totaled. "Totaled" doesn't mean it couldn't be repaired, it means the repair would cost more than it's value.

gooselee

I can't speak for the hotel in this thread, of course.

But for the company/properties where I worked, we (the valet company) indeed had different and separate insurance coverage from the hotel itself, and we (valet company) were on the hook for any claims related to our work - basically cars and luggage left in our care.

It's been a few years, but IIRC we always asked that guests with complaints first use our internal incident/claim process...I imagine because for minor things the company would rather just pay for a repair than file an insurance claim. Lots of claims were for paint scratches/dings/etc. and we told them to just send us the bill from the paint shop...honestly I'd guess that the majority of those weren't even our fault beyond someone being lazy during their initial damage check.

wanderer35

Not a lawyer here, but
Your "contract" for the valet services were with the hotel, so you sue the hotel, not the valet service.

jeffandnicole

I question if the car even ran into a wall. Into a pole or protective bollard is more like it based on the nice round dent directly in the center of the vehicle.

Also, in order for the friend to take it to small claims court, he's going to have to get at least one estimate, and preferably three, in order to determine what he's suing for. He can't just go and sue for no set amount, and he could sue for no more than what small claims court allows. If the damage is $6,000, and the court only permits claims up to $5,000, the friend will have to decide whether to forgo the $1,000, or to present it to another court (which will probably be more expensive on the friend).

He can request both the Valet company and the Hotel to be present at the hearing. We don't need to get the international CEO in on a minor car crash.

Judge Judy is a kangaroo court. Also, both parties need to agree to dismiss the claim in the city/county/state which has jurisdiction, and to go to Judge Judy's studios and have the case heard there.

Doubletree and/or Hilton won't agree to do that, so they aren't going to think too much about it.

gooselee

Not snarky - legitimate question: What leads you to this statement? What actions are taken by either the guest or the hotel employees to establish the contract between the two of them, if the transaction involving possession of the car is between the guest and a valet, who is not an employee of the hotel?

This of course depends on the exact circumstance, even down to how the hotel driveway & valet procedure is physically set up, if/how parking is billed and paid for, etc. But I think it could just as easily be argued that the "contract" is between guest and valet company. Valet company just so happens to have another B2B contract allowing them to use and operate on hotel property.

Half the time, cars valeted at hotels aren't even kept on hotel property...especially in city center areas where there might not be physical space at the hotel, and that's why valet service is offered/required to begin with.

scubaccr

If the valet cost is itemised on hotel bill and paid to hotel, as is usual, then the hotel is also liable, not just the valet company.

OP and posters have not actually stated for this DT, whether parking+valeting is inhouse or a 3rd party, though with OP stating hotel sacked valet next day, it could be inhouse (or OP did not understand that a separate valet company , not DT hotel, the sacked driver/employee)

jeffandnicole

Well, in this case, I would hope that there was no charge for the car in valet. So, if it's not on the hotel bill, nothing was paid to the hotel.

Based on your own reasoning, the hotel wouldn't be liable.

gooselee

Makes sense. But if we're talking lawsuit, wouldn't OP's friend be best positioned if he/she named BOTH the hotel and valet company in the suit (assuming there was in fact a 3rd part valet)?

I still say it's worth finding out if valet services were 3rd party, and if so, attempting to claim directly with the valet company. It's possible that the hotel is denying the claim but failing to mention that they are doing so because they assume the valet company will be taking care of it.

360worldatlas

Take it to small claims court if the hotel and valet company want to do nothing. Most jurisdictions you can sue for up to $10,000.00. If the parties don't show up in court - you win by default! Then they have one more to contest it in 30 days - if they don't your claim cannot be undone and they owe you the money. You can go after property if they don'y within a few months. Subpoena the valet to appear and tell his story. He will be under oath to tell the truth. If he was let go by the valet company he has no allegiance to them. These people will have to prove they are not liable to be let out of the suit. Most of the time people don't show up and you will win... Good luck! Do it soon. The longer it goes the less likely it looks good for you...

scubaccr

Just where do you come up with such false reasoning?

It is simply a test regards about whether hotel would have indeed billed guests for car valeting? The fact guests fee is waived due to valet damaging car does not let hotel off and is irrelevant.

If it was that simple, then everytime something goes wrong, a company would wash their hands of responsibility and liability by simply not charging for a service, thus making a mockery of their liability.