I absolutely agree.Good catch. Still hard to believe that something beyond minimum wasn't purchased. Comprehensive on a car that old would be minimal cost.
You bet wrong. I live in San Diego. It rains here 6 hours a year. And it floods. And I knew that before moving here.I moved here from Dubai where it rains 3 hours a year on average and there is no draining system at all so as soon as it does start raining, the city gets completely flooded. Would you have known that?! I bet not..
Subjective or objective standard? The fact that every other garage-parker apparently saw the sign (in time to move their cars) strongly suggests that even if our plaintiff legitimately did not see it, it was not the landlord's fault....Was the warning sufficient? The burden of proof will be on the landlord once the OP says *he* didn't see it. (In that the plaintiff will allege the duty of the landlord and that it was breached. Once the prima facie case is made, the landlord will have to prove a reasonable person would be aware of the danger.) Where the sign was on the property, how high it was posted, the size of the lettering and the lighting and cleanliness of the sign are all factors.
Having lived here for four years now, I suspect its rained a TOTAL of 42.9 days.5 other cars were flooded. and the average rainfall in san diego is 42.9 days a year (even now that you live there you dont even know that)
Sure I can. You just proved it for me by claiming to know more about meteorological conditions about my city than I do.and you cant compare moving to a different city in the same country to moving half way around the world to a different continent.