Dry Cleaner Liability

[Souix]

Before you go, are you and others suggesting that there is a Federal or MD statute or regulation that limits persons seeking to recover damages when the dry cleaner is a fault to fair market value of the damaged item ONLY and specifically excludes the recovery of special damages?

If so would you provide a citation?

***OP you sound like a bright guy that likes to argue. Maybe instead of wasting your time here and getting answers you don't like, go do the research yourself and come back and let everyone know the results.***

 

[mmbridges]

***OP you sound like a bright guy that likes to argue. Maybe instead of wasting your time here and getting answers you don't like, go do the research yourself and come back and let everyone know the results.***

I don't know about how bright I am but I do like to argue .

I took your suggestion and here is what I found:

Source:
Maryland Code/COMMERCIAL LAW/TITLE 14. MISCELLANEOUS CONSUMER PROTECTION PROVISIONS/SUBTITLE 4. MARYLAND SERVICE CONTRACTS AND CONSUMER PRODUCTS GUARANTY ACT./§ 14-407. Private remedies.

§ 14-407. Private remedies.

(c) Liability of guarantor.- The guarantor or provider is liable to the person guaranteed for any wrongful breach of a guaranty or wrongful breach of a service contract, as the case may be, and is under a duty to:

(1) Perform as required under this subtitle; and

(2) Compensate the person guaranteed for all reasonable incidental expenses incurred as a result of the breach.


I'm not sure if this is the correct section of the code that applies but here is my thinking:

If there is a guaranty by the cleaner to use reasonable care, either implied or written on the back of the ticket, and if it can be proven that he failed to do so and that is why the dress was damaged, then there was a wrongful breach of a guaranty and I can ask for reasonable incidental expenses.

Am I missing something?

 

[mmbridges]

Am I missing something?

Just looked more closely and wanted to answer my own question.

Maybe incidental damages are not the same as special damages.

From this site:

(3) Special Damages which do not arise as a result of the wrongful act or omission itself but arise due to the circumstances after the loss or harm has occurred. Special damages include out-of-pocket items that can be documented such as the need to rent replace property (such as a car rental) or the cost of services (such as the cost to have property valued or appraised).


(6) Incidental Damages include the reasonable charges, expenses, or other costs which flow from the loss or harm - such as delivery expenses and the cost of photocopies.

However the words in the code say incidental expenses. Does this mean the same thing as incidental damages?

 

[JETX]

Nope.... and nope.
BTW, the dry cleaner is NOT a guarantor.

 

[mmbridges]

Nope.... and nope.
BTW, the dry cleaner is NOT a guarantor.

Thanks for the answers and the hint. As a result I looked further and found the following:

Source:
Maryland Code/COMMERCIAL LAW/TITLE 14. MISCELLANEOUS CONSUMER PROTECTION PROVISIONS/SUBTITLE 4. MARYLAND SERVICE CONTRACTS AND CONSUMER PRODUCTS GUARANTY ACT./§ 14-401. Definitions.

§ 14-401. Definitions.

(a) In general.- In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated.

(b) Consumer product.- "Consumer product" means goods or services used for personal, family, or household purposes, the actual cash sales price of which to the person guaranteed was in excess of $10.

(c) Guarantor.- "Guarantor" means a person who is engaged in the business of making consumer products available to consumers and who makes a guaranty.

(d) Guaranty.-

(1) "Guaranty" means any of the following which is made at the time of the sale of a consumer product by a guarantor to a person guaranteed and which is part of the basis of the bargain between them:

(i) A written affirmation of fact or written promise which relates to the nature of the material or workmanship and affirms or promises that the material or workmanship is defect-free or meets a specified level of performance; or

(ii) A written undertaking to refund, repair, replace, or take other remedial action with respect to the consumer product if it proves defective in material or workmanship or fails to meet a specified level of performance.

(2) "Guaranty" includes warranty.


So it would appear that if the cleaner puts nothing in WRITING there can be no guaranty.

But (Hey Meursault, I'm starting to feel like Gumby ) is there not an implied warranty that the cleaner will exercise reasonable care (i.e. a promise relating to his workmanship) and hence an implied guarantee? Does this not make the cleaner a guarantor without something in writing?

I could not find a definition for implied warranty in the MD code so can someone give me another hint where to look? (My first time looking through the MD code and I found it pretty interesting)

 

[JETX]

One more time....
And exactly what "product" do you feel that the cleaner provided??
Product is NOT the same as a service.

And he is STILL not a 'guarantor'.

 

[mmbridges]

One more time....
And exactly what "product" do you feel that the cleaner provided??
Product is NOT the same as a service.

According to the MD code definitions: "Consumer product" means goods or services .....

And he is STILL not a 'guarantor'.

Again is that because there is no written warranty? If so what is the flaw in my implied warranty argument?

 

[mmbridges]

UPDATE:

I just picked up the dress from IFI but they will not give me the results. It seems that the report will be sent to the Better Business Bureau and they will send it to me. I told them I was dying of suspense and asked if they could give me a hint and they said no. So I have to wait a few days, I'll post the results when I get them.


In the meantime I emailed the following question to the MD Attorney General Consumer Protection Division:

06/09/04 04:49PM
If dry cleaner is at fault are there any MD statutes or regulations
that explicitly limit the recovery damages to the fair market value of the
damaged garment ONLY. In other words does MD law specifically exclude
the recovery of "Special Damages" like the the cost to rent a wedding gown
when the Dry Cleaner damaged the one submitted for cleaning? Thanks!

There response was:

The Consumer Protection Act does not provide for such limits, nor are we
aware of any other consumer statutes that do.

Consumer Protection Division
Office of the Attorney General
200 St. Paul Place, 16th Floor
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 528-8662

Do you folks (Meursault, JETX, Dequeendistress and BelizeBreeze) know something that they don't know?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

The Consumer Protection Act does not provide for such limits, nor are we

I can answer for two of the four

The above quote is non-committal. In other words, without specific damages recoverable by a finding of fault, no one can tell you what the limit of the award could be.

If you have a current action in small claims court, then the 'limit' would be the limit for SC actions in your state.

But again, the finding of fault is a question of fact for a judge. NOT a labortary. They can only tell you how the damage occurred and the process used during the damage. It's up to the court to adjudicate fault.

 

[dequeendistress]

Well, have you filed your claim yet?

NO ONE can tell you what a judge will award you prior to an ACTUAL hearing.

Noncommittal answers are my favorite, usually.

 

[mmbridges]

The above quote is non-committal. In other words, without specific damages recoverable by a finding of fault, no one can tell you what the limit of the award could be.

If you have a current action in small claims court, then the 'limit' would be the limit for SC actions in your state.

06/09/04 04:49PM
If dry cleaner is at fault are there any MD statutes or regulations
that explicitly limit the recovery damages to the fair market value of the
damaged garment ONLY. In other words does MD law specifically exclude
the recovery of "Special Damages" like the the cost to rent a wedding gown
when the Dry Cleaner damaged the one submitted for cleaning? Thanks!

When I used the word "limit" in my question to the consumer protection division, I was attempting to get clarification as to the "type" of damages that might be recoverable with a finding of fault. I didn't intend the word "limit" to mean total dollar amount. That is why I asked the second question the way I did using the words "exclude".

But again, the finding of fault is a question of fact for a judge. NOT a labortary. They can only tell you how the damage occurred and the process used during the damage. It's up to the court to adjudicate fault.

I understand ultimately the judge determines fault but I'm sure everyone would agree if the analysis of the supposedly "independent and objective" laboratory report pointed to the dry cleaner the judge might rely on it.

So let me try to be more specific:

If I filed a small claims case against my dry cleaner and for whatever reasons (e.g. an IFI report favorable to me) the judge found the dry cleaner was indeed at fault:

1.) Are there any statutes or regulations that says under NO circumstances can ANY kind of "special damages" be considered recoverable through a finding of fault?

2.) If the answer to question (1) is NO, then what are the factors besides (special damages + fair market value of ruined dress < small claims court limit) that impact whether the special damages are recoverable through the judges' finding of fault?

 

[mmbridges]

Well, have you filed your claim yet?

As I mentioned before, I am waiting on the results of the IFI analysis and depending on those results and other information I am able to collect here and elsewhere will help me determine if I proceed with filing.

NO ONE can tell you what a judge will award you prior to an ACTUAL hearing.

Noncommittal answers are my favorite, usually.

Will you commit to answering the same question I just posed to BelizeBreeze? Note: It does not ask what will be awarded.

 

[dequeendistress]

I'll get back to you on that.

 

[mmbridges]

I'll get back to you on that.

While your contemplating that I wanted to mention that you still have not answered the question as to whether in my auto accident analogy, where both drivers are uninsured, whether or not you thought it was "outrageous" for the innocent driver to ask for the car rental costs in addition to the repair costs of the damaged car (up to the fair market value of course).

 

[dequeendistress]

While your contemplating that I wanted to mention that you still have not answered the question as to whether in my auto accident analogy, where both drivers are uninsured, whether or not you thought it was "outrageous" for the innocent driver to ask for the car rental costs in addition to the repair costs of the damaged car (up to the fair market value of course).

I can only answer that question if one of the vehicles involved in the accident were owned by the dry cleaning company.