A man who suffered damage to his truck in the parking lot of a supermarket, managed to get the Court to decide in his favor, for which the company must compensate its customers.
According to judicial sources, the event took place in Viedma, in a branch of the supermarket Cooperativa Obrera.
Regarding what happened, it is reported that the victim left his truck in the company’s parking lot, to enter the place and ask for the summary of the Coopeplus card. When he returned, he noticed that various belongings had been stolen from inside, including his wallet and personal documents, Safari running competition glasses and other green bifocals.
Given the scenario, the man is sure that the door of the car was violated, despite the fact that he left it safe with the central locking system.
Seeking to find the criminals, he immediately went to the supermarket and asked the manager if they could give him the recordings from the security cameras. This was denied, arguing that the request had to be made in the subsidiary Bahía Blanca. However, management told him that they promised to communicate with him in the following days in order to find the tapes.
In this way, the client was removed from the place and filed a complaint with the Board.
In the same way, he asked the supermarket for the reimbursement of the damages suffered. Given the refusal, the client decided to file a claim with the Consumer Protection Agency of the Province of Río Negro. In the instance of conciliation there was no agreement between the parties. For this reason, he filed a small claim with the Justice of the Peace Viedma.
Phrases
In the decision, the Justice of the Peace explained that “consumers have the right to quick and efficient care that allows them to obtain information about their rights. In this case, the plaintiff personally requested the audiovisual material from the security cameras in the branch where the dangerous event took place, in order to have a good understanding of the situation. According to what was declared in these legal proceedings, it can be deduced that the defendant did not respect the right to information or the dignified treatment that the plaintiff deserves, behavior that shows his lack of regard for the plaintiff’s rights.”
He continued: “Under this perspective, there is no doubt that the supermarket must take responsibility towards the customer for the theft of the belongings that were in the car parked in the parking lot that is objectively available to the customer. The responsibility comes from breach of duty security established in article 5 of Law 24240 and its amendments”.
Finally, the judge sentenced the Cooperative to pay him for patrimonial damages, for lost profits, moral damages and punitive damages just under 120 thousand pesos.
