In the community, the car was parked well, but I found that it was scratched, and I didn't know who rubbed it, which was very disturbing.
In this case, some people think that the property company is generally not responsible, who scratches the lookout, because the property company and the owner of the car is not a paid custody relationship, although they have charged a fee, but the fee charged is not a storage fee, but a service fee and a site use fee. However, if the property management company fails to fulfill its security obligations, it shall bear supplementary liability for compensation.
What does it mean to fail to fulfill the responsibility of safety and security?For example, the camera should be installed but not installed, or although it is installed, it is broken, and it is not repaired within a reasonable period of time, resulting in the inability to find who scratched it. Even if the camera captures but does not shoot clearly, or because of the shooting angle, it is impossible for the camera to have 365 degrees without dead ends, then it is not to blame the property company, otherwise the property company will have to bear the supplementary liability, and the supplementary liability is to pay a little, not all compensation.
After the police confirmed that it was stolen, but because the monitoring of the location was broken and not repaired in time, no evidence could be obtained, and the property company should also be compensated for not fulfilling its safety and security responsibilities.