Ihr kostenloser Branchen-Newsletter
Lassen Sie sich von unseren Fachjournalisten einmal wöchentlich über die wichtigsten aktuellen Entwicklungen der Taxi-Branche informieren, bequem direkt in Ihre Mailbox.
Aktueller Termin
Meist gelesen
When the mirror flies off in the car wash
Not the owner himself, but the plaintiff's father was at the wheel. He stated that he had followed all the instructions of the staff and the on-site notices. However, there was no explicit instruction to fold in the exterior mirrors. This was precisely the issue later in the trial: Does the car wash operator have to be liable for the damage in this case?
Warning signs are not enough
The defendant operator argued that the damage could only have been caused by an error on the part of the driver – such as not folding in the mirror or an existing defect. The issue of mirrors had been clearly addressed in the user instructions before entry. Yet, this was not sufficient for the court.
In its decision (Order of May 23, 2023, Ref.: 171 C 7665/22), the Munich District Court determined that neither prior damages nor a driving error could be considered as causes. An expert confirmed the impeccable condition of the mirror before the incident. Furthermore, general notices on a sign were not sufficient to exempt the operator from liability. She would have needed to inform the driver specifically and unequivocally of the obligation to fold in the mirrors – for example, through a clear indication system or direct personnel.
Liability in Case of Technical Defects
In the end, the decisive factor for the court was: The damage was caused by the car wash itself – presumably due to a technical defect. In such cases, according to legal opinion, the operator is liable. The consequence: The operator had to pay the plaintiff 329.57 euros in damages.
```Recurring Legal Situation
The case from Munich is not an isolated one. Time and again, similar disputes concerning car washes occur in Germany. In 2016, the District Court of Siegburg (Case No.: 118 C 97/15) ruled that operators are liable even if vehicle roofs are damaged by sliding washing brushes – as long as it cannot be proven that the vehicle owner used the facility incorrectly.
A similar verdict was issued by the District Court of Stuttgart in 2021 (Case No.: 10 C 2286/20): This case involved scratches in the paint after the washing process. Here too, general liability disclaimers were not sufficient to exclude an obligation for compensation.
Read the Terms and Conditions - and if in doubt, speak with the staff
These rulings present a clear lesson for car wash operators: General disclaimers are not enough – what's crucial is clear, understandable, and unmistakable communication with the customer. Specific technical instructions, such as folding in mirrors, must be explicitly and comprehensibly communicated.
For drivers, it’s worth looking into the wash facility's terms and conditions – and possibly having a brief conversation with the staff. Important to note: If your vehicle sustains damage during mechanical cleaning, as a customer, you certainly have a chance of getting compensation.
Content automatically translated.
Taxi-Fahrzeuge (Pkw) , Taxi-Newsletter, Taxameter, Taxi-Fahrer , BZP – Deutscher Taxi- und Mietwagenverband , Straßenverkehrsordnung (StVO) , Krankenbeförderung , Weiterbildung , Taxi-Konzessionen , Verkehrspolitik , Mietwagenbranche , Taxi-Apps , Berufskraftfahrer-Qualifikations-Gesetz BKrFQG) , Taxizentralen , Personal, Gehälter, Arbeitsschutz , Wirtschaftsnachrichten , Werbung , Taxi-Folierung , Taxi-Umrüster , Straßenverkehr , Elektromobilität, Taxifuhrpark und -flottenmanagement , Taxi-Versicherungen , Hybrid, Diesel, Erdgas , Taxi-Magazin
