Man awarded over $1.5K after Vancouver airport valet parking surprise

A man won compensation from Concord Parking after he discovered that his car, which he had left with a valet at Vancouver airport, was in a different state when he picked it up.

According to a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dispute, a man who left his car in a vehicle operated by Concord Parking returned to find that his paddle shifter was broken.

His dispute was against both the Vancouver Airport Authority and Concord Parking, and he claimed damages of $1,746.65 to repair the shifter.

In defence, the respondents both stated that the vehicle wasn’t damaged when they picked it up and claimed they’re not responsible for damage under the terms and conditions listed on the airport authority’s website.

You might also like:
• Vancouver International Airport on track for record-breaking year, partly from resurgence in China traffic
• Vancouver International Airport leads Canada for passenger satisfaction among large airports
• PNE removes manned pay parking booths at Hastings Park under new digital system

On April 4, 2023, the applicant dropped his vehicle off at a Vancouver airport parking lot. He picked it up on April 12, 2023. He submitted a booking confirmation that shows he paid the authority $169.95 for valet parking.

He picked up the car at 10 p.m. and said it was dark so that he couldn’t inspect his vehicle. However, he claims to have noticed a small plastic item on the floor mat of his car the next day.

“His mechanic later identified this item as a paddle shifter, which had fallen off the back of his steering wheel.”

He then contacted the Vancouver Airport Authority, which referred him to Concord, the operator of the lot where he had parked.

Concord’s manager shared photos of the vehicle at check-in and check-out; however, the images did not show the back of the steering wheel, which prevented the tribunal from determining whether the shifter had fallen off at that point.

“However, nothing appears on the floor mat where [the applicant] says he found the paddle shifter. The photos of the vehicle at check-out are too dark to see anything.”

Because the airport authority wasn’t the one managing the vehicle after it had parked, the tribunal dismissed the claim made against it. It then turned its attention to Concord.

“Normally, in civil cases, an applicant bears the burden to prove a respondent’s liability. However, where property is damaged while in a bailee’s possession, there is a presumption the bailee was negligent,” the tribunal said.

Concord didn’t dispute that the shifter was fine when the applicant dropped it off. However, it added that the customer would’ve noticed the broken shifter while driving home and argued that he broke it after leaving the airport.

The tribunal didn’t accept that argument, saying that the shifter was not in the applicant’s line of sight and that it was so small that it would be understandable if he didn’t notice.

“I find that Concord has not rebutted the presumption that it damaged the vehicle while in its possession. I find that Concord, as a bailee for reward, is liable for this damage.”

Concord argued that its terms and conditions prevented this kind of decision; however, the tribunal responded that Concord did not make the terms and conditions clear to the applicant.

Ultimately, the tribunal decided to award the applicant $1,753.75, which includes reimbursement for repair costs and tribunal fees.

Want to stay on top of all things Vancouver? Follow us on X