My Mother returned an empty shopping cart to the store front, and the cart started rolling because of high winds and hit someone's car door. Now she wants me or my Mom to pay for it. I didn't see this whole thing because I was already in my car. My Mother doesn't speak much English, and she doesn't have an income, she lives with me.
Am I responsible for this and how can I defend myself since I really don't think we are guilty. Thanks.

p.s. I live in NY state

When a shopping cart rolls it is your responsibility.
According to what others here have said though you might be able to get partcial responsibility on the store even if they have a sign that they are not responsible.

If one does not take due care to place the cart in a secure position, then they can be held responsibility for damages.

Well yes if your mum can't pay then you might want to help her out, or she could be charged.

What do you mean you don't think you two are guilty? If that driver let a trolley roll into your car you'd want them to pay for it wouldn't you.

You said your mother put the cart back to the store front. That means your mother didn't make 100% sure it wouldn't roll away. In turn, that makes your mother responsible, not you. Let them sue your mother, you say she has no income... does she have a car? If not, she's judgement proof basically and won't have anything to worry about. No wages to garnish, no vehicle to seize (if she doesn't have a vehicle, that is)... no, they can't come after you because you did not cause this incident to happen. It's all on mom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passmeby

You said your mother put the cart back to the store front. That means your mother didn't make 100% sure it wouldn't roll away. In turn, that makes your mother responsible, not you. Let them sue your mother, you say she has no income...does she have a car? If not, she's judgement proof basically and won't have anything to worry about. No wages to garnish, no vehicle to sieze (if she doesn't have a vehicle, that is)......no, they can't come after you because you did not cause this incident to happen. It's all on mom.

---

I can't imagine there is a danger of a vehicle being "seized" as part of a Judgment for damage caused by a shopping cart but that aside I don't see the mother as Judgment proof. The fact that she has no income does NOT mean she doesn't have a bank account.

In many of these instances the store itself carries insurance - did OP check into that?

Judy, my mom (resident of NY, mind you) was sued in small claims court for breaking a lease on a house (small claims). The homeowner won. As per the rules of NY, a vehicle CAN and WILL be seized if the judgement is not paid within 30 days. Once seized, the car owner has a certain amount of time to pay the judgemnet and get their car back or else it will be sold at auction.

Unfortunately I had used that very car that day to attend college classes, and when I came out... there was a tow truck taking the car away! They were nice enough to let me get my items out of the car before they hauled it off at least!

Stores with shopping carts have policies that state "We are NOT responsible for damage caused by shopping carts being improperly left"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passmeby

As per the rules of NY, a vehicle CAN and WILL be siezed if the judgement is not paid within 30 days.

---

Can you cite what rules of NY allow that? NY exempts $2400 of a car's value from judgements.

Yeah if your car is of little value or you need it to get to work or necessary dr appts they likely will not touch it.

Just because they state that does not mean it is legally true. Hire an attorney and check it out!

I doubt that a cart can damage a car to the point that it would mean seizing her property anyway.
I mean how much damage can it be 1 or 2 hundred dollars. I think it would have to be in the thousands to take your property over it.'

She is low income so she goes into court and gets a the judgement, Then she goes to the front desk and asks for a payment plan.
They can tell her as little as $20. A month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passmeby

Judy, my mom (resident of NY, mind you) was sued in small claims court for breaking a lease on a house (small claims). The homeowner won. As per the rules of NY, a vehicle CAN and WILL be siezed if the judgement is not paid within 30 days. Once siezed, the car owner has a certain amount of time to pay the judgemnet and get their car back or else it will be sold at auction.

Unfortunately I had used that very car that day to attend college classes, and when I came out......there was a tow truck taking the car away!! They were nice enough to let me get my items out of the car before they hauled it off at least!!

Stores with shopping carts have policies that state "We are NOT responsible for damage caused by shopping carts being improperly left"

---

I'm in NY; I owned several houses and two apartment buildings until very recently; I have NEVER seen a car seized to pay a Judgment in Small Claims Court, never.

I would like to know the Law on this as well as the City/County.

And, again - and I've posted this more times than I can cout - the fact that a sign is posted is meaningless - you could print a sign and place it on your dashboard and have every passenger sign it to the effect that you are not responsible for injuries to your passengers and/or damage to their property. IT IS MEANINGLESS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT WAIVE YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS - including your right to sue.

Same with people who fall in parking lots and those same parking lots have signs to the effect that you are entering at your own risk during the Winter - meaningless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passmeby

Judy, my mom (resident of NY, mind you) was sued in small claims court for breaking a lease on a house (small claims). The homeowner won. As per the rules of NY, a vehicle CAN and WILL be siezed if the judgement is not paid within 30 days. Once siezed, the car owner has a certain amount of time to pay the judgemnet and get their car back or else it will be sold at auction.

Unfortunately I had used that very car that day to attend college classes, and when I came out......there was a tow truck taking the car away!! They were nice enough to let me get my items out of the car before they hauled it off at least!!

Stores with shopping carts have policies that state "We are NOT responsible for damage caused by shopping carts being improperly left"

---

When I first started here I had the same argument about the carts and the store signs that say 'NOT RESPONSIBLE'. Everybody here told me that doesn't stand up in court and makes them MORE RESPONSIBLE because they are acknowledging that a problem does exist and not doing anything to correct the problem.

Also again I don't see how a dent from a shopping cart would result in enough damage to have property seized. I don't see how the damage can be more than a couple hundred dollars and definitely under a thousand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

When I first started here I had the same argument about the carts and the store signs that say 'NOT RESPONSIBLE'. Everybody here told me that doesn't stand up in court and makes them MORE RESPONSIBLE because they are acknowledging that a problem does exist and not doing anything to correct the problem.

Also again I don't see how a dent from a shopping cart would result in enough damage to have property seized. I don't see how the damage can be more than a couple hundred dollars and definitely under a thousand.

---

I REMEMBER THIS! Yes, you were right from the start (of course).

That discussion led into the beware of dog signs. One theory is that once you hang one of those signs you admit you KNOW your dog could be dangerous and your standard of care becomes higher.

Good memory, girlfriend!

It all depends on the financial facts regarding the car. In your case, was the car an older model (hooptie)? Lots of times, even if the car is old and not the best car in the world, but is owned outright, the debtor will be more likely to pay the judgement rather than be without a car. The plaintiff has the choice whether to seize the car, or pursue any means of legal collections.

Is the car owned outright?

So in essence, YES the car can be seized providing it has $2000 of equity in it. It will be held for a set amount of time to allow you to pay the judgement, if you do not pay within the alloted time, it will be sold. One thing I'm not sure about is (if you owe money on the car still) if the finance company gets their money first or what, but I bet they do. If the finance company gets first dibs, then you might end up with NO car AND still be stuck with the judgement. It would all depend on which debt has precedence and how much you owe on the car (if you owe more on the car then it gets at auction, you're on the hook for both the finance co and the judgement).

Best to just help Mom pay the damage. Although if it's YOUR car, you have nothing to worry about as far as it being seized, YOU didn't cause the damage.

Ask the victim for at least 2 written estimates, and if they seem fair, just pay the lady. It's not fair for her to drive around in a damaged car, why should she have to live with that? If the tables were turned, you'd want the offender to pay for your repairs, right? It's just the right thing to do.

One other thing to be concerned about is that you will be responsible for the towing and storage, if the car is in fact seized.

You might find these links helpful for NY small claims trial and recourse:

http://www.tenant.net/Court/Howcourt...l#anchor121320

http://www.nyc.gov/html/doi/html/mar...nts.html#faq21

I still want to know why someone would seize a car for a judgment when the damage can't be more than a couple hundred dollars (definitely under a thousand dollars) at the very worst a door or fender needing replaced wouldn't be enough to cost a seized car. I can't imagine a shopping cart causing even that much damage though. It most likely only needs a small area repainted.

AND in her mothers financial situation she can simply file at the magistrate to make monthly payments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passmeby

It all depends on the financial facts regarding the car. In your case, was the car an older model (hooptie)? Lots of times, even if the car is old and not the best car in the world, but is owned outright, the debtor will be more likely to pay the judgement rather than be without a car. The plaintiff has the choice whether or not to sieze the car, or pursue any means of legal collections.

Is the car owned outright?

So in essence, YES the car can be siezed providing it has $2000 of equity in it. It will be held for a set amount of time to allow you to pay the judgement, if you do not pay within the alloted time, it will be sold. One thing I'm not sure about is (if you owe money on the car still) if the finance company gets their money first or what, but I bet they do. If the finance company gets first dibs, then you might end up with NO car AND still be stuck with the judgement. It would all depend on which debt has precedence and how much you owe on the car (if you owe more on the car thn it gets at auction, you're on the hook for both the finance co and the judgement).

Best to just help Mom pay the damage. Although if it's YOUR car, you have nothing to worry about as far as it being siezed, YOU didn't cause the damage.

Ask the victim for at least 2 written estimates, and if they seem fair, just pay the lady. It's not fair for her to drive around in a damaged car, why should she have to live with that? If the tables were turned, you'd want the offender to pay for your repairs, right? It's just the right thing to do.

One other thing to be concerned about is that you will be responsible for the towing and storage, if the car is in fact siezed.

You might find these links helpful for NY small claims trial and recourse:

TenantNet - New York Small Claims Court

FAQs About Marshals and Judgments

---

The entire first part of this post is merely guessing/conjecture. I work in the legal system and I am most definitely NOT aware of any "the debtor will be more likely to pay ..." study.

I have NOT seen a car seized and sold in satisfaction of a Small Claims Court Judgment as far back as I can remember.

Maybe in books - not in reality.

This is simply incorrect advice when the discussion is about a ding from a shopping cart.

Thread Closed