Surprised by the vehicle's towing into the detention yard

2000 dirhams as compensation for the owner of a vehicle that was violated in the parking lots

The Abu Dhabi Court of First Instance ruled to oblige a government entity to pay a vehicle owner an amount of 2,000 dirhams as compensation for towing his vehicle from under his place of residence, despite having a valid resident's parking permit.

In the details, the owner of a vehicle filed a lawsuit in which he demanded to oblige a “government entity” to pay him a compensation of 30 thousand dirhams, in addition to obligating it to pay fees and expenses, indicating that the defendant towed his vehicle from the bottom of the building without right and the knowledge of the plaintiff, and the defendant was contacted to inquire. He left the vehicle more than once, but the employees denied the vehicle's existence, which prompted him to report the vehicle's disappearance to the police.

He added that it was found that the vehicle was in the detention yard (the Eid prayer hall).

The reservation official stated that the violation must be paid, even though the vehicle is not a violation and that it has a valid parking permit for residence, but he was informed of the need to pay the violation and file a grievance.

During the consideration of the case, the plaintiff attended, as did a representative from the Governmental Cases Department, and the attendee on behalf of the government entity submitted a memorandum in which he indicated that the vehicle inspector inspected the plaintiff’s car, and it was found that the vehicle did not have a permit to park in the residents’ parking lots, and the plaintiff was released Violation and towing the vehicle to the seizure yard, but it was later discovered, when the plaintiff attended, that the vehicle bore a violation.

For its part, the court confirmed that the evidence from the lawsuit papers is that the plaintiff instituted the lawsuit based on a request for compensation for material and moral damages in return for the defendant towing his vehicle to a parking lot and depriving him of the vehicle, despite his parking his vehicle in dispute in the parking lot for which the subscription fee was paid. However, the employee of the defendant issued a fine of 200 dirhams, indicating the reason for issuing the violation, stopping a vehicle in the parking lots and places designated for residents, and it was towed to the place of seizure, which resulted in the plaintiff being obligated to pay the value of the violation and the cost of the fine expenses and the vehicle towing fee and the seizure fee of 800 dirhams. An amount of 750 dirhams and a 25% reduction fee was paid if the fine was paid within 15 days.

In the rationale for her ruling, she indicated that the inspector for issuing the violation had to read the plate well, and that what the present stated about the defendant was that the plaintiff was clearly concerned with the plate of the vehicle. It was filmed from the front, and the inspector should have looked at the vehicle from all sides, i.e. the front and back, to verify the number and code, especially since the numbers were identical except for the letter R or H. Sorry about the presence of the nail on the letter H until it is read as the letter R, and if he checked the rear of the vehicle, he would not have made this mistake.

The court confirmed that the error was proven through what was made by the defendant’s agent, which led to the damage to the plaintiff and depriving him of the vehicle and searching for it while he desperately needs it, even if it was for one day, and the plaintiff paid expenses unjustly, and the court ruled to obligate the defendant To pay the plaintiff 2000 dirhams, in addition to obligating her to pay fees and expenses.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news