UpliftMovers (UM) is a moving company specialising in the relocation of business

Question

UpliftMovers (UM) is a moving company specialising in the relocation of businesses. Titanic Global Octopus (TGO) employs UM to move its office equipment including furniture and computers to its new premises. To do the job within the tight time frame specified (TGO must have its new office installed and ready for business by 9 o'clock on Monday morning) UM agrees to work over the weekend. At 3 am on Monday morning while making the final delivery Monty, UM's driver, falls asleep at the wheel and crashes the delivery truck. Desks and computers fall onto the road and are damaged. When TGO sees the damage to its desks and computers it wants to make a claim against UM. But UM points to the contract which TGO has signed that says, " In the event of any damage by UpliftMovers, or its employees, to any of the client's (TGO's) property being moved, from whatsoever cause and howsoever arising, the total amount for which Uplift Movers shall be liable, regardless of the number of items damaged, shall not exceed $1,000." TGO estimates that the damage to its property is $30,000. One of the computers was a personal computer owned by Karl. TGO has encouraged its employees to use their own computers in order to save costs. The computer was completely destroyed. A replacement computer will cost Karl $2,500. In one of the damaged desks was a ring owned by Lennie. He had been storing it in a locked drawer in his office desk for safekeeping before giving it to his partner on their anniversary. The lock was damaged and when Lennie got his desk back on Monday he discovered that someone had stolen the ring valued at $5,000 REQUIRED Advise TGO, Karl and Lennie as to any claims they may have against UM. Word Limit: 700 words

Explanation / Answer

This is rather a tricky situation and there cannot be a 'one-size-fits-all' type of a solution.

Once the situation is carefully assessed, we can see that TGO definitely has some case against UM. As per the contract signed by TGO with UM, it has been stated that any damage to the TGO property by UM or any of its employees will be compensated to a maximum of $1000. This in itself cannot be contested as this has been signed by TGO and thus is contractually bound to bear by this. However, Karl & Lennie do have a case against UM as due to the accident, the losses that they have suffered is personal since the assets belonged to the individuals and not to TGO. Thus in their personal capacity, they have the right to ask for due compensation. Especially in case of Lennie, the lock of the drawer was broken and the contents inside it was missing. This clearly can be a case for wilful damage to property to usurp the personal valuables.

Also, since the accident happened at 3 AM on Monday, which is well passed the weekend delivery promise, it can be assumed that the delivery could not be completed within the agreed time as TGO had start operations from 9 AM. Thus TGO can make a claim from UM to compensate the losses that were rising due to failure to start operations from 9AM. By estimating the anticipated business value loss by not being able to start the operations from 9AM, they can make a claim which can to some extent, if not fully, can make up for the losses of $30,000.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse U
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.