A Navy veteran has been denied compensation for damages sustained to his vehicle while using a Sheerness Tesco car wash, despite his assertions that the incident was caused by the car wash’s malfunctioning machinery.
Clifford Smith, an ex-Navy servicemember residing in Sheerness, Kent, was utilizing the Tesco car wash to clean his vehicle when the wash’s malfunctioning machinery caused considerable damage to the car’s exterior. Smith attempted to seek recompense for the damage, but Tesco refused to cover the costs, claiming that Smith had operated the machine inappropriately.
Smith has disputed this allegation, maintaining that he followed the instructions provided by the car wash’s operators, and that any negligence on his part had been minor and inconsequential. Smith has asserted that he is entitled to compensation for the damages caused by the machine’s malfunction, and has stated his intention to pursue the matter further in court.
Smith’s legal counsel has argued that Tesco is liable for the damages caused by the car wash’s malfunction, citing the company’s obligation to ensure that the machinery is in working order. Furthermore, the counsel has asserted that Smith’s use of the machine was not in any way improper, and that the damages were caused entirely by the car wash’s malfunctioning equipment.
Despite Smith’s insistence that he is entitled to compensation for the damages, Tesco has refused to accept liability, citing Smith’s alleged misuse of the car wash’s machinery. This case has raised questions regarding the responsibilities of companies and operators of car washes, and the means by which consumers can seek recompense for damages caused by malfunctioning equipment.