Law, ask for advice and answer the answer score of 200 points

The parking lot in front of your Internet café is not a commercial parking lot, it is a public place, and it is used as a temporary parking place for customers spontaneously, and as the owner, the network owner certainly does not have management responsibility for it, and therefore does not have the obligation to compensate.

Your Internet café will record the entire theft process, and at most it will be provided to the public security organs to help them solve the case.

This question is too simple, it has nothing to do with you, and you and the owner do not constitute any legal relationship.

No responsibility. There is no custody contract. Rest assured, boss.

He didn't surf the internet at your internet café.

There is no custody fee for you, it does not constitute a contractual relationship with you, and you have no duty of care, so you are not liable for compensation.

Keep your surveillance video and help ** solve the case, which is the responsibility of ordinary citizens.

Obviously there is no responsibility, first of all, you have no obligation to supervise the motorcycle for him, needless to say that you have not surfed the Internet in your Internet café, even if you are online, as long as you do not charge for its stay or promise to take care of it, you are not obliged to compensate. Moreover, your surveillance video can be provided to **, which is also a great help to the owner, the above personal opinions, if you are not at ease, you can consult the law firm, hehe.

Since there is no agreement between you and the owner of the vehicle, and there is no event that may give rise to a civil legal relationship as prescribed by law, there is no civil legal relationship between you and the owner of the vehicle.

If there is no corresponding civil legal relationship, there is naturally no need to make compensation.

The owner reported the crime, no wow!! Or did they come to ask you for compensation? Why didn't you even say the most important thing!!

Since you have a videotape, the owner comes to ask you that you can take it out and help the owner find the motorcycle, isn't that the end!! It's not even about what you're responsible for!

From what you have described, there is no legal relationship between you and the theft of the motorcycle, and there is no question of whether you are liable for compensation.

No, you don't have a legal relationship with him, unless the monitor detects that someone from your Internet café stole it...

There is no liability for compensation, there is no contractual relationship with you for not surfing the Internet in your Internet café, and you have no duty of care, but you have to keep your surveillance footage.

You don't charge him parking fees, if you collect 100 times the storage fee charged, if you confiscate no responsibility.

1: Zhao's behavior: attempted intentional injury, after being beaten by Zhao, he released a big wolf dog to bite Wang, with the subjective intention of harming, but because Zhao hid himself, he avoided injury;

Wang's conduct: The crime of theft was completed, and Zhao stole Wang's mountain bike and hid it, which met the subjective and objective conditions for the crime of theft.

2: Mistakes made by the public security organs in handling the case:

A: To summon Wang to the police station, you need to show written documents;

B: Wang is a student, and his guardian should be informed when he is summoned to the police station;

C: There is no reason for the case-handling personnel not to let Wang go home on the premise that he does not admit to the theft, and the conditions for administrative detention are not sufficient;

D: For stolen bicycles, police station personnel should immediately confiscate and return them to the victim Zhao;

E: The value of the stolen goods is 400 yuan, and Wang was indeed detained for 5 days and fined 500 yuan, which is too heavy.

Pure hand fighting, hope!

I'll help you break it down.

1.I received a home improvement project some time ago.

Legally, this is not called a project, in fact, you are in a contractual relationship.

2.The contract is known as the name of all safety accidents, and I am responsible for all safety accidents.

This clause is invalid, and the so-called exemption clause that exempts oneself from responsibility and strengthens the responsibility of the other party is invalid in accordance with the law, and shall be dealt with according to the legal provisions corresponding to the occurrence of facts.

3.The plasterer I hired died on the site due to a faulty use of electricity.

If a labor relationship is formed between individuals, and the party providing the service causes damage to others due to the service, the party receiving the service shall bear tort liability. If the party providing the service suffers damage due to the service, it shall bear the corresponding responsibility according to the fault of both parties. The basis is Article 35 of the Tort Law.

The meaning of this clause is that the death of an employee is liable according to fault, and the employer who is at fault has to pay for it, and if he is not at fault, he will not be compensated. If you have fulfilled all the duty of care and safety required of the employer, and the accidental death of the employee is caused by his own intentional or gross negligence, the employer will generally have no responsibility or only have little responsibility.

4.The worker I hired A (the deceased) asked B (the deceased's brother) who was standing aside. Someone not hired by me) plugged in to use the cutter.

B is at fault for A's death and is also liable.

5.After the incident, I gave Party A's family 40,000 yuan for funeral expenses. The next step is that Party A's family plans to sue me.

If you can't negotiate, they will sue, you have an advantage in law and reason, and you also took the initiative to pay 40,000 yuan in advance. To tell the truth, if they go to court, they may not be able to get 40,000 yuan, and maybe they will have to return most of it.

6.How much responsibility do I have! How much responsibility does Party A and Party B have! How much responsibility does the owner have.

The specific responsibility depends on who is more at fault between you, purely from your description, it is estimated that you are divided by two, seven, one and one, and the owner is not responsible because he is not at fault.

Unfortunately, it is appropriate to pay Party A's expenses from a humanitarian point of view, but from a legal point of view, you may not have to bear such a heavy responsibility. It is recommended that the two parties negotiate first, and actively respond to the lawsuit if the negotiation fails, in this case, the lawsuit is much less than the loss of money in private.

I hope it helps you, and I wish you a speedy and successful resolution of the dispute!

It's hard to go the legal route.

The first is the issue of evidence, which can be considered to collect evidence through audio recording, but it is difficult for the judge to accept the recording evidence alone, and it is very likely that the case will be lost.

Secondly, "what compensation claim can be made in addition to asking for money", in addition to the arrears, you can make a corresponding claim for compensation under the premise of evidence (such as invoices, etc.) (supplement: there is no compensation for mental damage and youth loss).

Finally (not legal): For this kind of man, the best way is to come to the door to ask for money, preferably with everyone in the family, call 110 if you don't admit it, and go at least once a week.

It's lossy, but it works.

If it can be proved that it is related to the debt, you can sue for repayment. There is no legal basis for other compensation.

In this case, it can be considered whether the man deliberately concealed the facts and deliberately defrauded the facts of the crime, and if so, deliberately reported the case to the public security bureau.

1. This is a problem caused by damage to immovable property and its shelving and hanging objects.

Article 85 of the Tort Liability Law stipulates that buildings, structures or other facilities, as well as their shelves and hanging objects, fall off or cause damage to others. Where the owner, manager, or user cannot prove that he or she is not at fault, he shall bear tort liability.

After the owner, manager or user makes compensation, if there are other responsible persons, they have the right to recover from the other responsible persons.

The Act adopts the principle of presumption of fault. There are three defendants: the owner, the administrator, and the user. Among them, the person who directly controls, manages and has the obligation to repair is the main body of responsibility, rather than three people who are liable at the same time, not joint and several liability, but separate liability.

2. The responsibility of A can be borne by the owner or the property.