It's a big deal! The boy knocked down 130,000 bicycles and was claimed, netizens quarreled, and he was still a teenager at his own risk
Hello everyone, I'm a crying kitten. Here's wishing the friends who read this article in advance, family harmony, all the best, financial resources, and all wishes come true!
The incident occurred on May 7, in Tianjin, a 17-year-old boy rode to the door of a shop, and he wanted to park his bicycle next to the wall, but accidentally touched a bicycle by the wall, causing the bicycle to fall to the ground.
The teenager picked up the bicycle and apologized to a few people who came out of the store, but he was shocked by what the other party said, and the other party told him that the bicycle was worth 130,000 yuan, and the teenager knocked it down and caused a bump, and he needed compensation.
Because the teenager was underage, the parents of the teenager asked them to negotiate, but the two sides could not discuss the results, and the owner decided to take the legal route. He has appointed a lawyer and is preparing to prosecute.
The incident went online and sparked a huge controversy.
First of all, this car does have such a price, and the owner is not deliberately deceitful. This car is a limited livery version of the Trek P1, the owner has just bought it for about a week, and the price is nearly 130,000 yuan.
Trek is the most expensive bicycle brand in the world, and some of its bikes are worth millions of dollars, which is really unimaginable.
We ordinary people don't care if it's worth it or not, at least that's how people sell it, we must admit it.
Secondly, there is no doubt that the bike was knocked down by a teenager. At the time, Trek's bicycle was leaning against the wall, and the teenager tried to put his bike on it, but it ran into it, causing Trek's bicycle to fall to the ground.
The most critical question is that the 130,000 car fell down, there was an obvious bump, causing losses, how to divide this responsibility, is it the responsibility of the teenager, or the responsibility of the owner, or is it the responsibility of both parties?
——Beijing netizen: The principle of self-risk in the Civil Code, since you put such a valuable car without protection in a place with obvious potential safety hazards, you should be aware that there will be a risk of being encountered, so you must bear the adverse consequences of potential safety hazards.
——Shanghai netizens: This kind of car increases the burden of travel attention of the whole society, and also increases the travel cost of the whole society.
——Gansu netizens: Watching the video is completely an act of touching porcelain! It is placed in a position that has just been balanced, and it will fall down when touched, and it is a position with a large flow of people. Immediately after the fall, he ran over to demand compensation.
Everyone's attitude is the same, we admit that your thing is valuable, so you have to pay attention to the precious things, right? If you don't have a foot support, you just lean against the wall at will, isn't this a deliberate attempt to transfer the risk to someone else? And this is different from luxury cars, luxury cars everyone has a basic understanding, dare not approach, your kind of bicycle, looks ordinary, placed casually, where will everyone pay attention to it?
Some people believe that the owner of the car is responsible, while others believe that the juvenile is responsible. They believe that no matter how they discuss it, the teenager's behavior of knocking over the bicycle is an ironclad fact, and if the bicycle is worth 300 yuan and the damage caused is 15 yuan, the teenager will pay for it himself, and his parents will definitely not care.
Isn't that the truth? So just because the price is expensive, the teenager wants to rely on his own responsibility and deny his fault, which is obviously inappropriate.
The two factions have their own reasons, although there are many people who support the teenagers, but they also have the confidence to support the car owners, and the two sides do not give in to each other, and they quarrel fiercely.
Personally, I think that the possibility of the owner touching porcelain should be ruled out first, after all, this matter is very similar to the routine of professional porcelain touching, and the police need to rule it out.
If it is not a porcelain, then the responsibility between the teenager and the owner of the car should be ninety, the teenager is one percent of the responsibility, and the owner of the car is ninety percent of the responsibility.
In my opinion, the teenager is just an ordinary person, in his cognition, this is an ordinary bicycle, like his own bicycle, he has no sense of risk, all his actions are not at fault, just an accident.
The owner of his car knows the value of his car, he should have a sense of risk prevention, but he did not do it himself, put his car into the risk, then he has to bear the corresponding consequences.
Wearing a bracelet worth 200,000 yuan to play basketball and being hit by someone else, the person responsible is yourself, not someone else.