Auto Insurance Claims: Valet damage but with proof., monetary jurisdiction, small claims court

Question
To whom it may concern,

I had a valet damage my car at a hotel. Unfortunately, I did not notice the damage until I got to my friend's apt.
However, I went right back(probably an hour or two later) to the hotel and found out that the hotel actually keeps a record of where my car was parked. Me and the valet supervisor went to check the parking space where my car was parked, and we found bunch of fresh flakes on the pillar right next to the parking space, which I took photo of.
As of right now, the insurance company of the valet service is telling me that they have dropped the case since I left the parking lot.
Like I said, I have the photo proof and their supervisor saw the fresh flakes of paint on the piallar as well.
What can I do in this situation?
Please help.

Answer
Hi Boohee Cha,

Do NOT be put off on this claim by the bogus statement that you left the lot.  Your action in returning was excellent, and you have the proof.  

#1, send a letter as below, and #2, file a claim in small claims court.  BEFORE you file, however, you do need to send a certified letter to the hotel giving them the facts and your evidence and an opportunity to pay the damages before you go to court.  Also mention that you will be seeking court costs in your award against the hotel..  That letter is a prerequisite to filing in small claims court.  And you will need proof of mailing the certified letter in order to file

Then, just figure out the location of the nearest small claims court with jurisdiction over the hotel, and arrange to file a claim there.  The monetary jurisdiction is usually around $4K to $5K.  No attorneys or representatives are allowed in small claims court, so your proof should carry the day.  

Do NOT give any worry to that bogus defense that they raised, even if it states in your parking ticket that you must inspect your car prior to leaving the lot.  Tell the judge that the lighting was poor and also that such a restriction on a ticket is an adhesion contract, and not reasonable to bind the customers.  

Does that make sense?  I trust that my time here has produced some information that has been of value to you, and thus I would respectfully request that you take the time to locate the FEEDBACK FORM on this site and leave some feedback for me.


Dr. Settlement, J.D. (Juris Doctor)
http://www.SettlementCentral.Com