If your car is stolen or damaged while inside a garage, multi-story car park, or paid parking area, the primary question does not only concern the theft or damage: it concerns the service the operator had undertaken. Was the mere availability of a parking stall offered, or also the custody of the vehicle? The possibility of claiming compensation depends on this distinction.
I will explain which elements help recognize a guarded parking lot, why a sign does not always have the same effect, and what evidence it is advisable to keep. We will also see what changes between a private garage and a public parking area declared unattended: two apparently similar situations, but regulated differently.
The decisive question: had the operator assumed custody?
Custody does not coincide with the mere payment for parking. Paying a ticket shows that a relationship exists with the operator, but it does not clarify on its own which service was agreed upon. Under the contract of deposit, governed by articles 1766 and following of the civil code, one party receives a movable thing and must keep it and then return it. Applied to a vehicle, this scheme entails an obligation that goes beyond providing a parking space.
The concrete point is to understand how the parking offer was presented before entry: enclosed or fenced area, barrier, personnel, hand-over of keys, access control, automated parking, pick-up or return service. No single element always resolves the issue, but together they can show that the operator took delivery of the car and undertook to guard it.
The Court of Cassation has held that a fenced-in paid automated parking area can give rise to a reasonable expectation in the user that the service also includes custody. The decision also notes that a derogation from the obligation of custody, in that context, cannot be reduced to a warning placed on the ticket collected at the entrance or inside the area when the contract is already concluded. You can read the reference to judgment no. 18277 of 2023 in the civil and labor newsletter of the Court of Appeal of Perugia.
Private garage and multi-story car park: what car deposit entails
If a deposit exists, the operator must return the car intact. Return does not only concern the material presence of the vehicle at the exit: it includes its preservation according to the obligation undertaken. Total theft, theft of parts stably connected to the vehicle, and damage occurring during parking can therefore constitute a breach if they are referable to the period in which the operator had custody.
This does not mean that every theft automatically determines compensation. Article 1218 of the civil code links liability to non-performance and allows the debtor to be released if they prove that the performance became impossible for a cause not imputable to them. In a deposit, the mere assertion of having set up cameras, fences, or controls does not necessarily close the issue: it is necessary to understand whether the event was truly extraneous to the operator's sphere of control and whether the precautions promised or reasonably required by the service were adequate.
Theft committed by a third party does not exclude liability on its own. In a 2025 decision, the Tribunal of Taranto recalled articles 1218 and 1768 of the civil code and specified that the depository is not released simply by proving they adopted generic diligence or a surveillance service. In the examined case, the judge valued the concrete assumption of the obligation to guard the vehicle. The ruling is available on the jurisprudence page of the Tribunal of Taranto.
The rule must however be applied to the real contract. If you entrusted the keys to the staff, the link with custody is normally more evident. If instead you parked autonomously in an accessible area, it will be important to establish what the operator had promised and what meaning the access methods had. The ticket, receipt, online booking, and information displayed before the barrier can become decisive.
Paid parking declared unattended: the difference of public areas
A paid parking lot can be without custody. The law does not presume that every onerous parking area protects the vehicle against theft or acts of vandalism. This happens in particular for public parking areas established by the Municipality and managed under concession: the function of the service may be limited to regulating parking and collecting the fee.
The Joint Sections of the Court of Cassation have clarified that, for these areas, an obligation of custody does not arise if the notice of "unattended parking" is adequately perceptible before the conclusion of the contract. In such a situation, fences, barriers, access devices, or personnel assigned to organize parking do not in themselves transform the service into a deposit. The principle and reference to judgment no. 14319 of June 28, 2011, are reported in the civil review of the Court of Cassation.
The moment when the information is made knowable matters. A clear notice before entry can define the object of the service in an unattended public parking lot; it is not correct to automatically transfer this solution to a closed private garage or a multi-story car park which, due to its structure and offer method, presents different characteristics. For this reason, the same sign can have a different weight depending on the type of parking lot and the moment when the user can choose whether to accept the service.
Car theft, bodywork damage, and items in the passenger compartment
Damage subject to compensation must be proven in its existence and value. In the case of a stolen car, the request normally concerns the financial loss connected to the loss of the vehicle; in the case of damage, it can concern the expenses necessary for repair, when they are congruous and documented. Estimates, invoices, photographs, reports, and documents certifying the conditions of the vehicle before and after the event help define the claim.
Extra caution is needed for items left inside the passenger compartment. Car custody does not automatically include every asset inside it. It is necessary to verify whether the operator was aware of their presence, whether the items were entrusted together with the vehicle, and whether their value can be proven. It is not sufficient to indicate generically that valuables were present in the trunk or passenger compartment: description, proof of purchase, and connection to the event make the claim more verifiable.
Pre-existing damage also counts. If the operator claims that a scratch, dent, or breakdown already existed, comparing entrance photographs, delivery reports, immediate reports, and camera images can clarify the point. Filing a report with law enforcement is useful, but it does not replace proof of the contract. It attests to the reported fact, while the operator's liability also requires demonstrating why that event fell within their custody obligation.
Evidence to keep immediately after the event
The primary need is to establish the facts before data disappears. Keep the ticket, electronic receipt, reservation, any messages with the operator, and photographs of the signs or access conditions. Also photograph the vehicle, the spot where it was parked, the barrier, entrances, and any visible damage. If you no longer have the ticket, card payment, or confirmation email can still help prove the date, time, and operating entity.
It is advisable to report the incident to the operator without waiting, so that a record of the dispute remains and potential video surveillance can be preserved. Asking for the preservation of images is different from automatically demanding a copy. Access methods to footage also depend on personal data protection rules, but a timely request can prevent the recording from being overwritten before being evaluated.
If the car was stolen, the report must contain identification data of the vehicle, location, time slot, and known circumstances. If it is damaged, an estimate or appraisal can quantify the prejudice, but it is prudent to document the damage before repairing when possible. Do not sign hurried release statements. A formula delivered after the event can affect the reconstruction of the matter and must be read together with the contract and the information provided before the barrier.
Claiming compensation: operator, insurance, and agreement
The request to the operator must precisely reconstruct the relationship. It is not enough to write that the car was in a parking lot: it is necessary to indicate when it was delivered or parked, what service was purchased, where the conditions were displayed, what event occurred, and what damages result from available documents. A detailed claim allows addressing the true point of the controversy, namely the existence or non-existence of the custody obligation.
The operator may have liability insurance, but the operator's insurance does not replace the operator as the contract counterparty. The presence of an insurance company can affect practical liquidation methods, but it does not eliminate the need to ascertain custody, non-performance, and damage. Similarly, if your theft or damage insurance intervenes, claims must be coordinated to avoid overlapping on the same prejudice.
An agreement can be a useful solution when custody and damage are clear and the amount is documented. If instead the content of the contract remains controversial, the text of the offer, the visibility of notices, and the concrete characteristics of the area take on significance. The distinction between parking and deposit comes before quantification. Clarifying it avoids basing the claim on an assumption that the operator could contest.
Frequently asked questions
Can I claim compensation if the ticket says the operator is not liable?
That wording is not always decisive. It is necessary to understand what service was offered and when the clause was made knowable to you. In a garage or multi-story car park with custody characteristics, a sentence on the ticket collected at the entrance may arrive after the conclusion of the contract. For unattended public areas, however, it is essential to verify the presence of a clear notice before parking.
Is the theft report enough to obtain payment from the garage?
No, but it is an important document. The report certifies that you reported the theft and describes known circumstances. To obtain compensation from the operator, it is also necessary to prove the parking relationship, any obligation of custody, and financial damage. Ticket, payment, reservation, and photographs normally complete the picture.
Does the operator remain liable even if the theft was committed by unknown parties?
The fact that the perpetrator is unknown does not automatically exclude the claim. If the operator had assumed custody, the theft must be evaluated as a possible breach of the obligation of return. The operator can defend themselves by proving a non-imputable cause, but it is not enough to generically recall the presence of third parties or the existence of a surveillance system.
Can I get reimbursed for items stolen from the car?
It depends on what was entrusted and what you can prove. For items in the passenger compartment or trunk, it is necessary to prove their presence and value, as well as the connection to the custody assumed by the operator. Receipts, photographs, purchase documents, and a precise description in the report make the claim less uncertain.
Should I repair the damaged car immediately?
Document the damage well before repair. Clear photographs, communication to the operator, and an estimate allow preserving proof of the vehicle's condition. If repair is necessary for safety reasons or daily use, keep invoices and technical documentation. The point is to be able to clearly link the intervention to the damage that occurred during parking.
Useful references and a concrete step
To frame deposit and liability for non-performance, the text of the civil code contains rules under articles 1218 and 1766-1770; the institutional reference is the text of the Civil Code on Normattiva. The recalled decisions show why there is no single answer equal for private garages, multi-story car parks, and public areas declared unattended.
Preserve available evidence immediately and do not limit yourself to qualifying the place as a "guarded parking lot" or "unattended": what counts is the service concretely promised and accepted. If you need to clarify this distinction for a claim already contested by the operator, you can contact me.