Solved case study of Bailment case- Mrs. Weldo & Fox Mountain Country Club

1. Submitted by: Sukhdeep Kaur (160967188)
Submitted to: Amanda Shuen
CASE STUDY 3- MRS. WELDO VS. FOX MOUNTAIN COUNTRY CLUB
The Fox Mountain Country Club was a popular location for weddings in a midsized town. The country
club offers a free coat check service to its members and guests. A staff member employed by the
countryclub operatesthe coatcheck service.The coatcheckroomislocatedjustoutside the entrance to
the club’s Crystal Ballroom.
At a weddingheldonJune 15,Mrs. KathyWeldopresented her full-length sable coat to the uniformed
coat check attendantatthe countryclub.Mrs. Weldowas givenasmall plastictagwitha number,which
she observedcorrespondedtothe numberona coat hangerwhere hercoat was hung.Standing outside
the coatroom,Mrs. Weldohada clear view of her fur as it hung on the coat rack. Mrs. Weldo remarked
to the attendantthat the coat was “veryvaluable”andthat she hoped the attendant would watch over
it carefully.
Upon leavingthe clubat 1:00 A.M.,Mrs. Weldo went to the coat check area to retrieve her coat only to
find that it was missing. When she inquired about the coat’s location, the coat check attendant
apologizedprofuselybutcould not explain the coat’s disappearance. The attendant stated that he had
leftthe coatroom unattended only twice that evening, one time for a 15-minute dinner break and the
otherfor a 5-minute cigarette break.The doortothe coatroomwas leftopenandunlockedduringthose
periods so that guests who left early could retrieve their own coats.
Mrs. Weldo returned to the club the next day to speak to Ms. Miles, the club manager. Ms. Miles
pointedtoa signprominentlydisplayednearthe coatroomdoorstating,“The clubisnot responsible for
lostor stolenproperty.”She recommendedthatMrs.Weldoreferthe matterto herinsurance company.

2. 1. What was the nature of the bailment relationship in this situation?
The bailment relationship is that relationship in which Bailor gives the product to the other
person for a given period of time and expects that the Bailor should return that product in similar
conditions in which it was provided. In the above case the Bailor is Mrs. Waldo because she
gives her coat to the coat check attendant (Bailee) during the wedding ceremony and was
expecting that the Coat check attendant should return her coat upon request after the ceremony.
The bailment relationship in the above case is for the sole benefit of the Bailor. The Bailee was
providing the service without expecting anything in return.
There was a moderate relationship between the Bailor (Mrs. Weldo) and Bailee (The attendant),
in this situation the club is liable for any loss occurred. The situation is called an Infra hospitium,
means that it was the responsibility of the club to take care the valuable item which guest
handled to the Innkeeper.
2. Did the club exercise reasonable care in the handling of Mrs. Weldo’s coat?
The club didn’t exercise a reasonable care in handling the Mrs. Weldo’s coat. The small plastic
token with a number was the contract between the Bailor (Mrs. Weldo) and the Bailee (Coat
check attendant). This is the case of the negligence from the club’s behalf. Mrs. Weldo put the
trust in the club for the safety of her coat and club assured her by providing with her a token
stating that club made a contract. However, the attendant left the counter unlocked and didn’t
exercise reasonable duty of care& responsibility in handling the Mrs. Weldo’s coat. Mrs. Weldo
put a trust in club for the safety of her coat; however, the club didn’t exercise a reasonable care
towards a Mrs. Weldo
3. What should the club manager do in the future to avoid situations such as this?

3. To avoid similar situations in the future the hotel should implement some strategies:
I. Hotel should not leave the doors unlocked during the attendant’s break time so
that people should self check-out their possessions. If attendant has to go o a
break, other person should be implemented on the place of that attendant to check
the procedures for check-out for possessions.
II. Hotel should clearly state that hotel is not responsible for any loss of the items by
not providing their guests with the plastic tags with numbers. Club should
implement a strategy for self check-in in coat check counters thus making club
less liable for losses.
III. There is a reasonable negligence in duty of care from the coat check attendant’s
side because he didn’t valued the expensiveness of the coat and left the counter
unlocked for self check-outs when he was in a duty to care about the possessions
of the guests. Adequate reasonable care is necessary in gaining the trust and to
avoid similar incidents in the future.
IV. Club should immediately remove the disclaimer near the check room that club is
not liable for any loss incurred at the property.