SIBU: The notice ‘Park at your own risk’ did not augur well with some vehicle owners here who want the management of premises and private car park operators to take up insurance policy instead.
In a street poll yesterday, these vehicle owners said it was essential to have their properties insured, concurring that break-ins and other untoward incidents would still happen in spite of the presence of CCTVs and security personnel.
Consumer Association Sibu division chairman Simon Tiong, in leading the call, stressed that having such (insurance) coverage would enable vehicle owners to have some form of compensation.
“It is most unfair that fees are imposed on vehicle owners for the use of parking space, and yet the operators washed their hands when untoward incidents cropped up.
“Vehicle owners are left high and dry to cover for the losses. There must be some form of insurance scheme to protect or at least minimise their losses.
“We understand that operators have their constraints but there needs to be a win-win situation for both sides,” Tiong told The Borneo Post.
He also gave the thumbs-up to government directives to have the notice removed.
Tiong, however, said vehicle owners too needed to beef up their own security.
A rented van operator, Lambat Sumbang, said he had no qualms being charged more so long as his van was insured against losses sustained when parking in the car park.
“We are charged RM42.40 monthly for parking at a gated public car park here, and paying slightly more won’t do us any harm.
“What is important is to be able to claim compensation when something happens to our vans. This will give us a peace of mind,” Lambat quipped.
He strongly objected to the notice, which he described as unfair since they were charged for the use of parking space.
“As customers, we would expect them to be responsible for our vehicles when under their care,” he said.
An executive with a private firm, Chua Tung Wei, figured it was high time management of premises and private car park operators go the extra mile by taking up insurance coverage for car owners.
“I for one is all for it. Imagine the mental torture that one has to go through if the car is vandalised or broken into. Worse still, when something important are stolen from our cars,” Chua noted.
A retailer, Angy Ng, however, said the matter needed to be looked at on a case-to-case basis.
When asked what he meant, Ng explained that when the fees charged were minimal, there was nothing much one could do.
“But if they (operators) impose high charges, we will expect them to take full responsibility for losses suffered as a result
of break-in or vandalism,” he said.
Ng too supported the removal of the notice, saying the notice appeared ‘intimidating’ of sorts.