Jacket stolen from a venue cloak room

[Czza]

Can someone please help - I paid for my jacket to kept within a venues (UK) cloak room, when I went to collect my jacket, it was gone. The venue have admitted full liability. My question is, what am I entitled too in terms of compensation, I have requested a replacement jacket. The jacket is considered a collectors item and has therefore risen in value, the venue are only offering a refund of what I paid for the jacket - this amount will not be sufficient to replace it. My understanding is i "should be put back in the same position I was in prior to the theft". I have always maintained to the venue I want my own jacket back or a replacement. Can anyone advise what I am entitled too - is it what I paid for the jacket OR is it the replacement value ?

Thank you.

[atticus]

The measure of damages for the tort of conversion is to compensate for the value of the item in question. What do you think you would be offered if, say, we were talking about a second hand car that you had paid £1,500 for 4 years and 60,000 miles ago? Certainly not £1,500. The same principle applies, in reverse.

dls may be able to provide some case references and links.

[atticus]

NB this is all subject to any terms and conditions (eg limitation of liability) that may apply.

[Czza]

Atticus, thank you for your reply, whilst I can see logic in your response, if it was a vintage/collectors car then surely this would change ?

The jacket has risen considerably in value (both second hand and new) as per various ebay listings.

[atticus]

my point was that values can go down as well as up. That is why, after giving the example of an asset that reduces in value, I said that the same principle would apply in reverse.

[Czza]

Atticus, apologies, I should have re-read your reply.

Can you advise in law, what act/legislation would provide protection for this dispute?

Thank you in advance.

[atticus]

Your claim appears to be in the common law tort of conversion. That is to say, interference with goods, or in your case failure to take care of goods entrusted to another.

[Czza]

Atticus, thanks again. Is there any reasonable grounds that this could be disputed and not go in my favour - if I am honest, I believe I have the law on my side regarding my dispute, however I also have nagging.

Is there any reason why within the law this will not be settled to provide a replacement or current market value (I have proof to show the increased value) ???

[Czza]

.....I also have nagging doubt.

[dls]

It is about the evidence. Can you prove what it was, and itscondition, and its value.