Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

This is a question that many attorneys will answer, "it depends." Generally, parking lots are considered bailments, and special rules govern bailments. It is standard for parking lots to give you a ticket, that disavows their liability for anything. It is similar to the sign at the laundromat that states that they are not liable for damaging your suit. It isn't the law, but it has a dissuasive effect on customers, and many do not address their damaged items. California law generally holds that a bailee cannot unilaterally waive his liability for tortious conduct.

The "it depends" also is based on the underlying theory of liability. Is it negligence? Did a parking attendant steal the keys and steal the car, while the keys were in his car? A defense attorney may be able to successfully argue that the owner of the lot is not responsible for the criminal acts of a third person not under his control. A counter argument to this is that the owner may be liable for foreseeable criminal acts. These cases are factually intensive, meaning the result depends on specific facts that can be proven at trial.

Probably not, though under some facts it might be. Agreeing to let you park does not make the lot's owner your insurer. If it did, the parking fee would presumably be much higher. You could have insured your car against theft; if you didn't then you accepted the risk of theft and cannot shift that risk to the owner of the lot. And chances are that the lot's contract with you included a waiver of its liability.