If a shoel (someone who borrowed non-fungible personalty) re-lent the borrowed item to a further borrower (which he may not do), the original borrower (i.e., the relender) is liable to the original lender for any damages that occur. (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 342, q.v.)
Does the relender then have a claim against his borrower for those damages? (Assume the item was not mesa mechamas m'lachtah. In a normal case of borrowing, not reborrowing, the lender would have a claim against the borrower.)
Likewise, suppose the original shoel gave the item to a shomer chinam (bailee). Again, the borrower is liable for damages to the lender, even if the shomer was negligent (poshea). (Or at least so it seems to me. For one thing, it's directly analogous to the above case. For another, it's pretty much implied by SA CM 72:31, which doesn't say it's referring to only a case in which the bailee was not poshea (and the nos'e kelim don't say so, either).)
If the shomer was negligent, does the borrower have a claim against him? (In a normal case of bailment, not of a borrowed object, the bailor has a claim against the bailee for negligence.)