On the hook for our son's mistake
by JEANNE FLEMING, PH.D. and LEONARD SCHWARZ
Question: My seven-year-old son and our neighbors’ son were roughhousing at our neighbors’ home when my son accidentally broke their new high-def TV. I replaced the set. Shouldn’t our neighbors have offered to pay for half, since they ought to have been keeping a closer eye on the kids?
Answer: You’re right that you are on the hook for the loss. Parents are responsible for the damage that their children do, and the fact that your neighbors could have monitored the boys more closely doesn’t outweigh that responsibility. At age seven, your son should have learned – from you – not to engage in horseplay in the vicinity of expensive, breakable items and to be especially careful in someone else’s home.
That said, assuming your homeowners insurance didn’t cover the cost of a new TV, your neighbors should have offered to split the bill. It takes two to roughhouse, and it was just bad luck that your child was the one who actually broke the set.
Getting these folks to refund part of the tab is another matter. Our guess is that they’re not likely to look kindly on being presented with an after-the-fact bill. But it can’t hurt to point out to them that your son had a partner in crime. After all, be it in the family room or the courtroom, accomplices bear some responsibility when damage has been done. Good luck with your neighbors – and good luck civilizing the offspring as well.
Questions? Email Money Magazine’s ethicists – authors of “Isn’t It Their Turn to Pick Up the Check?” (Free Press) – at FlemingandSchwarz@right-thing.net.
if you are rough housing with your neighbor, the likelihood of breaking your neighbor's TV on purpose is quite small (specially at seven years old). It would make no sense for a seven year old to break his friend's TV–maybe if it was the stereo or something. Cut the kid some slack — it was probably just an accident.
"Teach your kid some respect for other peoples property…if I had broken a someone’s TV when I was 7, it would have come out of my allowance.
Posted By Mindy Milford, CT: December 2, 2008 8:47 am"
…it would have come out of my hide.
I have some very dear friends who are frequent guests in my home. One of thier children — I'll call him Steve to protect his identity — has serious anger issues and a learning disorder. Steve is only 6 and when he loses control something generally gets broken. I love the boy and his parents, but I have made it clear ahead of time that if he is to break anything expensive, they are expected to replace it.
As the mother of sons ages 23, 21 and 4, I'm gonna go against the grain and say the entire cost should be the responsibility of the host. Sorry to say this folks (and I've always had a house full of valuable oriental antiques, some of which have been broken by children), but when you agree to host another child, you also agree to supervise them – a 7 y.o. should not be unsupervised to the point of roughhousing. While it would be civil for the parent of the child that did the damage to offer to pay, the other party should have in good conscience refused it. If you want to parse, the defendent child is at most 1/3 responsible – as the host has 1/3 of the reponsibility at a minimum and the accomplice is another 1/3. But I still maintain that the visitor should have been supervised in a way that would have prevented this. Also gotta wonder if faulty installation/bracketing is a factor.
Teach your kid some respect for other peoples property…if I had broken a someone's TV when I was 7, it would have come out of my allowance.
Anyone who believes that the child can actually pay the parent back the full, actual amount for a high def tv is out of his/her mind.
Sure, extra chores, etc. But there is no way this child could REALLY, seriously, accomplish this task. He is 7, the parent has to let it go- and in the meantime, no visits to friends' houses until he can behave.
Since you had to pay for the TV unit, it is only fair that your child pay you back for the money that you forwarded in his behalf. Additional chores and odd jobs should be assigned monetary values. It is never too late nor too early to learn that bad behavior has consequences. The pain of paying you back the full amount will inculcate in your child a healthy respect for another person's property. He will learn to better control his own responses and be a better person to boot. I will also recommend banning your child from playing at that neighbor's house until the amount is paid in full. Then this lesson will be truly learned and remembered. Please don't forget to tell your child that you still love him, but just don't like what he has done.
Had a similar situation happen a few years ago. Our friends' son spent the night at our house and while we were fixing breakfast the next morning, he thought it would be "fun" to take my son's giant horseshoe magnet (from his science kit) and stick it right on the middle of our t.v. screen! We were horrified to see that the magnet was so powerful that it blew out the screen so we could hear the shows, but not see any picture. When we informed our friends about what had happened, they just shrugged their shoulders and said, "oh well." Basically, boys will be boys, and all that. Long story short, we ended up having to buy a new t.v. and when my husband told them how much we had to pay for the t.v., they didn't even offer to help out, nor did they ever express remorse for what their son had done! It put quite a cramp in the friendship for a long time…
I think you did the right thing. While it would have been nice if the other neighbors had paid half, they clearly didn't offer, which tells you what kind of folks they really are!
I wouldn't allow your son over at the neighbor's house again because of the inadequate supervision and judgment the neighbors show. You got off lucky this time. Be grateful that the neighbor kid didn't offer to show your son his Dad's gun collection!
As an insurance agent, I can advise that claiming this on your policy will more than likely cost you just as much, if not more, once your rates increase due to the claim. That is, if is covered at all.
Teach your kids to lie about it so you don't have to pay. That's what everybody else's kids do anyway! It's also a lot easier than bothering to make your snot-nosed kid respectful around other peoples' things.
I know that TVs are expensive, but the issues resulting from trying to "get half back" might not be worth the money. Are you friends with the neighbors? If so, you probably won't be after presenting them with a bill. You offered to pay for the entire TV because you were raised that your child is your responsibility. If it came out after the fact that the other child was equally responsible, it should be an equal division, but what's done is done. Use this as a lesson for your 7 year old about managing his money. He will never understand what has happened and how much you had to pay unless he begins to pay you back. Obviously a 7 year old isn't coming up with $3000, but they can understand how many hours of extra chores that $3000 equals.
When my friend Angela broke the garbage disposal at my house at age 7, my Dad repaired it. Angela wasn't held financially accountable for her actions, but was given a stern lecture on not putting ice down the sink. On the flip side, when my BFF hit my brand new car, she just handed me a check, which I happily accepted. Every situation is different.
I would only have offerred to pay for 50%, which would have been the fair thing to do.
If they would not accept half, then they could have opted to take me to court and take their chances with a judge who would probably say the same thing.
Also, this shold have been covered by the couple's homeowners insurance anyhow, thus only making the neighbor whose child participated in the horseplay pay for the insurance deductable. That's what the homeowners insurance is for…accidents!
Years ago my kid and his friend convinced themselves it would be fun to throw rocks in a neighbor's pool. Liner was damaged, and we split the cost of replacing it with the other perpetrator's parents. I filed an insurance claim against my homeowners policy, which was paid — then I became "rated" and my policy premium went up almost the amount that was paid out. No matter which insurance company I went to, since I was "rated" I had this black mark on my record. It stuck for ten years. So I paid 10x over for this little infraction. Moral of the story: Unless you experience a total or near-total loss, never leverage your homeowner policy for these smallish events.
I think the owners of the TV bear a good deal of moral responsibility here. Seven year old boys get out of hand very quickly. They have not yet developed the constant focus / awareness of an adult. The owners of the TV had a responsibility to keep their child from rough-housing. It really is their house and the little boy doesn't know the rules of THEIR house. Seven is really NOT very old…
They are lucky you are paying anything. It's not like this little kid is a thug. It would be hard to go back now and ask for half the money, but splitting the cost of a new TV is what appears the most fair and responsible thing to me.
It would have been considerate for the neighbour to offer to pay a portion, if not half, for the cost of the tv, however, it was not mandatory, and these people obviously took the cheapest road to a new tv. I do have issue with the last sentence ( and good luck civilizing the offspring as well.). As a parent of two well disciplined children, at the end of the day, kids are kids and they may not notice the exact moment roughhousing a little turns into dangerous play. What starts as a little shove quickly turns into a "wrestling match" before they think it through. Even the most polite and well meaning kids make mistakes. Let him work off one hundred dollars for the trouble as a refresher course on how to act while at someone else's home, and then let it go.
In the future, you should just offer to pay half and be done with it. And have a conversation with your son so that he knows the consequences of his actions. Extra chores are not inappropriate.
Oh, and V Cornelius, please don't try to practice law without a license. While the parents might be named in a suit, chances that they will be found liable are dependent on so many factors . . .
How well do you know these neighbors–
what could boys have been doing that would have caused them to break a tv–that is some serious rough-housing…
where were the parents???
How did they approach you with this information?
How do you know they did not file a claim with their home insurance or with the credit card they used to buy the tv==some offer protection for a year after purchase–
Call me suspicious…but I would want to know that they were not getting double reembursement—and contact your own insurance company…it is possible that there is coverage for your son's actions under your policy as well…
Frankly, I would make my son pay for part of the replacement costs so that he feels the pinch, and I would not let him play with that other boy, especially at his house.
This isn't the right thing, It is the responsible thing to do. Have you learned anything from this experience?? This is a wakeup call!! a cheap one at that. Most parents don't learn this lesson until they get the call that their child was in accident and has killed someone. You, as the parent will then be named in the lawsuits.
And you thought the HD TV was expensive….
very nice subject. thank you