Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If they can't recover the losses via the parents, a judgment should be entered on the offenders and the kids should be required to file for bankruptcy. Work, earn, pay for the lawyer themselves. Then appear for their 341 meeting.
I would love to advocate indentured servitude, indefinite wage attachment, or the death penalty, but we in modern times tend to frown on such heavy-handed punishment.
FYI, one cannot discharge a debt that is the result of an intentional act in bankruptcy court. This has the potential of following these kids for the rest of their lives and perhaps it should.
Wonderful kids huh? Makes me understand why some animals eat their young.
I think it depends on their evaluation of whether or not its worthwhile. You can't collect money if there isn't any...
^^This is the correct answer.
All it would take is one kid to have a parent that has some decent assets (like a house) to go after and they will.
However, if they have a beat up car and only 10k equity in a townhome and lower income? Unlikely.
Would be funny if one of the parents had an umbrella policy with 1mil limits from the same company that insured the cars on the lot. I've seen that happen.
These kids were clearly old enough to physically drive, legally they may or may not have been. We're probably talking about teens here.
The parents shouldn't have to pay a red cent unless they were proven neglectful. If they were good parents and just got dealt a bad hand with misbehaving kids, then it wouldn't be fair to force them to pay for something they had no part in. Sometimes the DNA or circumstances are unfavorable.
Make the kids pay. Maybe they won't be able to recoup the full 800 grand to the insurance company, but put them in jail for a year and make them get a job both in jail and then out of jail for a few years to pay some of that money down. Hopefully, by their mid-20s they're productive members of society.
Correct. People erroneously assume that just because minor children engage in illegal activity the parents are always responsible. This is not always true. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. What often happens is the children are held legally liable for damages and the judgement is held in court. The person/entity can then collect monies from them after they turn 18.
IF they go after the parents for the money, what is the purpose of having the insurance coverage in the first place? This is what insurance is for.
Yes, policy holders have insurance to cover losses, damages etc. However, the insurance companies are certainly entitled to go after the "at fault" parties to recover their losses. You know to try to keep the premiums that everyone is always complaining about down as much as they can.
Correct. People erroneously assume that just because minor children engage in illegal activity the parents are always responsible. This is not always true. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. What often happens is the children are held legally liable for damages and the judgement is held in court. The person/entity can then collect monies from them after they turn 18.
Generally, there are some limits. A civil court judgment typically will run for eight years. In my state, the judgment can than be renewed for another eight years at the discretion of the judgment creditor. However, after 8 + 8 or 16 years its over.
IF they go after the parents for the money, what is the purpose of having the insurance coverage in the first place? This is what insurance is for.
Yeah. I have insurance to fix my stuff. That doesn’t mean the insurance company is just gonna sit there and say oh ok well we’re done here. All is well.
The insurance company should go after the parents. The kids should be charged with destruction of private property and should go to juvenile hall.
I’m willing to bet if someone damaged your vehicle you would go after them for repairs. Why should the insurance company not have that option?
I used to work at a car dealership in Houston back in the 90's. We had about 100 Expeditions broken into one night and all of their dvd players stolen right out of the roof. I don't remember what the total for damages was but it was a lot. This sort of thing happens all the time, it typically doesn't make the news though as dealerships don't want bad publicity.
That makes sense. Good luck trying to sell "new" cars that have already been subject to vandalism and repairs.
It is a scary situation for the parents. These things take a long time to play out. My guess is that insurance would cover most of it, but there is a chance the parents will have to pay a good amount. Unfortunately, the parents will have the fear of uncertainty hanging over them for a while.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
