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.
We have a neighbor whose adult son is using meth. Because of his unstable mental state, he's living in an RV rather than in the house because his father is well aware that he poses a risk. Since he's been around, he's assaulted a much older weaker man, had a friend overdose on the property and harassed neighbors. Additionally he's loud, obnoxious and angry the way most serious users tend to be when they're coming down off their high. He's not in any kind of treatment program or undergoing supervision. The police are aware of the situation and advised the father that he's perpetuating a potentially dangerous situation.
Obviously, Mr Meth is broke and uninsured, so where does the liability lie for creating this nuisance? While he has the mentality and poses the same risk as a rabid unchained fighting dog, he's still sort of a human, what's left of one anyway. Is the father liable for keeping him there?
I don't believe the parent is legally liable, since the son is over 18. Look at it this way, if the kid were 19, not on meth and committed murder, would his dad be guilty (criminally)?
I think the question is more about whether the father can be held liable for damages if something happens since he is aware of the situation and is allowing it to continue on his property, not about whether he is responsible for his adult sons actions. There is a difference between being held responsible and being held liable.
I would think that a property owner has little if any liability for the actions of a person off their property. However, a property owner could have liability when they could foresee a problem. How this is determined is based on each state law. Example in Washington State Chapter 9.66 RCW spells out what are public nuisances, and making it a crime to allow and permit it. So in a case like the OP's, if it can be shown the actions of the person falls within the public nuisance ordinance (9.66.010) and the property owner knows of the nuisances (9.88.030), the property owner can be charged with a misdemeanor. As such, they may be held liable under tort laws in the state.
I think the question is more about whether the father can be held liable for damages if something happens since he is aware of the situation and is allowing it to continue on his property, not about whether he is responsible for his adult sons actions. There is a difference between being held responsible and being held liable.
I think the question is more about whether the father can be held liable for damages if something happens since he is aware of the situation and is allowing it to continue on his property, not about whether he is responsible for his adult sons actions. There is a difference between being held responsible and being held liable.
In bold, this has put the father into a precarious situation. A visit with a lawyer, his advice and a letter may help solve the problem.
In some cities they have Community Services Depts that may be able to help or advise you as to what the city can do or best way to handle it.. Check them out.
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.
