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.
My opinion is that its an honorable thing to mitigate the expenses of the party who steps up without pressure and takes responsibility for causing harm. Now your son has to reflect on whether the replacement he is going to get (with the free wheels) is as pleasing to him as the one that was damaged. If it is in fact a lesser product than the prior one, keeping the money for now having the lesser product is ok. If it is in fact as pleasing a product as the damaged one, he should return the balance of the funds and stand tall as a person of character. This is guidance I would give my kid; but I would ask that he makes the decision.
If the party who damaged the item had to be nagged and coerced to pay then all considerations would be off the table and one should get and keep the cost of the item.
What your son now does with the money is an entirely different transaction. Suppose he were to decide that he no longer wanted to skateboard? Should he have to give the money back? Of course not, whether or not he wants to continue to skateboard is irrelevant, he was deprived of his property through the fault of another and was then 'made whole'. Whether he chooses to continue to skateboard, or not, he deserved restitution for the loss of his property. What he does with the money is an entirely different matter that has no relation to the action of his being 'made whole' for the loss of his property.
If he chooses not to continue skateboarding at all, he still deserves to have that restitution for the loss of his property and is entitled to keep the money. If he chooses to replace his property at a lower cost, then he is still entitled to keep what money remains. The restitution being paid does not obligate him to spend the entire sum on obtaining a replacement, the one has no bearing on the other.
I/we were just talking about this and your point is well taken. Let's say he was losing interest in skateboarding to the point where he would not replace the board. However he might still long for a board from time to time but if he were not paid, that would not be an option.
Bottom line on this is that since my son bought the board, I'm not going to force him to do what I would do.
(As a side note, I so wish my husband was here. He passed away last November. This solo-parenting is not always easy.)
I/we were just talking about this and your point is well taken. Let's say he was losing interest in skateboarding to the point where he would not replace the board. However he might still long for a board from time to time but if he were not paid, that would not be an option.
Bottom line on this is that since my son bought the board, I'm not going to force him to do what I would do.
(As a side note, I so wish my husband was here. He passed away last November. This solo-parenting is not always easy.)
I'm sorry for your loss.
I do think the fact that he paid for the board himself sheds a different light on things. I think, given that, it's probably right to let him make the decision. If he spends the $100 on other things and is then dissatisfied with the free wheels (which I presume are used), he will have to deal with that. Personally, I think he should sock that money away to pay for college, or perhaps law school.
Your son was deprived of [the use of] his skateboard, the other kid's parents paid for that loss. That transaction is done and settled, as it should have been.
What your son now does with the money is an entirely different transaction. Suppose he were to decide that he no longer wanted to skateboard? Should he have to give the money back? Of course not, whether or not he wants to continue to skateboard is irrelevant, he was deprived of his property through the fault of another and was then 'made whole'. Whether he chooses to continue to skateboard, or not, he deserved restitution for the loss of his property. What he does with the money is an entirely different matter that has no relation to the action of his being 'made whole' for the loss of his property.
If he chooses not to continue skateboarding at all, he still deserves to have that restitution for the loss of his property and is entitled to keep the money. If he chooses to replace his property at a lower cost, then he is still entitled to keep what money remains. The restitution being paid does not obligate him to spend the entire sum on obtaining a replacement, the one has no bearing on the other.
I/we were just talking about this and your point is well taken. Let's say he was losing interest in skateboarding to the point where he would not replace the board. However he might still long for a board from time to time but if he were not paid, that would not be an option.
Bottom line on this is that since my son bought the board, I'm not going to force him to do what I would do.
(As a side note, I so wish my husband was here. He passed away last November. This solo-parenting is not always easy.)
Solo parenting isn't easy. I am sorry for your loss.
But its still so important to teach your kids your values.
Absolutely! The OPs son seems to have a very logical mind for the law.
And that's a good point. Knowing the law is one thing...but we all know how much lawyers are hated and why that is so. Which is why doing things "by the book" or "by the letter of the law" rather than the spirit is not always the best way to treat friends or those you want to keep as friends. Business is one thing...friendship is another.
Personally I would make him give the $100.00 back to the parents.
Your son is essentially stealing from them by not using the entire amount for the replacement skateboard.
Absolutely agree with this.
I was a single mom and you can never go wrong doing the right thing. The fact that you asked tells you the answer.
They still owe him for the cost of the entire board given this scenario. He is choosing to utilize the goodwill of his friend, but that is his choice and not unlimited. If he broke the board himself tomorrow, his friend would probably be not be willing to give him a second set of wheels, etc which is where he could use the saved $100.
The friend who broke the board and paid cannot expect to be the benefactor of the goodwill from a different friend.
If someone hits your car and your friend owns the body shop and does the work for you at a discount, you're still entitled to the full market cost of repairs from the person who hit your car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atina333
Took my son shopping for a replacement board today and he only bought part of it (cost of $70) claiming that he's going to get the wheels, etc from a friend for free. Therefore he's pocketing the remaining $100.
Bottom line on this is that since my son bought the board, I'm not going to force him to do what I would do.
Sorry for the loss of your husband but you remain the young boys parent and he should not be allowed to dictate to you what is right or wrong.
Test his moral compass and tell him once again you feel the right thing to do is for him to give the $100 back to the other kids honorable parents and if he doesn't, you will do so out of your own money due to you stated that is what you would do anyway......he might just rethink his position and tell you not necessary as he will go give his friends paents the $100 but if he lets you do so, then good luck with him.
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.
