Parents must pay $30,441 for getting rid of son's porn cache (insurance, video)
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.
I guess my only question is: Should we really be expecting parents who are letting adult-aged children move back in to understand that they are setting up a landlord/tenant relationship?
I always thought that was a well understood, cautionary tale...
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin
Morally (not legally) do you think a 40 something man had a right to sue his parents on this issue after staying with them for 10 months?
I mean if the parents threw away some valuable ancient archeological fertility symbols that they objected to because of their Baptist religion, I could see that lawsuit might be morally justified.
But, hired experts aside, you can download a new porn collection without a lot of difficulty.
Was the purpose the obvious one associated with adult content? Or did it have a collector value?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin
My parents destroyed my comic book collection (on moral grounds) that I collected over 50 years ago. It was straight comics, not porn. It may have been worth something.
I am not arguing about right or wrong on the parents part, I am just saying you don't take your parents to court over a personal property claim. If you are going to take your parents to court, it had better involve serious bodily harm or egregious misuse of your money.
At what point is personal property worth enough though?
What I don't understand is, did the stuff they threw away have value outside of the content it contained? IE, if I wanted to read "Amazing Fantasy 15" (the first Spiderman,) I can buy a reprint/copy for $18.00. An original in mint condition probably costs 7 figures. That's an easy example.
My parents destroyed my comic book collection (on moral grounds) that I collected over 50 years ago. It was straight comics, not porn. It may have been worth something.
I am not arguing about right or wrong on the parents part, I am just saying you don't take your parents to court over a personal property claim. If you are going to take your parents to court, it had better involve serious bodily harm or egregious misuse of your money.
Jackie Coogan first appeared as "Uncle Fester" just before his 50th birthday.
I don't understand. What is immoral about comic books, and how old were you?
The parents can cut the son out of their will and leave it all to other family members. Maybe they will leave $30,441 to some porn addiction counseling organization.
The parents can cut the son out of their will and leave it all to other family members. Maybe they will leave $30,441 to some porn addiction counseling organization.
Was thinking exactly the same. minus the addict thing.
The right thing to do for sure.
Morally (not legally) do you think a 40 something man had a right to sue his parents on this issue after staying with them for 10 months?
I mean if the parents threw away some valuable ancient archeological fertility symbols that they objected to because of their Baptist religion, I could see that lawsuit might be morally justified.
But, hired experts aside, you can download a new porn collection without a lot of difficulty.
You first sentence makes no sense. You say "not legally" and yet use the terms "right to sue, a legal term, in the same thought.
This has nothing to do with any one individual's view on morality. It is legal and that is all that matters. In this case, yes... he had every right to sue his parents for destruction of personal property.
Downloading new porn statement is irrevelant in this case... You have no idea if the porn he obtained was free on the internet or paid for.
And some people feel the need to be rude and snarky just to be rude and snarky. No, sorry, I don't click on every link that everybody puts in a thread. And nowhere did I say the property was "abandoned," just that it was "left behind."
And I'm not saying the parents were "right." I have an adult-aged kid. I wouldn't do it. I'd probably talk to him about the fact that he might have a porn addiction. That that porn addiction might have gone a long way to contributing to his divorce. That if he hadn't blown so much money on porn he might not have had to move back home, divorce or no.
I was simply raising the philosophical question of whether in a legal framework that having your adult-aged kid move back in with you should be treated like a standard landlord/tenant relationship.
It wasn't just any link.. it was in the first opening post of this thread and the entire point of this discussion.
It is illegal for anyone to destroy another adult's property. Whether or not they are the child of the perpetrator of the destruction of property or whether or not they are considered a tenant or landlord is irrelevant.
If they were, how much rent was the son paying? What was his share of the utilities, insurance, food etc? How long was his signed lease for?
They definitely should be held responsible for destroying his property, but without the above agreement a landlord-tenant relationship it was not. It was just a person staying with their parents by mutual agreement.
If you were visiting a friend as an adult. Is your friend responsible if they destroy your phone (letsay for discussion)?
Yes... even though there is no landlord-tenant agreement... since you were just visiting. Simply being in someone person's home doesn't alleviate their responsibility for damage to another's personal property. I don't see how landlord-tenant relationship has anything to do with it in this case.
Now if there was an landlord-tenant agreement that specifically said they can destroy specific items on the property... that's a different story...
My parents destroyed my comic book collection (on moral grounds) that I collected over 50 years ago. It was straight comics, not porn. It may have been worth something.
I am not arguing about right or wrong on the parents part, I am just saying you don't take your parents to court over a personal property claim. If you are going to take your parents to court, it had better involve serious bodily harm or egregious misuse of your money.
.
You are setting the bar based on your own personal life and views.... it isn't universally true. Whether or not one takes their parents to court over a personal property claim is a personal decision and no one else.
I think it may vary state to state. If you were child at the time your comic book collection was destroyed, you may not have a claim as children in certain states are not legally able to claim legal ownership of possessions. However, I do remember in one state parents removed and sold a valuable from a child which was gifted to them from grandparents. In this case, the posession/valuable had to be returned to the grandparent or whomever purchased the item.
The parents can cut the son out of their will and leave it all to other family members. Maybe they will leave $30,441 to some porn addiction counseling organization.
Assuming the parents have anything left... it might even be a moot point.
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.
