DC’s friend broke something expensive - WWYD

[Anonymous]

Most likely this kid touched the stereo, which sounds like he shouldn’t have done but he is a curious 10 year old and many can’t keep their hands in their pockets, but probably didn’t realize he actually broke it. So, I’d label this an accident. In which case I think it is reasonable to accept the kid’s parents’ offer to help repair costs but unreasonable to expect them to buy you a whole new stereo. If the stereo can’t be fixed, then you just apply that money to buying yourselves a new one. Sh-t happens when you host- I’ve had adults damage items in my house. They apologize and I deal as part of hosting.

But I, too, still don’t understand how in a small apartment no one saw this happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So weird to put out so many details but then be annoyingly vague on what the object is. Obviously with this obfuscation the other people would still recognize the story.

DP. It doesn't matter, pp, and clearly you don't realize the nationwide reach of this forum.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn’t let kids play in a room with very expensive equipment.

I think sharing the cost to fix it is fair. It sounds like the child was curious and didn’t even know he had damaged anything by looking. It doesn’t sound like he intentionally broke anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t let kids play in a room with very expensive equipment.

I think sharing the cost to fix it is fair. It sounds like the child was curious and didn’t even know he had damaged anything by looking. It doesn’t sound like he intentionally broke anything.

Omg, can you please read the thread before posting? OP lives in a small city apartment, probably NYC. The stereo is likely in her living room. There’s no way to have someone over but not have them in your living room if you live in 1000 sqf. The mother apparently sat there smiling beatifically while her devil spawn wreaked havoc. Or, even more likely, she had her nose in her damn phone and was completely checked out.

[Anonymous]

I see why your husband is pissed. It’s his kid’s friend who came over and acted like a jackalope and HIS prized item gets broken. That sucks.

The kid shouldn’t have been in the turntable. No question. Kids also don’t have a really good idea of a) how something can be damaged and not LOOK broken to them and b) the cost of fixing something that is broken.

The parents should be on the hook but from their perspective, your husband had an expensive item out and their kid didn’t intentionally break it so they’re not going to pony up the full cost.

You unfortunately are in the middle of all these competing perspectives!

I guess I would respond to their initial request and say “A repair isn’t advisable. The full cost to replace is $2300.” Leave it at that. If they say “well, we are only paying the $600 we offered,” leave it there- take the money, put it toward a new one, accept that it really really sucks and never invite that kid over again.

Once you objectively and succinctly convey what the replacement cost is, they might say “ok, we will pay it.” In which case you graciously accept, still invite them over in the future, but make it clear that nobody is to ever touch the turntable.

Sorry, rough little situation!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So weird to put out so many details but then be annoyingly vague on what the object is. Obviously with this obfuscation the other people would still recognize the story.

Eff it. It was part of his stereo. He’s a big music collector. We all live in apartments, we’ve all been over before and the kid deliberately opened the turntable case and ruined something. It wasn’t because of roughhousing.

So the kid opened it on purpose but that doesn't mean he ruined it on purpose. He admitted to touching it but didn't think he had broken it. If it were me, I'd be mortified and would fully pay to replace it, although I'd be a bit annoyed that you left something that expensive out where kids could touch it. Had you previously explained to the kids that they shouldn't touch it? I'm not sure you can be certain the kid broke it on purpose. Not that that changes the cost to replace it, but accidents happen, and that's why expensive things are insured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm on the fence. On the one hand, I would be tempted to go with Lesson Learned.
On the other, I think kid shouldn't get away with playing with it, though did he know he shouldn't.

If i could afford it I would either take what is offered or not have said anything.

I did ask. While this is awkward, I’m not unhappy I did that - I was gracious and I care about my husband. I really don’t see how this one is lesson learned, I guess because DH has been pretty clear that the force taken to create the damage done was purposeful, and the kids aren’t super little anymore, and the parent was present.

So you think the parent watched their kid purposefully break your record player? That seems like quite a stretch...

[Anonymous]

So when this kid was on the turn table where was OP's kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm on the fence. On the one hand, I would be tempted to go with Lesson Learned.
On the other, I think kid shouldn't get away with playing with it, though did he know he shouldn't.

If i could afford it I would either take what is offered or not have said anything.

I did ask. While this is awkward, I’m not unhappy I did that - I was gracious and I care about my husband. I really don’t see how this one is lesson learned, I guess because DH has been pretty clear that the force taken to create the damage done was purposeful, and the kids aren’t super little anymore, and the parent was present.

Did you tell them you expected reimbursement? You must do that otherwise you leave a grey area. If your husband believes it was done maliciously then demand payment. If they refuse, and you’re as rich as you say, sue them.

Yes. We discussed repair and replacement and that’s when she went to her husband who gave her the lower estimate. I’m not accusing anyone of malice and we’d obviously never sue, but I just wanted to get some feedback because I feel awkward. We’d tabled this over the holidays and DH told me the ultimate replacement cost today.

I'm not sure you should get a new item on your friend's dime. Fixing the damage is one thing, getting a new one is another. For example, I have a very expensive camera but it's now several years old. I have been looking at a new one and the current model is much nicer than mine. Asking someone to buy that one for me puts me in a better position, which seems ridiculous for someone else to cover the cost of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm on the fence. On the one hand, I would be tempted to go with Lesson Learned.
On the other, I think kid shouldn't get away with playing with it, though did he know he shouldn't.

If i could afford it I would either take what is offered or not have said anything.

I did ask. While this is awkward, I’m not unhappy I did that - I was gracious and I care about my husband. I really don’t see how this one is lesson learned, I guess because DH has been pretty clear that the force taken to create the damage done was purposeful, and the kids aren’t super little anymore, and the parent was present.

Did you tell them you expected reimbursement? You must do that otherwise you leave a grey area. If your husband believes it was done maliciously then demand payment. If they refuse, and you’re as rich as you say, sue them.

Yes. We discussed repair and replacement and that’s when she went to her husband who gave her the lower estimate. I’m not accusing anyone of malice and we’d obviously never sue, but I just wanted to get some feedback because I feel awkward. We’d tabled this over the holidays and DH told me the ultimate replacement cost today.

Sorry OP, I think you're way out of line. If your DH has valuable equipment, it should not be accessible to visitors, especially kid visitors. Never in a million years would I expect guests to pay for something like this.

I am in no way out of line - we all live in smallish apartments, not in DC - I used to live in DC. There is no practical way to make this equipment inaccessible based on the layout of our home. They’ve been over before when the kids were years and years younger. The equipment was under a cover. My friend was in the room, and I was getting stuff to eat for people. No matter what some will tell me, I didn’t do anything wrong here.

NP. I think you're making a huge deal over something that's not that expensive. You keep saying the mom was in the room, like she saw what her kid was doing. You're acting like these people purposefully ruined this item, which is out of line since you have no actual proof of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So weird to put out so many details but then be annoyingly vague on what the object is. Obviously with this obfuscation the other people would still recognize the story.

Eff it. It was part of his stereo. He’s a big music collector. We all live in apartments, we’ve all been over before and the kid deliberately opened the turntable case and ruined something. It wasn’t because of roughhousing.

So the kid opened it on purpose but that doesn't mean he ruined it on purpose. He admitted to touching it but didn't think he had broken it. If it were me, I'd be mortified and would fully pay to replace it, although I'd be a bit annoyed that you left something that expensive out where kids could touch it. Had you previously explained to the kids that they shouldn't touch it? I'm not sure you can be certain the kid broke it on purpose. Not that that changes the cost to replace it, but accidents happen, and that's why expensive things are insured.

NP. I have a 10-year-old, and if she lifted a closed turntable case and ripped something off of it, I would consider that intentional.

We’re talking about a fifth grader, not a toddler.

[Anonymous]

I would never have asked or expected money for this. That’s what insurance is for.

[Anonymous]

Your husband shouldn’t be expecting a replacement. At most, a contribution towards or the full cost of repair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So weird to put out so many details but then be annoyingly vague on what the object is. Obviously with this obfuscation the other people would still recognize the story.

I feel bad about the whole thing, because I feel awkward, is all. I can’t edit posts.

You can request to get the post removed. I would if I was you. Awkward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they’re good friends I would just eat it. But it’s up to you.

This. If you actually bill them the cost of the equipment, I would expect that to be the end of the friendship. Up to you which is worth more without knowing if these are good friends who live a few doors down or casual acquaintances you see once a year.

Agree