Advice please. DS has broken a shop window!!

Mojisola

aliasojo wrote: »

As for the mate, liability is usually held by the person who does the act, not with whoever was beside him at the time so it's unsurprising the Police let him go home. It's notoriously difficult for them to make a case that would stand up in court, against another party as in this situation so most of the time, they wont even try.

Even if it was weakened ....if your son and his mate were not playing silly beggers with a ball beside it, it would still be in one piece.

Whatever the legal position, the OP's son is accepting moral responsibility for the act. Presumably, the OP's son would not have thrown the ball if the mate hadn't been there. They were playing together - they are both morally responsible for what happened. The OP's son's mate should be helping to pay the costs.

aliasojo

Mojisola wrote: »

Whatever the legal position, the OP's son is accepting moral responsibility for the act. Presumably, the OP's son would not have thrown the ball if the mate hadn't been there.

Perhaps not, but the situation isn't completely known is it? For all we know the OP's son could have thrown it to his mate out of the blue with no warning, especially if he was messing around. How could his mate be held partly responsible in that situation?

They were playing together - they are both morally responsible for what happened.

I do see your point, but we are all responsible for our own actions. If it were my son and his mate, I would expect my son to cough up for it himself....he was the stupid begger that threw it after all.

It's all subjective really isn't it?

myrnahaz

My household policy covered us when our DS (aged 14) rode his bike into the side of a mercedes and dented every one of the 4 side panels. The cost was over £1,000, but the insurers paid up without any problem.

bestpud

From memory (my son accidentally ran into a parked car on his bike so we looked into this a while ago - he did the same and admitted it etc but unfortunately the car owner decided to try and swindle us, as it was later proved the dent was not caused by my son, and neither was the fault in the immobiliser he tried to charge us for!! :mad: ):

They will not pursue you for the money as you were not with him and at that age they deem him responsible for his own actions.

They can take him to the small claims court but if he has no money the only action they can take is to put some sort of order on him so that he would have to pay it as and when he starts working. The order can last six years (I think!).

They would only make him pay if it is deemed he acted in a manner which was likely to cause damage to property (I guess your son was doing this?).

I hope that clears that up for you. They definitely cannot chase you. I believe the information is on the CAB website if you have a look.

I would offer so much a week and/or his services in the shop! It's good he has taken responsibility for it and he is at least trying to get some money together. Definitely ask for proof of the excess, as already said though!

ETA: here is the CAB link:

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_rights/legal_system/young_people_and_the_law.htm

It suggests you go and see them, and I would advise that anyway before you hand over any money. Not because I think you shouldn't pay (or your son) but because it would be wise to do it 'properly' and avoid potential problems, or come backs later on.

Re the negligence bit: We were told it is very difficult to prove you have not taken proper care to ensure your son doesn't injure someone/something. I really wouldn't worry about that at all!

celyn90

Awwhh OP, I've read through this thread and I haven't got any practical advice, I'm sorry. However, I would like to say that you should be very proud of raising such a responsible young lad who is readily willing to step up to the mark and take responsibility for his actions. That is a rarity nowadays.

I wish you all the best in coming to an arrangement to sort it out. cel x

clairec79

It may be worth speaking to the shop owner and see if he will accept installments (although contact your son's friend's parents and see if they will offer to pay half)

Re the 2.5 hours detaining him though, was it actually detaining or just a the shop keeper saying he's calling the police 'wait till they get here' and your son staying without any argument, neither of them realising it was going to be more than a few minutes (and did shop keeper realise your sons age?)

mrtoybox

Would keep it simple ask for proof of the excess explain that moneys tight and tell him how much you can pay each week. Would imagine your son could do some cleaning in the shop or even post leaflets advertizing the service but that would be upto the shopkeeper to agree.
Think your being very responsible. Wouldn't worry too much about the time your son had to wait. It might not be right but it is fair that he was inconvienienced and alot of that time would have been while the policeman was there.

LondonDiva

As previously advised, I'd work out a repayment plan with the owner, explaining that money's really tight. If you offer to pay in £75 or £50 installments, it should only take a few months.

On top of that, I'd ask him if there were any jobs your son could do in the shop until the debt is paid off.

Any decrease in the family's standard of living will be covered by your son not having any spending money or any income / treats at all until the money's paid and by the inconvinience of him having to give up an evening a saturday a week until you are all square.

Yes ask for proof of the excess, but remember that your son is in the wrong & him owning up to the fault is the first step. Once he's made restitution & the owner's happy, then you can pat him on the back.

toofy

Not only has the shopkeeper suffered a loss, it may also have potentially left his premises unsecure, and the 2.5 hrs he has spent with the boy may have resulted in loss of trade, in my honest opinion I think he has been very reasonable, I hope it can all be resolved amicably.

Merlot

toofy wrote: »

Not only has the shopkeeper suffered a loss, it may also have potentially left his premises unsecure, and the 2.5 hrs he has spent with the boy may have resulted in loss of trade, in my honest opinion I think he has been very reasonable, I hope it can all be resolved amicably.

reasonable?, keeping a 15 year old in a shop for 2.5 hours waiting for the police, I don't think so. The shopowner should have asked for some ID and taken a phone number etc etc, and let the boy go.

Its actually the polices fault for not turning up earlier, and I know what you are going to say its not a priority call, well if its anything like around here, you can't get a police officer to attend anything, they are completely useless nowadays, and I have a friend who is a police officer and she will tell you they don't arrest for some offences like they use to do, they just give a warning now as an arrrest creates paperwork, they have little time for actual policing as it is. Her words not mine.

OP, I hope you get it sorted, and I would be proud of your son for owning up.