Money Moral Dilemma: Do you charge house guests for breakages?

allybee13

If it was my son who did it (and that would have been entirely possible when he was six: he was a little beggar) then I would immediately offer to replace the TV. I'd have had to take it out on credit at that point in time but I would still have done it.

I would expect friends to do the same and if they didn't then I would no longer count them as friends.

As for whether I'd charge them, I don't think I could go that far.

scarlet_macaw

These circumstances don't describe an accident. Breaking a plate or glass by dropping it or whilst washing up are just facts of life which you don't expect a friend to pay for.

This however was careless behaviour of the type the person in question (or his parents) must take responsibility for.

The question has to be how the breakage occurred, rather than any simplistic question of what was the value of the damaged item. I would expect repayment for a broken pane in my greenhouse if a football went through it after I had asked a child not to kick it around nearby, but if someone walking through a door stumbled and knocked over an antique vase, that would be down to my insurance (and my fault if I did't have any) irrespective of the distress caused if it was a family heirloom.

Ebenezer_Screwj

Yes, they would definitely be called upon to replace the television set and it is to be hoped administer a resounding punishment to young Tommy, although in our house there is a code of behaviour for child visitors which does not include playing with cricket balls inside the house.

lynn_m21

Stampede wrote: »

I can't really see it happening but reading the little boy was six I have this picture of my grandson .. coming up five and there is no way I'd expect his folks to pay, I just wish it could happen as he lives too far away for me to see him, over the N. Atlantic nr the mountains in W. Canada .. a broken telly is a price I'd willingly pay

I hope you get to see him soon.

scrooge678

Dropping soup or whatever on somebody's laptop (even assuming they had permission to use it) isn't an accident either - can't anybody think about what they are doing any more?

Frugaldom

Kids, a cricket ball, indoors in the same room as expensive breakables? :eek: I'm afraid I would have had no qualms about banning the activity in the first place, friends know that and, in the extremely unlikely event that the breakage did occur, I would blame myself for the stupidity of allowing it to happen in the first place. I wouldn't expect the friend to pay for the damage. But, (there's always a 'but'), I have witnessed the accidental mishaps caused by hyperactive kids - and we automatically helped to rectify the chaos. :rotfl:

[Deleted User]

I'd throw the cricket ball at the kid, then do it again, until £500 was found.

Only kidding.

helentolf23

if i was tommy`s mum then i`d offer to pay for or contribute towards a new tv straight away, so they would`nt get chance to charge me! tbh though my kids would`nt be allowed to play inside with a cricket ball anyway!

JimmyTheWig

Agree with scarlet macaw, it depends greatly on how the accident happened and who was "in charge" of the child at the time. If the householders were involved in the game then they should expect accidents to happen.
But if the kid had been told to stop and his parents weren't doing much to stop him (e.g. taking him to play outside / finding him something else to play with) then I think they are responsible.

There is then the question about variations in disposable income. We don't have an LCD TV, mainly because we can't afford one. It would be unfair for us to have to pay for a friend's TV just because that's what they could afford - it would almost mean that we couldn't afford to go to that person's house, which would be terrible.

ihatebt_2

What if little Tommy's mum is a struggling single parent?