Would this bother you?

Person_one

notanewuser wrote: »

Indeed. Makes me so cross to be so taken for granted though. As if it doesn't matter what happens to our stuff.

But, surely you realised that an item intended for use by a baby, and in a house with a dog, was unlikely to come back in pristine condition? You lent them these things to be used didn't you? Not stored or just admired!

laurel7172

Crumbs.

DD was at the transition size between stage one and two (and I'd already bought the stage two seat in the sales) when a desperately hard-up friend's second hand stage one seat fell apart (actually, the fabric handles ripped off) as she was leaving our house.

I scooped my friend's baby into DD's seat and asked her to let me have the seat back when her DD had outgrown it.

By the time my friend was done with it, a friend of hers was struggling with baby expenses, and friend asked if friend-of-a-friend could borrow it. I said that would be fine.

It came back to me, in pristine condition, in time for DS. He had just outgrown it when friend-of-a-friend had HER second child. She asked if she could borrow the seat again. This time, I said she could keep it-and just give it to somebody else who needed it afterwards.

I'm sorry you've had a bad experience, OP. But it's a good thing for families and the planet to swap and share these things. I hope your unappreciated generosity doesn't put anyone else off doing the same.

notanewuser

Person_one wrote: »

But, surely you realised that an item intended for use by a baby, and in a house with a dog, was unlikely to come back in pristine condition? You lent them these things to be used didn't you? Not stored or just admired!

No. It's baby E's parents that have the dog. We didn't lend the toy to them - it was given by baby A+C's mother to them.

(Although given their attitude to keeping the things we did lend them directly safe I wish I'd not bothered!)

notanewuser

laurel7172 wrote: »

Crumbs.

DD was at the transition size between stage one and two (and I'd already bought the stage two seat in the sales) when a desperately hard-up friend's second hand stage one seat fell apart (actually, the fabric handles ripped off) as she was leaving our house.

I scooped my friend's baby into DD's seat and asked her to let me have the seat back when her DD had outgrown it.

By the time my friend was done with it, a friend of hers was struggling with baby expenses, and friend asked if friend-of-a-friend could borrow it. I said that would be fine.

It came back to me, in pristine condition, in time for DS. He had just outgrown it when friend-of-a-friend had HER second child. She asked if she could borrow the seat again. This time, I said she could keep it-and just give it to somebody else who needed it afterwards.

I'm sorry you've had a bad experience, OP. But it's a good thing for families and the planet to swap and share these things. I hope your unappreciated generosity doesn't put anyone else off doing the same.

That's partly why we did loan for babies A and B. It seemed daft for them to buy new when DD had, in the grand scheme of things, barely used them. We just hadn't anticipated them being used for more children afterwards.

Spendless

notanewuser wrote: »

Nobody knew (even them) that they were going to have 2nd children so soon after the first. I think a "is it okay of we keep the suchandsuch for number 2" would have been polite.

Where does that stop? I lent it for 1 child. What of they had 5 or 6 in quick succession? It's not that I don't want babies C and D to use the things, it was the ASSUMPTION that it was fine to keep the things that grates. And then the passing on to baby E with no mention whatsoever.

I took it from what you said in your first post, that baby siblings were on their way by the time the firstborns had finished with the items. Is that not the case?

notanewuser

Spendless wrote: »

I took it from what you said in your first post, that baby siblings were on their way by the time the firstborns had finished with the items. Is that not the case?

That is the case, yes. There's 18-19 months between the siblings.

FatVonD

You could also go completely the other way and tell E's parents (since they are the least well off) that they can keep it or sell it once they're done with it rather than return it (it doesn't sound like you'd fancy having it back now even if you did have another baby.) Would it actually be a weight off your mind not having to worry about what kind of state it's in if it's no longer yours?

If you really wanted to make a point of letting A + C's parents know you're not happy you could always say something about how it would be 5th hand by the time you got it back again, In the great scheme of things though, although it cost a lot new the resale value now is probably only about £20 or £30 pounds, would it make you feel better thinking of it in terms of a £30 toy instead of a £100 one? (I'm thinking it's one of those baby walker shaped things but minus the wheels with activity toys all round?)

jackyann

I am in a family that loaned things in a great merry-go-round. The deal was that we all got good use of something, but we all made sure we kept track of what was where.
I am guessing that you got nothing out of this deal as you were the first to buy stuff.
I agree that you should see the bigger picture, and I would think it a dreadful shame if you didn't continue to lend things. I would just try to be clear in the future.

notanewuser

FatVonD wrote: »

You could also go completely the other way and tell E's parents (since they are the least well off) that they can keep it or sell it once they're done with it rather than return it (it doesn't sound like you'd fancy having it back now even if you did have another baby.) Would it actually be a weight off your mind not having to worry about what kind of state it's in if it's no longer yours?

If you really wanted to make a point of letting A + C's parents know you're not happy you could always say something about how it would be 5th hand by the time you got it back again, In the great scheme of things though, although it cost a lot new the resale value now is probably only about £20 or £30 pounds, would it make you feel better thinking of it in terms of a £30 toy instead of a £100 one? (I'm thinking it's one of those baby walker shaped things but minus the wheels with activity toys all round?)

I think i paid about £70 for it in a glitch. DD was never sicky and never had explosive "episodes", and she was an early walker so she didn't use it for very long at all. It was immaculate when it was passed on. I thought one more baby wouldnt really devalue it as they sold second hand at the time for about £50. 4th hand its probably not worth much at all. I've already written it off in my head.

It's really not about the money though.

notanewuser

jackyann wrote: »

I am in a family that loaned things in a great merry-go-round. The deal was that we all got good use of something, but we all made sure we kept track of what was where.
I am guessing that you got nothing out of this deal as you were the first to buy stuff.
I agree that you should see the bigger picture, and I would think it a dreadful shame if you didn't continue to lend things. I would just try to be clear in the future.

I'm not loaning any more stuff. They've had loads and loads of stuff from us and saved a fortune by it, and then are too tight to buy our DD a birthday or Xmas present for 2 of her 3 years. Apart from E's parents (E's mum still on maternity) they all work full time on good salaries and don't pay a penny for childcare so they can afford their own stuff easily. I'm not prepared to have the !!!! taken out of us anymore. I'd rather donate it to somebody/a charity that really needs it.