child spending money on playstation.

powerful_Rogue

Hintza wrote: »

The child is 8 not 10.

If you reckon the child knows what they were doing then you need to campaign for a change in the age for criminal responsibility in England where I assume this took place.

Until that time you can not argue that the child knew exactly what he was doing because legally he didn't.

(I can't actually believe I'm on this side of the argument but stranger things happen....lol)

Why are you bringing criminal responsibility into this. I know the age of criminal responsibility is 10 - however that has nothing to do with this discussion and certainly dosent mean that a child can do no wrong - it just means they cannot be arrested or charged with a crime.

The child knew what he was doing. If he's capable of navigating the Playstation store and deciding what he wanted, he's capable of reading that it cost money.

unholyangel

At 8 years old, I certainly knew what "buy" meant. However in fairness, in game currencies didnt exist then (well not unless you count the rings in sonic!).

However I dont think we've got enough to decide who (legally or morally) should be paying for it.

If son was playing on his own account and BIL put his card details onto an 8 year olds account then that was very silly indeed. If BIL had his details on his own account and doesnt have young kids of his own, then I think its quite understandable as to why he wouldnt password protect it.

More info needed about the circumstances surrounding the purchases imo. As above, who did the account belong to, did he have permission to be playing on it unsupervised?

ThumbRemote

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

The child knew what he was doing. If he's capable of navigating the Playstation store and deciding what he wanted, he's capable of reading that it cost money.

You keep making this assertion that the child knew what they were doing.


Not all 8-year-old children understand the value of money.

An 8-year-old who hasn't seen purchases on a Playstation before is unlikely to realise it's even possible to spend real money using one.

Not all 8-year-old children understand the concept of credit cards and 'virtual' money, they tend to only see physical coins and notes as money.

If the screen shot you put up is accurate, an 8-year-old may not realise dollars are money.

An 8-year-old is unlikely to read every item on a screen before pressing buttons.

VictorCharlie

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

The child knew what he was doing. If he's capable of navigating the Playstation store and deciding what he wanted, he's capable of reading that it cost money.

You don't know this child, so stop making ridiculous statements.

rustyboy21

This is the problem of leaving children to their own devices and buying something for them, simply to shut them up.


If you cannot spend time with your child and watch what they are doing and show them what is right and wrong then you shouldn't have them in the first place. If we did anything wrong, we would get a clout around the earhole first and asked questions later !


BIL could have simply offered to buy nephew a few games as a gift, not knowing that the little fraudster would steal off him later. IMO parents should foot the bill, whether BIL was stupid or not.

halibut2209

"fraudster"????

This is getting ridiculous now!

powerful_Rogue

ThumbRemote wrote: »

You keep making this assertion that the child knew what they were doing.


Not all 8-year-old children understand the value of money.

An 8-year-old who hasn't seen purchases on a Playstation before is unlikely to realise it's even possible to spend real money using one.

Not all 8-year-old children understand the concept of credit cards and 'virtual' money, they tend to only see physical coins and notes as money.

If the screen shot you put up is accurate, an 8-year-old may not realise dollars are money.

An 8-year-old is unlikely to read every item on a screen before pressing buttons.

VictorCharlie wrote: »

You don't know this child, so stop making ridiculous statements.

Neither the two of you know this child either. So why does it make it ok for you both to assume he didnt understand what he was doing, but not for me to think the opposite?

adouglasmhor

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Neither the two of you know this child either. So why does it make it ok for you both to assume he didnt understand what he was doing, but not for me to think the opposite?

You wil notice ThumbRemote's statements are open. with phrases like "not all" and VC's is a comment on your black and white judgemental venom. So your above question is void.

powerful_Rogue

adouglasmhor wrote: »

You wil notice ThumbRemote's statements are open. with phrases like "not all" and VC's is a comment on your black and white judgemental venom. So your above question is void.

Venom? Wow, someones being over dramatic!

I gave my opinion by which I stand.

adouglasmhor

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Venom? Wow, someones being over dramatic!

I gave my opinion by which I stand.

You can stop being over dramatic any time you like, no one is stopping you.

Opinions are not the same as facts, you gave it others challenged you on it and refuted your stand.