School lost DS' phone

[ICancelledTheCheque]

I could use some perspective on how to handle this please.

Background - blended family, DHs children live with us. They aren't keen on sleeping over at their mums but they do it once a week. We gave them both our old phones when our contracts were up so they could stay in touch with us. They're 10, in Y6.

That means that once a week they have to take their phones into school. School have a rule that they have to be handed in to the office in the morning and collected in the afternoon.

However SDS phone has gone missing and wasn't there to collect on Friday afternoon.

The school basically just require the kids to place them in a drawer and it's transpired that they don't supervise them collecting the phones at the end of the day so anyone could take anyone's phone.

I can't help but think that if the school want to impose a rule that the children can't look after their own property, they should take reasonable steps to look after the phones on behalf of the kids! I feel that they've been negligent in allowing it to be lost or stolen.

The phone is worth £120. Should the school pay for it or do we just accept it's one of those things and suck it up?

[SuburbanRhonda]

snork

Only one phone went missing.

[CorkieD]

The school should not have to replace the phone.

While I understand why your stepchild brought the phone to school, the school did not require that your stepchild bring a phone into school nor did it insist that it should be such an expensive phone. Yes, while the school has banned phones from the classroom, the school did allow phones be left in a drawer but this would be at own-risk.

If you ask the school to replace such an expensive phone, a likely response is the school not allowing your stepchildren bring their phones into school. Is this a risk worth taking? Replacing both phones with cheap versions is probably a best solution in this instance.

[SuburbanRhonda]

No, we don't need a reason.

Someone upthread asked why the issue of the value of the phone was being brought up. So that person clearly wanted a reason for why the value of the phone was being discussed, even if you didn't.

No-one is saying it's justification for stealing a phone, fgs. It's explaining why the most expensive phone was stolen rather than a cheaper one.

[SuburbanRhonda]

a likely response is the school not allowing your stepchildren bring their phones into school.

An even more likely response is for the school not to allow any child to bring in a phone and for calls home to be made from the school office - common practice in schools I've worked in.

[CotswoldStrife]

The £30 phone would be less attractive to the thief - if there is one. Wait and see what happens on Monday when/if the school asks pupils to check.

Our school also has a rule that phones must be handed in and collected at the end of the day (they are kept in the office though) because phones are not permitted in school. The fact that they also have to hand the phones in makes me think the school will not accept liability as they may have a similar rule about no phones in school, but it would be worth checking the school's website about this as the 'throw them into a drawer' does sound a bit slack tbh!

Hope it turns up on Monday or Tuesday!

[Olympiathequeen]

Definitely worth bringing up with the school for their take on it. If the general policy is not to bring in phones but leave them in a cupboard at your own risk you are pretty stuffed. To be honest I can't see a busy teacher signing in and signing out mobile phones. Not part of their job. Maybe if parents contributed to a small locker system with keys for each child they could agree that? No reason it should come out of the school budget as phones shouldn't be used in school hours anyway.

[Meadows76]

No-one is saying it's justification for stealing a phone, fgs. It's explaining why the most expensive phone was stolen rather than a cheaper one. Ah, but of course, we all know that someone will steal a more expensive item over a cheap one, we didn't need anyone to explain that. The query of why the cost was being brought up relates to the fact that it's fuck all to do with anyone how much the phone cost. If the school insists on taking possession of them then they should be looking after them. It's trying to put blame onto the OP for making her SDC phone more attractive to a thief. That's not on.

[TheSnorkMaidenReturns]

SuburbanRhonda
Only one phone went missing.

Sorry for the inaccuracy but it is still theft!

[Kennington]

It isn't the schools responsibility to look after phones.
If it makes you feel any better the batteries on an iPhone are pretty rubbish after a couple of years as need frequent charging so the phone won't be worth as much as 120 quid.

[Meadows76]

It isn't the schools responsibility to look after phones.. I agree with this, and that would be fine, but then school should not ask for them to be taken into school possession. No responsibility should mean just that, the school have nothing to do tpwith it.

[SuburbanRhonda]

It's trying to put blame onto the OP for making her SDC phone more attractive to a thief. That's not on.

No blaming going on here. Just explanation. And the cost is obviously significant to the OP - no-one would have known the cost of the phone if she hadn't mentioned it.

And as yet, we don't know whether there's a thief at all. So the advice about talking to the school seems the best way forward in the absence of any evidence about what happened to the phone.

[Trifleorbust]

Meadows: but that is the same as allowing phones on site. The school has to take the phone off the child because phones aren't allowed.

[SaucyJack]

YANBU.

I think if the school has taken it upon themselves to have possession of the phone, then they need to be liable for looking after said phone when it's in their office.

[SuburbanRhonda]

school should not ask for them to be taken into school possession. No responsibility should mean just that, the school have nothing to do tpwith it.

I think schools have no choice when primary school children bring phones into school that they are not supposed to have. They cannot have them with them during the day because of the disruption it would cause and if they put them in their bag and they disappeared, I'm sure people would still think the school should cough up for them.

What would your solution be, meadows?

[MsColouring]

Primary schools have no obligation to keep phones safe for children. Children shouldn't bring anything valuable into school.

I get your reasons for giving them phones (blended family here too) but schools have enough going on without dealing with this. For this reason, I drop dd's phone round to her dad's (which he hates, but he will just have to get over it).

[Trifleorbust]

Saucy: That makes no sense IF their policy is no phones at all. The only alternative to the school 'taking it upon themselves to have possession of the phone' would be to say the child with the phone has to be isolated until a parent can collect either it or them.

[redskytonight]

Has the phone definitely gone from the office? And not, for example, simply been lost by the DC (or given/taken by another child).

[GuttedDotCom]

A 10 year old doesn't need a phone that's worth £120.

You should have gone to Asda/Tesco and bought a basic £9 one. Walking around with an expensive phone makes them a target for thieves, as you have now found out.

[sashh]

It would have been pretty pointless spending money on two cheap phones just for the sake of it.

Except that a cheap phone is less likely to be stolen.

[cansu]

I think the school would probably argue that they have no way of knowing whose phone is whose. They will not want to free up a member of staff to deal with this issue at the end of the day. They undoubtedly don't want the responsibility of looking after these phones. They have access to a phone via the office in school time. They have access to a phone at their mums house. I would say lesson learnt. Buy a v cheap brick if you must but I think that you have no chance of getting the school to pay.

[cansu]

The reason for having phones in office is due to kids taking photos of others without permission. Undoubtedly parents would complain if kids were taking inappropriate photos and sharing them on social media therefore phones are not allowed in school. In my own school kids are allowed to have them switched off and locked in their lockers. However this is for older children. I really don't think they have any place in a primary school.

[CorkieD]

If it were my future DC I would be telling the school that my DC would be looking after their own phones, and if they had an issue with that then they better replace the phone they lost, and improve their system.

Really?

If the school has a policy of no phones in the class rooms for child safety reasons, it is likely the school would suggest that you either follow the school policies or enrol your children elsewhere.

[DelphiniumBlue]

For those of you saying the school should replace the phone, could you bear in mind that school budgets are really constrained. 120 pounds is the equivalent cost of a set of class reading books. If we were to pay out for someone's phone, that's 30 kids without a class book for half a term. Schools already struggle with basic staffing costs, there really is very little give in the budgets. Staff don't get reimbursed for lost/ stolen phones.
If children really need to bring them into school , the school cannot accept responsibility.

[viques]

Fighting talk Garden geek!
whatever the phone technology situation when your yet to be born children are old enough to need phones in school I think it is fair to predict that with that attitude you will be 'that parent' before the ink is dry on the book bags.