Who should pay?

[PookieDo]

Group of teenagers (under 18) decide to go to a gig. Gig is age appropriate

Teens A B C and D have part time jobs and transfer money to A for their tickets, then A pays. their own money, not from parents.

Teen E wants to join in, but doesn’t have the money upfront. A pays for it and E says they have a new job and will pay A back when gets paid. E has not paid A back yet

Teens then collectively decide to go to another upcoming event and teen C’s mum agrees to collect the money from them all and book it. Teen E’s parent decides they would like to pay for E for a Christmas present then becomes aware that E has not paid for the other ticket yet, and discloses that E does not have a job yet so can’t pay for event 1.

C’s mum is in a dilemma over whether to accept the money for E for event 2 knowing event 1 has not been paid for by E back to A.

A’s mum feels awkward knowing E has not paid their child back and that C is in a dilemma.

E’s mum is not offering to pay for both events.

What should A, C and E parents do? Or should the teens just sort this out between them?

IMO, the debt between A and E has nothing to do with the event that C's mum is collecting money for. It's not C's mum's responsibility to see that E pays his debts. That's E's mum's job.

It's up to the attendees to decide if they want E to accompany them to the 2nd event knowing that he/she still owes A money for the 1st. C's mum should tell the teens to decide about E attending before she collects the money from E's mum for the 2nd event.

I agree with Drum though, if I were the teens involved I'd be selling the ticket.

Then E can go to whichever ticket has been paid for - loses out on the other, have them sell it on ticket stub

Ah, well if neither event has happened yet, then yes, sell E's ticket for event 1 to someone else. If E or his mum can pay for event 2 in advance like everyone else, E can go. If not, they can't.

And new rule: no one is definitely going to any event until they've paid for their ticket.

All kids are good friends and have felt bad for E about missing out, but now this is more about the lie about the job than the money it seems. All teens are angry with E

Parent A and E don’t know each other much at all. Parent A and C know each other.

Parent C has offered to sub A for the money until E pays back which A does not want to accept. E has also asked C to pay for ticket 2 and pay back at a later date. E knew about ticket 1 but not how much it cost

A has suggested E pay back in small instalments but agrees that they will sell the ticket if this doesn’t happen

I'd treat the two events as separate.
First event - teen A says to E 'you have until X date to pay otherwise I'm selling your ticket'
Second event C's Mum says anyone who wants to go to this event has to give me the money by X date when I willpurchase the tickets. No tickets without money upfront.
I would also tell E's mother that he owes money for the first ticket (although maybe she knows ans doesn't care)

A needs to tell E to pay up or they will sell the ticket.
Mum C buys tickets only if cash paid.
No one buys tickets unless all have paid.

E is being really obnoxious and cheeky. This would stop me doing anything for them again. Definitely sell the first ticket and if E's mum provides cash upfront then by all means get a ticket when booking the rest but only once first ticket is sold, A has money back and E's mum pays up front. E's mum has a terrible cheek asking someone else to buy another ticket though, knowing her child has just lied to a friend to cheat them out of £80.

E's parents should pay A back, and give E a stern talking to about why he now can't go to C's event too. C's parent is now in a very awkward position.

Kind of. But It’s not for C to refuse funds More that it’s down to E’s parents to refuse to pay C (by telling E) until A is paid back.

How long has the money been outstanding for? I think E needs to be given a deadline.
C shouldn’t pay for the ticket up front knowing a debt it outstanding.
E needs to learn that sometimes you miss out on stuff if you can’t afford it and lie about being able to afford it.

Curious to know why Es parent hasn’t sorted this out and is considering paying for a ticket when she knows her daughter is in debt

E's parents should divert the funds to the original event costs and then leave E to pay for the second event if she can if not she doesn't go

The two events are nothing to do with each other. It's between E and A to sort out the money E owes A, nobody else needs to think about it. (Possibly E's mum should suggest she'll give him money towards the debt instead of him going to the second event, but that's for the two of them to decide, and it's ultimately up to E to decide, and deal with the consequences.)

C mum can accept the money and book. Though it may be worth confirming that everyone is happy for E to be invited, given he's been a very naughty boy.

Sell E ticket and if parents want to pay for the other gig then they can

Having said that, if I were E's parent I'd insist on the money going to pay back his debt.

If I was C's mother, I would tell E's mother that E can only join the outing if A is paid back immediately and if E pays C for the second event in advance of the ticket purchase. E's mother is clearly as bad as E, has no moral scruples and can't be trusted to pay up after the event.

Morally, I think that E should settle the debt with A first but with event 2's ticket price being half the cost, I can see why that might be difficult if they simply can't afford it.

I think it's probably a valuable lesson in getting the money upfront before buying anything. A parent should probably help with getting the extra ticket sold so at least A isn't out of pocket to the full cost.

I would also treat the two things as different things. C's event has nothing to do with A's

I would get A to tell E they have till x date and then if they still don't have the money, they will sell the ticket to recoup the costs, but expect E to pay back any out of pocket expenses, so if the ticket cost £80 and A can only get £60 E has to give them £20

C should get the money for the gig that they are arranging from e’s mum.
The transaction between a&e for the first gig is nothing to do with c so they shouldn’t be out of pocket for making sure they get the money in a timely fashion.
A should have done the same

Also this might be a good time for them to introduce a cash upfront before booking anything before e turns into a young cf

E is a right cf isnt he getting a ticket before he has paid for another

C has to refuse because he hasnt paid A back

Unfortunately an under 18 cannot be held responsible for a debt and their parents didn't agree to it. So the two events have to be kept separately.

They should pay upfront for event B and be allowed to pay in installments for event A. It can be counted as a Birthday/Easter etc present or perhaps they could ask relatives to contribute instead of Christmas presents for the teen.

It's a lesson learned, for all of them.

Thanks for all of the opinions, it’s been helpful

Totally agree re the cash up front and I think this is a lesson learned I just hope that it doesn’t cause too much of a falling out

Essentially E owes the money to A and it is nothing to do with anyone else.

However, if I was E's parent, I would make the decision not to buy the ticket for the 2nd gig as a Christmas present for E.
Instead I would, subject to being able to afford it, pay A the £80 owed for the first ticket and I would tell E that their Christmas present was going to be £45 so, when they start work they owe me £35.

I'd tell E that if they don't have the money to pay for the 2nd gig that they can't go and should let C know that.

Sell E's ticket to event one, give A the money back from that. E's mother can pay for event 2.

E misses event one but that's his/her tough shit. Shouldn't have expected someone else to pay.

If she can't afford both then she hands the money over to A (or whoever he owes it to) and tells her brat that that's his Christmas present. If E wants to go to anymore concerts he goes and buys his own ticket with his own money.

The mother shouldn't do any business with him.

Parents of child E should stump up.

It is clear that parents of child E and child E are both CF. But since they are family then the CF attitude of their child isn't surprising.

It is appalling that they think it is ok for that child A should be bankrolling their child.

Child BC&D should stick up for A tell E that they aren't welcome to come to 2nd event until A is paid for the 1st event.

Parents of BC&D should encourage their children to do this.