Who should pay?

[Fudgewhizz]

Scenario: Sibling A lent Sibling B a car seat (a good one) to help them out when they had a baby, as money was tight. It was made clear that they would need it back when they had another child.

Sibling A had another child and asked for car seat back, giving several months' notice (obviously). Sibling B had been using seat for 18 months by this point. Covid hit, car seat couldn't be returned in person so needed to be couriered.

It took Sibling B another six months to get round to sending the seat, citing not having found a replacement seat / big enough box to send in / too expensive to send / too busy. Finally got round to sending it (had had it two years). In the meantime, Sibling A has been using car seat that is about to expire (apparently they have a shelf life, after which time the plastic degrades) and will soon be outgrown.

Car seat arrived filthy, with part of the harness worn away due to incorrect usage (twisted belt causing friction in the wrong place so badly fraying), and inadequately packed. Has clearly been chucked around by couriers - standard, and should have been packed better as this is to be expected. Had no padding round it and had obviously been rattling round in the box. Dirt and potentially harness could have been resolved (if harnesses available as a spare part), seat being thrown around cannot as there's no telling what unseen damage has been done (which is why they advise to replace seat if it's been in even a minor accident).

Sibling B is refusing to contribute at all to cost of new seat, citing money issues and that it's not their responsibility at all, and they've already spent money sending it back. Sibling A also has money issues and can't really afford to replace a seat that they were counting on using and would have been able to had it been packed properly (or if they'd not lent it in the first place - lesson learned there).

I mean, it's obvious which sibling I am, but who is right? Who should have paid for sending it back, and should sibling B offer to contribute to a new seat? Wear and tear and dirt fair enough, seat unusable I think not so much.

Why would OP expect her brother to spend at least £20 on the courier, purchase packaging (because how often do you order something with a box big enough to fit a carseat in), then give it a full valet and send it back.

Because he agreed when he accepted the loan that he would return it.

Sibling B is in the wrong. And I hate the 'rank' 'scrounging' 'disgusting' ''. Some people like to reuse items. Not just because it's massively financially beneficial, but, you know, stops us killing our planet.

I think you were quite petty to ask for it back considering it had to be sent by courier . It probably cost more to send it back by Courier than it was worth when you gave it to your sibling considering it was second-hand. Your sibling will have to do have to buy a new one anyway if they have another child. They probably feel quite pissed off and didn't feel like spending time cleaning it.

@Whatdoyoudowhendemocracyfails

Why would OP expect her brother to spend at least £20 on the courier, purchase packaging (because how often do you order something with a box big enough to fit a carseat in), then give it a full valet and send it back.

Because he agreed when he accepted the loan that he would return it.

OP says he agreed but he wouldn't have expected to need to use a courier. He's probably spent as much on that as the seat is worth.

@JellyBabiesFan

Well I am completely bemused by this thread. Apparently nowadays if you lend something out you cannot expect it back in a usable condition. Since when did people become incapable of looking after things? No wonder there is so much landfill.

You can't expect to use a car seat multiple times. Most people wouldn't lend it out in the first place.

@Pipandmum

Is this a solid gold car seat? For goodness sakes i would have just given it to my sister and bought a new one. You should be a bit more generous.

Maybe the sibling shouldn't have been so mean by not buying their own in the first place, they sound like the sort of people who will be forever sponging off the other sibling, hope she's learned her lesson.

@Belladonna12

I think you were quite petty to ask for it back considering it had to be sent by courier . It probably cost more to send it back by Courier than it was worth when you gave it to your sibling considering it was second-hand. Your sibling will have to do have to buy a new one anyway if they have another child. They probably feel quite pissed off and didn't feel like spending time cleaning it.

I don't understand why you would be pissed off at returning something, if someone lends you something to help you out, but with the express understanding that they'll need it back. Sibling A obviously wouldn't have asked for it back if they'd been told it's not usable and could have just taken the money used to send it.

I can Kind of see both sides of the argument on this one.

A is being unreasonable because
a) Car seats actually have a shelf life (I think 5 years?) Even if you are using them for siblings after which time they should be replaced.
b) Car seats should not be used second-hand even if you know the person it was used by. You can never be 100% sure it is safe to use. The car seat may have been in a very minor accident, which the users may not consider to be an accident but the car seat has already taken the impact
c) A car seat is likely to be used quite regularly, so it is unreasonable to expect it back in great condition after 4 years of use.

B may also be unreasonable because:
a) They should have cleaned it before giving it back to you (assuming it's just dirt, not stains)
b) They should have made sure it was reasonably packed
c) If it really is in unusable condition and not just normal wear and tear, they should have explained the situation before sending it and offered to contribute towards the cost of a new one as they knew you were expecting to use it again.

Leigh-on-Sea in Essex. Pretty fishing village with beach, cafes, pubs, cockle sheds...cobbled streets and very pretty. 40 mins on the train to London.

Oops I've posted on the wrong chat sorry!

I don't understand why you would be pissed off at returning something, if someone lends you something to help you out, but with the express understanding that they'll need it back.

I wouldn't see it as a favour in the first place if the owner said they would want it back. If you have more children you would have to buy a new one anyway. Plus, as in this case there is always a chance that it will get damaged and no good to give back anyway. I remember somebody asking me for something back that I thought they had given me. No doubt they would say they lent it too but I know I wouldn't have agreed that. I certainly didn't think they had done me a favour and I don't think the OP has done her sibling a favour so not surprised they don't want to buy a new one.

Sibling A obviously wouldn't have asked for it back if they'd been told it's not usable and could have just taken the money used to send it.

On the other hand, sibling B probably wouldn't have borrowed it if they had known they would have to pay to send it back and potentially buy a new one for their next baby as well being expected to contribute to a new car seat for sibling A. Regardless, presumably sibling B did think it was reusable. Perhaps it got damaged by the courier.

"I wouldn't see it as a favour in the first place if the owner said they would want it back. If you have more children you would have to buy a new one anyway."

So why didn't Op's sibling just buy their own in the first place?

See, @diddl, to me that’s part of it

I had people “offer” me things when I was having my first and it was clear those things came with emotional strings that I was expected to be grateful and doff my cap and undeserving poor because single parent and young.

That stuff was more emotional bother to me than it was worth and I wish I hadn’t been made to take it because it actually made me feel crap about myself.

I’m not saying the op has done this, but I can see how it might have come across that way to her brother.

@diddl

"I wouldn't see it as a favour in the first place if the owner said they would want it back. If you have more children you would have to buy a new one anyway."

So why didn't Op's sibling just buy their own in the first place?

I can only assume they didn't realise that OP would want it back. Why would they have taken it otherwise? Because OP has asked for it back, they have had to buy a car seat anyway so no money saved in that respect. In fact they have lost money because they also had to pay for a courier and now OP expects them to pay for her to have a new car seat. It's the kind of "favour" most people could do without.

How old is the child you need a seat far. They aren't much money. So I find it hard to believe if you're choosing to have another child you don't habe 50 to 100 pinds flex in your budget.

Sibling B at fault.soon as you asked for it he should have started looking around for another one or sent you the money.And it should have been returned in a clean stable condition.That is the decent thing to do.No excuses.

How old is the child you need a seat far. They aren't much money. So I find it hard to believe if you're choosing to have another child you don't habe 50 to 100 pinds flex in your budget

I agree.

A cheap car seat is about £40.

It seems very petty to make your brother send the one he borrowed back via courier (huge hassle, expense and risk of damage) then try and charge them for wear and tear they caused to it through use.

Car-seats are used so often they’re bound to get stained and dirty. Why lend an expensive one that you’d planned to use again anyway?

"I can only assume they didn't realise that OP would want it back."

According to Op they did.

It's the sort of thing I would only want to borrow for a limited time until I could get around to buying my own.

Obviously not all people think like that!

@Fudgewhizz I think Sibling A should have expected wear and tear (you’ve said you would) and sibling A should also have considered a scenario where Sibling B’s car would have been involved in an accident and therefore the car seat should not have been used again. In this scenario, would you have expected Sibling A to replace the seat, considering their financial situation? Was that discussed? You could liken this scenario to the couriers smashing it up: if the seat was returned broken due to an accident which wasn’t A’s fault? If the answer is yes, I imagine you would be OK paying if it was returned by courier and not their fault?

I think it is difficult as neither of you would have been expecting a pandemic which prevented B from returning the seat to A.

A should have foreseen wear and tear even after 18 months. You should have discussed who would pay for courier before it was sent. B shouldn't have kept hold of it for so long after A asked but it was never part of the expectation that there would be courier costs involved (for either of you). It is a bit unreasonable of B not to agree to contribute as they have had a car seat for free but A should have expected this to be a possibility when they lent it.

I think sibling B was unreasonable - a lent item should be returned in as good condition as possible.

However, it also seems unreasonable to me to request the return of a car seat that the sibling is still using (delay was partly due to having to find a replacement). Surely you don't demand something back if it's still needed?

OP, I get it.

You've bought something, which you've looked after, lent it to your brother, who has treated your items in the same way that you have.

Your brother is unreasonable for the way that he has treated your car seat, but I don't think you should have asked for it back after two years.

Personally, I don't think it's often helpful to borrow baby items as timing wise you may end up having to give back before you have finished using it and then then you may end up having to buy the same item for subsequent children anyway.

@HikeForward

It was £280 half of that is still £140 which is more expensive than a cheap seat

It was £280 NEW, but used car seats have very little re-sell value. Especially when used by 2 babies! It’s like prams, people spend £500 on a state of the art one, then try to sell it for £250 and wonder why nobody wants it.

The sibling and his wife didn’t ruin the seat, they used it and returned it by courier (at the sister’s insistence) and it was damaged in transit. Very unreasonable to charge them for that!

Where can I find a state of the art one for £500? Looks like they’re over £1k !