Would you pay for this?

[Lockerlocker]

Received a phone call from DS16s school last week to say him and another child had been involved in an incident where they had both kicked a locker, they have viewed the CCTV to confirm it was them. He explained DS would be excluded and we would be billed for the locker as they had damaged it. As there was two boys involved they bill would be halved. Fair enough. Makes sense we are billed for the locker.

Friday, I receive an email followed by the letter in the post yesterday to say that the single locker can’t be replaced so we have to pay for the column of lockers, adding that the lockers are on show in the corridor and it ruins the atheistic and the locker is now not functional. So I’m still sort of in agreement. The cost of the four lockers is £156.06 so our bill is £79.03.

Then I open the photo they have sent me (picture 1), the bottom locker is already clearly without a door (there is no suggestion that my DS was involved in this). I show my DS the photo, he states that it doesn’t look like the picture at all and that the girl is still using the locker. He said several of lockers have dents in and they have not been replaced. He has then sent me photos of the block showing the dinted lockers and the locker now.

I think I should only be charged for the broken locker and at a push 3 out of 4 lockers.

Not to drip feed, not sure it’s relevant, it’s an alternate provision. DS has an ASD & ADHD diagnosis. However I don’t believe he was having a melt down at the time of the incident.

Yes exactly this

Georgeskitchen · Today 12:33
Just pay for the damaged door. School tried to make me pay for a full wall to replastered when my son hit the wall with his hand and a small piece of plaster roughly 3"×3" fell off the wall. I told them very clearly and concisely where to shove it

They didn't bother me again 😉“

That apple didn’t fall far from the tree.

I think he needs a harsh lesson about actions and consequences. Don't be wading in with them or fair nonsense, he's wilfully vandalised something, he needs to stop this behaviour and be chastised appropriately - making excuses for him just breeds criminals with their parents making excuses for them

Yes he absolutely will be, but I’m not sure he should also be paying for the one that already had no door. If the looks of the lockers are so important, why were they not replaced when that one was broken?

Why didn’t they replace the lockers when the bottom one had no door?

You need to pay it

A third is a good shout actually.

I wonder why whoever broke the bottom locker (and dented/graffitied the other lockers) wasn't made to pay for a column of lockers.

I was thinking a third would be fair the whole way through reading this. Your DS clearly needs to pay (more as a deterrent for future than anything else) but it needs to be fair and reasonable. Since he didn't cause all the damage but all the damage is being rectified, it's more appropriate for him to pay a reduced bill.

Pay up.

The school was due for demolition so in my view the apple fell in a perfect location 🤣

Ffs pay it I can't believe people arguing about 'betterment ' and discounts are for real. Vandalism has consequences and £79 is cheap for what's he's done.

Your ds still kicked the door so even if they had replaced it you would need to pay the same amount of money to replace it anyway due to the deliberate damage your son caused,

the bottom one may have been damaged accidentally, your sons damage was deliberate .

Your ds still kicked the door so even if they had replaced it you would need to pay the same amount of money to replace it anyway due to the deliberate damage your son caused

This is a good point.

Ffs pay it I can't believe people arguing about 'betterment ' and discounts are for real.

Because the law states that for the claimant to claim for the whole cost and end up in a better position would equate to unjust enrichment. FFS yourself.

Maybe the school didn’t know who broke the door, and didn’t have the money to replace it. Or it was accidentally broken?

@EVHead that wouldn't give the claimant the right to get a third party who'd caused later, separate damage to also cover the cost of the previous damage. That would be unequitable.

Have any of you actually read the post?

op was going to pay, until she realised there was previous damage. Personally they could remove the locker door as they have done for the bottom one

i would contact the school, and tell them there was obviously previous damage and you are not paying for that, and offer £50

It’s possible that the school had enough lockers for students without the original broken one but not now and/or two they consider one broken locker out of 4 not worth replacing, but it is worth replacing the column when 2 or more are broken.

I do think it’s slightly irrelevant though, the school is entitled to compensation for their damaged property (whether it’s a third or half). I think your time would be better spent dealing with your son who thinks it’s acceptable to kick in girls’ lockers. I would be more concerned over what that is about.

If this went to court you’d be in the right since they’re looking for betterment, I’d be offering 1/3 in your shoes.

Pay up and stop embarrassing yourself, has your son's vandalism not embarrassed you enough?

I am absolutely with you OP. Not a chance in hell I'd be paying and I don't know any other school that makes parents pay for damage done whether by accident or on purpose. Are they not insured?!

No wonder so many boys grow up into men with no respect for other people or their possessions. And thinking that violence has no consequences.

we are really are doomed.

Please please don’t compound the embarrassment by quibbling op! If you can afford to pay it, just pay it.

Absolutely mortified for you.