Boy breaks grandmother's arm by accident

[Nimbostratus100]

I am not going to say what happened next and what I think until I have heard a few objective opinions on here

The facts of the case

12 year old boy in sports club, leaving the main entrance on his skateboard, which he has been told is not allowed in the building, knocks over the grandmother coming to collect another child. The grandmother has a broken arm and needed an operation

This is a fairly elite sports club, you need to be able to play to a certain standard to by allowed to join. This boy has played there for a year. No serious trouble, several minor reprimands. Reasonably good player. Turns up for the team probably 80-90% of the time.

This happened last weekend. The sports club is meeting tomorrow. The parents have just heard that this boy has/has not been expelled and will/will not be there.

What do you think should happen? why?

I am allocating the voting by a toss of a coin to be random!

YABU - the boy should be expelled
YANBU - the boy should not be expelled

also, what else should happen, as well as/ instead of being expelled?

Thank you

@Nimbostratus100
Glad he and the grandson were both there yesterday.

I just hope the boycotters kids never do anything to let them down. The words of a wise woman 'never criticise anyone else's kids, because you never know what your own will do'

I wouldn't class a person being in hospital having an operation on a broken bone, as 'nothing '.

If my mother landed in hospital due to the careless, dangerous actions of a 12 year old who refused to listen to people in charge, I certainly wouldn't be going down the 'Ah well, boys will be boys' route.

Nobody is saying that the broken bone is 'nothing' but his crime is skateboarding where he should not have been.

That doesn't change, regardless of the outcome, and the punishment has to fit the crime. His crime is no different, if he hadn't hit anyone, if he or other person managed to avoid the collision, or he knocked her over only causing a bruise.

The ‘and rightly so’ rather implies that there is debate over whether or not the boy should be punished, which there isn’t.

No - I was simply stating that he had been rightly punished for ignoring the safety warning and going on to injure someone as a result. Nuance is always a problem with written posts and I have misunderstood a couple of posters and apologised to them. You on the other hand, seem to have scrutinised my previous posts looking to criticise, and have misinterpreted my replies to other posters. The difference is that you have resorted to insults like ‘hard of thinking’ and ‘hypocrisy’, and at one point accuse me of harassment of a child because I don’t agree with the suggestion that the protestors are a ‘baying mob’ and should have their memberships cancelled. If, as seems to be the case, the boy has had a fair hearing and a suitable punishment, then surely the club can at least take the time to explain that to any parents who still have concerns. I have a much right as anyone else to express my opinion on a public forum without having my posts trolled.

I think that if the injured woman needed an operation then it isn't a simple break. Whilst it was an accident it was avoidable. OP has said that skate boards aren't allowed in the club so in that case it should have been taken from the boy. So I think the club possibly has a responsibility. What is a good thing is that the boy has obviously realised the seriousness of his actions by being hesitant of going back. He's also learnt that some people are critical of the club's ruling so he's caused controversy and hopefully he will repay the club by being a hard working team member.

I have been concerned by the posters who minimise the effect on the injured woman as no-one visiting the club would expect to br knocked over by a skateboard, could have been a young child or a parent carrying a child

Yes the outcome could have been worse banged her head or been carrying a baby but it could also have been a lot less, not hit anyone, stopping in time, her stepping out the way, came away with a slight bruise. Or it could have been him who was hurt.

He appears to have lost his skateboard which I think kind of fits. But I'm hoping that someone eventually relents and gives it back especially if that's how he normally gets back and forward

You wouldn't have your car confiscated for speeding or an accident resulting in a broken arm

But the question is what you could do about it. Which is pretty much nothing. The club is not liable. The parents are not liable. The police won’t get involved as it’s a civil case where no laws have been broken.

You would have to scrape together the money to pay a lawyer to sue privately, the judge would have to agree that the 12yo could have been expected to anticipate the accident and was neglectful, and the punishment would be extremely minor. You wouldn’t get any compensation because the 12yo has no money. And it would cost you a fortune in legal fees.

If it was my child I wouldn’t make him apologise either, or send flowers, or have any contact at all, because that’s admitting liability. If the injured party did decide to sue the apology would be used as evidence to prove it was the 12yo’s fault. Frankly the injured party needs to claim on her own insurance.

You wouldn't have your car confiscated for speeding or an accident resulting in a broken arm

But you might lose your license. Which pretty much amounts to the same thing.

If it was my child I wouldn’t make him apologise either, or send flowers, or have any contact at all, because that’s admitting liability.

But if, as you say, the child won't be paying compensation, then why on earth would you not, at the very least, make him apologise?

The club is not liable.

The club is liable

They have public liability insurance for this reason. The lady was not safe on the property - where the accident happened. She could ask for their liability policy details and claim. No solicitor needed.

Here exampl

You wouldn't have your car confiscated for speeding or an accident resulting in a broken arm

If you were found guilty of causing injury by careless or dangerous driving you’d be banned from driving it though. Amounts to the same thing.

Problem is, as has already been pointed out, public liability insurance is not compulsory and the club could argue that they are not liable because they had already warned him about using the skateboard inside the building.

The fact that something is foreseeable as a possibility does not make it intentional. When I type it is definitely foreseeable that I will make mistakes, it does not mean I intend to do so.

Why do people keep making up the facts? He has not persistently had to be disciplined in the past, he's had minor reprimands for disagreeing with the referee, which (as pointed out) virtually is something that virtually all teenage boys and a hefty proportion of adults do. He has never previously had to be disciplined for misbehaviour off the field. A one-off incident for which he has already been sanctioned doesn't make him a danger to other people.

Is a group of people banding together to protest always right? Have a look at this if that is what you believe.

But obviously the club has a choice not to expel him, because they had chosen not to do so before OP first posted this thread.

Or he may not. Because you are making up the facts. It's reasonable to assume the club knows what level of upset he may or not be causing.

“As a result of your work”. This accident was not a result of the club’s work. It was outside of the normal activities of the club, and while it happened on their (rented?) premises, they did not cause it and had taken reasonable steps to prevent it. They aren’t liable and their insurance won’t pay out.

Because the injured party could still decide to sue and pursue a legal punishment, which is undesirable. I wouldn’t want my child to have a criminal record or be on probation or whatever. So my child wouldn’t admit any liability which includes apologising.

They are liable - they knew the boy used his skate board in the premises - they have admitted this by telling him not to use the board. They knew it was a possibility that a 12 year old wouldn’t adhere to the rules. See how many posters belive he’s impulsive and argues with the red! Did they watch him? Did they issue a warning about him doing so and the consequences if he didn’t? Is it part of their club rules?
Have they taken all steps to prevent injury to visitors?

They haven’t.

Some people obviously don’t know how insurance works. You don’t have to prevent accidents on your premises. You just have to take reasonable steps to prevent accidents. Which they did, by making a rule about no skateboards and disciplining him previously when he broke the rule. They aren’t responsible if someone breaks a rule - the rule breaker is.

Mmm, that's not how it works - luckily. If insurance worked like this, the best way of avoiding a claim against you would be never to take any precautions or issue any warnings.

You seem to think that the fact that the club took steps to prevent an accident is somehow evidence of their liability. Quite the opposite - it's their best defence against a claim, if the claim depends on negligence on their part.

Has anyone said th3e 12 year old should not be held accountable? It's simply logical that, in deciding on a sanction, you take into account both the consequences of his action AND his age. Which is what the club seems, sensibly, to have done. They don't need to be second guessed.

Being responsible for safety on the premises does not make the owner of the premises automatically liable for everything that takes place there It is still necessary to prove an element of negligence or fault on their part.

And the boy hasn't been expelled.