What do you think is the right thing to happen?????

[RTKangaMummy]

On BBC1 WATCHDOG Programme on Tuesday

{repeated in the early morning tonight, Thursday @ 2AM}

A man with Downs syndrome went to a shop to buy a ring for his girlfriend.

It was a very overpriced ring that was actually found to be misadvertised ie not correct size of diamond

Anyway my question is:

1. He had his own bank account he went to get the money himself from the bank.

2. The jeweller said because he had his own money he didn't see any reason why he couldnt buy the ring.

3. His brother {I think it was} said the man had learning difficulties and didnt understand the difference between £1 and £100.

Now the thing is do you think that if he was an adult with his own bank acccount

4. Do you think it is the shops responsibilty to question whether he should be able to or have the ability to understand that he was spending £700 on a diamond ring?

Obviously the ring was a con anyway and was misadvertised

but was wondering what people thought about adults and teenagers with special needs being able to spend their own money.

Part of me thinks it would be insulting for a shop to question whether my DS was to be allowed to spend his money on what he wanted

but whose responsibility is it?

What do you think?

I guess if the person in question is an adult and has their own bank account, they ought to be responsible for it.

It makes me wonder, though, if the guy didn't understand the difference between £1 and £100, how he got a bank account.

Not the shop's responsibility.

if he is old enoug hto have a girlfriend, his owjn bank account adn wants to buy something then he should.

its not the shops responsibility to question whether a customer has enough knowledge to purchase something. If family members/carers feel they cant make a decision on their own then they should be on hand to advise the teenager/adult with SN.

open that is what I thought too

His carer, brother I think it was, said that he didnt have any concept of money

Why let him have bank account then?

agree, definitely not the shop's responsibility - to have questioned him would have been outrageous

the brother said something like

he should get a refund because should have been sold it in first place

Which is true because it was misadvertised and overpriced

The shop did give a full refund btw.

he got a refund becuase it was mis-sold, i dont think he should've gotn a refund if the ring wasnt over priced and mis-sold.

well I think he should be able to spend his own money but i do understand that his family are aggreived because it was mis-sold.

FWIW my friends son has DS(22) cant be left alone so wouldnt understand the price of a ring and she would be mad too, so i can see all sides. And of course DS is a spectrum of learning disabilities so the shop wouldnt know if he understood or not iykwim

I don't think a shop should have the responsibility to question people. Lots of people are rubbish with money and get ripped off. You can't make it a shops responsibility to do that, they would all go out of business.

I think its nice for all people to have their own money. Lucky him to have 700quid for a ring and someone to give it to.

Any item is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it.

I believe the law states in latin but it means
'let the buyer beware'

surely he needs a bank account to store his money as we all do... think that is a strange question to ask. How did he get a bank account - the same way any of us got a bank account. Why should he be denied a bank account if he is not able to tell the difference between one pound or one hundred pounds.

If he wants to spend his money on things like that then it is his choice. If it was misrepresented or mis-sold by the store then he is entitled to his money back.

Never know if the store saw a potential rip off for their benefit iykwim.

Agree with misdee. If the carer etc were concerned then they should have advised the young man.

I think that adults with SN who are in receipt of benefits or DLA have to have their own bank account to receive them into. This is the case with a friend's son who has severe learning difficulties - they opened up an account for him (which was in itself complicated as the son cannot write or sign his name) and amounts go in and out by Direct Debit.

eidsvold - if he doesn't have any concept of money, what's to stop him getting in debt? And if you follow that line of thought to its ultimate (possible) conclusion, going to prison for something effectively out of his control. That's obviously unfair and that's why I asked how did he get a bank account.

I don't think you the shopkeeper should have to take responsibility for his customers like this. If you turn the situation around, what would the headlines have been? "Shop refuses to serve man because he has DS". There would have been uproar with accusations of discrimination against people with disabilities.

I think the over-pricing/mis-selling issue is entirely separate tbh. The man has the same consumer rights as anyone else. In this case these were exercised and he got his money back.

yes CT that is what I said to DH about the uproar that would happen if he was not allowed to spend the money

I am sorry I should not have clouded it with the over pricing and misadvertised aspect.

A very good point about debt.

So really it is his brother that should have had the control of the account is it?

I dont know the answer

I suppose one option could be to limit the amount of money that can be withdrawn from the account in a single day. I think it's important that he retains his independence wherever possible so maybe this would be a compromise of sorts? A bit like when I was at university and students could only take out a certain amount of money each day/week unless they'd specified otherwise.

I suppose one option could be to limit the amount of money that can be withdrawn from the account in a single day. I think it's important that he retains his independence wherever possible so maybe this would be a compromise of sorts? A bit like when I was at university and students could only take out a certain amount of money each day/week unless they'd specified otherwise.

CT that is good idea