Guy Gets Mad When Friend Refuses To Buy Him A New Phone After Her Toddler Destroys His, Sparks A Debate Between Parents Online
Falls, cuts, and burns are some of the most common kid injuries out there. So parents have to be really careful when they take their little ones to an environment with steep edges, hot surfaces, and sharp objects.
I know, at first, it sounds like I’m describing a battlefield but even someone’s backyard can become a front line in this regard.
Consider a BBQ party. A pool filled with water, a flaming hot grill, and countless knives make it pretty hostile for someone who eats dirt and has the motor skills of a stick.
Recently, however, one mother left her toddler alone in these exact conditions. Luckily, the one-year-old didn’t hurt herself. But the girl did destroy everything in her path. Including one of the guest’s phones. After the guy saw his ruined device, he approached the mom and asked her to buy him a new one. But she refused.
Not sure what to make of the situation, he asked the subreddit “Am I the [Jerk]” whether or not his request was reasonable.
Image credits: Bob_Dmyt
Some people said the guy shouldn’t have left his phone unattended
While others think the mom is responsible for the damage
101Kviews
Share on FacebookNTA. The kid obviously wasn't on the table when he left, and she shouldn't be free to roam around like that anyway. If it was just spilled juice, then I might change my answer. But for a 1 year old to climb onto a table, spill juice and then smash the phone onto the floor? The mother owes you a new phone.
First of all, don't bring your kid to a party intended for adults. Secondly, if your kid destroys someone's property, you are responsible to compensate.
Why all the blaming the victim here? For all of you saying he should have had it in his pocket....I'm pretty sure we have all left our phone on a table while at a POOL party. This is 100% on the mother and she should replace the phone. I agree she doesn't need to upgrade it but I'm pretty sure OP wasn't after an upgrade, just a new to him replacement or equal monitory value. I get that mom is SUPER young but that is not a "get out of jail free" card when it comes to the destruction that child causes. She chose to have a kid. She is responsible for that child...its well-being AND whatever it manages to destroy in the wake of terror that small children are bound to create because that's their natural default setting.
Yeah this is the same kind of victim-blaming that we see from a range of other subjects. Yes, there are a number of things that he could have done to better protect his phone, and hopefully others learn from this BUT we are still talking about protecting it from someone who was destructively negligent, and that's the person who needs to pay for the damage. If Person A leaves their $400 on the table unattended and Person B comes by and steals it, then is caught. How much should Person B have to pay back? Would we say only $200 because Person A should have taken better care to avoid being robbed? No chance.
Load More Replies...Things can happen with toddlers even when they are closely supervised and of course I am responsible as a parent. That's why I have insurance that explicitly covers my small child.
Not his kid. Not his problem. The stupid bint left a one year old unattended in a yard with a pool. She's lucky that poor little spud is still alive. If she keeps going the way she is, that won't be a problem any more.
Load More Replies...NTA. Not the slightest. I'm actually fed up with people not taking the responsibility for their kids ... it's not that I wouldn't understand that they may cause some damage now and then, fine ... children are so, what would'ya do, ... but their parents have to cover the cost they cause. End of - no disussion or any needed. The same parents who refuse to take responsibility, often, are those who boast about their children, and how great and smart they are, and often, they're just not. But, dare one word... No, don't - wanna survive, huh...?
NTA. Yes you deserve your phone to be replaced, but the way the law works is it’ll be replaced at the current value it was at when it broke. You don’t get a brand new phone, you get one equal to yours prior to it breaking. I’d ask her to get you one off Craig’s list or marketplace. You can usually find them reasonably priced. Otherwise if you take her to small claims you’ll only be rewarded the price of the value and that’s up to the judge to decide what that is.
What, for real, some people think it is the posters fault for leaving their phone on a table? Dude no, parents are responsible for their kids and anything their child breaks. Go to the store and kid breaks something, you don't say that the store shouldn't leave things on tables or shelves because they know kids will be in there. No one but the parent is responsible, people shouldn't have to modify their behavior because people can't watch their kids.
a parent should always watch their kids. they should never dump that responsibility on someone else. kat in this case seems like she assumed everyone was watching her kid so everything would b fine but its a party ppl r having fun not group babysitting. this guy NTA kat is at fault here. i would gladly pay for any damage my kid cause to someone elses property and if i couldnt pay full amount id contribute to the cost. being a parent is a responsibility and until ur child can take responsibility on their own the parent is held responisible
anyone could have spilled juice on it and broken it and that anyone would have been responsible for paying to repair or replace it
In Germany you have to have insurance called "Haftpflichtversicherung" (Liability insurance) which covers for cases like that. I know that quite well because I destroyed an electric garage door of my moms friend as a toddler.
You don't have to. You need one for every motor vehicle you possess, but otherwise, it is voluntary, outside of running businesses, to which some are mandatory, accordingly to the kind and size of business. But it isn't a bad idea to have one. Also, a "Rechtsschutzversicherung", which covers your lawyer-cost in cases according to the contract, which essentially safes you from being outlawyerd by big corps pushing their s**t - otherwise, although you could know you'd win the case, you'd have to pay in advance and could possibly reclaim afterwards from the opponent. I'm sure there is no place on this earth where the actual law is obided by, by authorities, where these two aren't useful!
Load More Replies...Ironic how many people are attacking OP saying he should've been constantly supervising his phone... but oh no the PARENT doesn't have to supervise their TODDLER. I am getting real sick of the narrative that parents aren't responsible for their children and that letting them run feral and destroy everything is pefectly okay. Mother is 100% the asshole here.
I had a similar thing happen but it was kindergartener. I bought my son a new school jacket at the beginning of the school year. Another little boy was chasing him and grabbed his jacket. This child managed to put a huge rip in my son's new jacket. I called the childs mother and asked if she would be willing to replace it. She gave me a raft of crap about kids being kids. I agreed it was not on purpose but nonetheless, I was out a jacket. I have been raised to take responsibility for your kids behavior. I would have replaced the jacket if it had been my son ripping the other kids jacket. The mother in the cell phone scenario, was completely out of line not supervising her toddler. It is her responsibility to watch her child. It is her responsibility to advise guests to keep valuables away from a small child. Do not expect that people realize how distructive a small child can be. She is lucky she did not have a dead child. A cell phone is a small price to pay.
Cuts both ways. My phone, iPad etc are my responsibility, if I don’t take care of them then it’s my own fault. If there’s a child about then as an adult it’s up to me to ensure my property is secure. On the other hand I have a daughter, she’s now ten so she knows how to respect others property. When she was younger it was my job as an adult / parent to ensure she was observed / controlled. If she damaged something then it’s on me to help work out a solution, my negligence coupled with someone else’s has ended up with a cost. Surely the two can admit they are both at fault, had he been more responsible with his property then it wouldn’t have been a temptation. Had Mum been more responsible then the phone would’ve been safer. 50/50 split the cost and learn a lesson. Be thankful it was the phone that got damaged and not the child.
The parent(s) of the child is or are legally and morally responsible for replacing the phone. The only reason to refrain from asking for repayment is if the injured party can afford to replace the phone, and is aware that the parent can't. If there's no jnsurance and the phone-owner knows they're significantly better off than the young parent, they could consider accepting an apology instead of repayment.
It seems to me that the real problem here is that the teenage mother doesn't seem to have any type of insurance to cover for her toddler's damages. Because if that were the case, she would've said: "I am sorry that happened, but no worries, my insurance covers that." The prospect of having to pay for an expensive phone out of her own pocket is, of course, frustrating.
The mother is a lazy idiot who hasn't realized that her child means that she doesn't get to be a teenybopper any more. She DOES owe the LW a new phone. Period. This is not a discussion. When ANYONE'S child destroys someone else's property the PARENTS are responsible. ..../////...... And for those attacking this person for not having insurance - get stuffed.
Ikr, I don't know of any child insurance or walking around insurance to protect people that come in contact with you or your kids on the daily. If the party was at a house she owned or a apartment she rents,then maybe homeowners or renters insurance would cover it 🤔 but the deductible would probably be so high that she'd just end up having to pay cash anyway. For that matter, he could have carried phone insurance, cause that's a thing ppl do, right? Not saying it was all his fault, clearly we know mom was in the wrong. You're so right.
Load More Replies...So if the kid happened to have ended in the pool while mom/dad were busy chatting with other people, is it the other attendee's fault?
People were acting like nobody ever sets their phone down for a minute, especially to go do something. Some phones are huge and fall out of pockets anyway, plus when you're at a friend's place, you should be able to trust that you can set your phone down for a couple minutes without something happening. It wasn't carelessly left behind or tossed onto the floor, it was sat on a table. Parent is 100% responsible here. They do the same thing in stores; your kid damages any products then you're gonna pay for it.
What was this 1 y/o doing climbing up onto a table? And the guy clearly stated that she had not just spilled juice all over his phone, she had thrown it onto the patio and smashed it. As a parent it's your responsibility to a) watch your damn kid and b) pay for any damage they cause. NTA
Yeah, the parent should get then a new phone. It was their kid, and the parent wasn't keeping an eye on them, just assuming it was "someone's" job. Not fine. True they shouldn't have left their phone on the table, but, a toddler at a party with no other kids is a recipe for disaster
If it’s that expensive why not insured. And just have her pay the insurance 50 dollars to replace. But if not then you fault for leaving a breakable phone around an unattended daughter if you knew she wasn’t being closely watched she should at least help pay half since it was her kid.
I always play "devil's advocate. If someone's dog jumped on the table and knocked the phone off, would you still feel the same way? Toddlers are quick and unpredictable, I personally would just chalk it up to "accidents happen" and would HOPE that the mother pay or help pay, but not expect her to. But the fact that she is a mother at 18, I wouldn't expect her to have the finances to replace it.
Only half TA. Split the cost. Yes, Kat was irresponsible, as she should’ve been watching to her toddler, who could’ve gotten in much worse trouble, even injured (or worse, since there was a pool), bit keeping an expensive phone on a table where there as food and other party stuff is also irresponsible. So, two 19 year olds, pretty much equally, and immaturely, irresponsible with valuables; one human, one electronic, should split the cost of replacing the phone. Just be more careful with electronics next time, and tell Kat to get a damn babysitter!
First of all I would never leave my phone anywhere unattended to start with. Just because of the situation is like this. If you care that much about your phone then it should remain on your person. If this person values the friendship then split the cost to repair the phone and then move on
Both the OP and the parent ATA, at least partly. - OP - Don't leave your phone out places where it can be damaged, or stolen. And get a decent protective case for it. My phone is almost always on my person and has a decent case - I can't tell you how many times I've dropped it and it's still doing great. - Parent - having a kid means being responsible for it, even as a toddler. You need to be watching it, not just letting it wreak havoc in the background. I think they should both contribute to the cost of having the phone repaired, or replaced if it can't be repaired. Both of them need to take responsibility.
If it was that "expensive," there should have been insurance bought as well. Mom is responsible for the deductible. Owner should take responsibility for his carelessness. Something "expensive" should not just be laying around.
I see this as 50/50 responsibility. even adults can have accidents, spill a drink on the phone. take care of the stuff you care about. but the mum should also be watching her young child. she should pay for half of the phone.
I think it's 50/50. Yes, she should have kept close track of her kid, but OP should have kept track of his phone. What if it got broke because someone accidentally tripped and knocked it over? Or any number of a thousand scenarios that can and have happened to others. The only way to try and keep your phone safe is to make sure you maintain control and keep it on your person. They should share the cost, because both the mother and the OP were negligent in preventing this particular accident.
If you have ever watched a court show, a judge would rule that the party would ONLY be liable for the value of the used object, never the new price. Unless the phone is less than 12 hours used, the mom should offer 1/2 the price of a replacement not the full price. That is the grown up thing to do. (on both their parts)
If I'm at a party I deliberately wear pants with pockets to keep my phone in. If I saw someone else's phone left on a table, I would assume they'd lost it and try to find them. However, if I had a small child at that party, they would also be in my eyeline at all times. Mum should at least offer to contribute to the cost of repair/replace. I doubt a young mum like that would have the money to replace a phone. Maybe an agreement for half/half could be reached, or payments in instalments.
As a middle aged person, I would feel obligated to pay for any damage my kids did. And I no longer go to the kinds of parties where I have to worry something is going to happen to my phone if I leave it sitting on a table. But these are teenagers, and the sense of personal responsibility isn't the same. Obviously, the mother should have been watching the child. But the owner of the phone should have been more careful too, knowing he couldn't afford to replace it if it fell prey to wet pool towels, drink spills, careless drunk people, etc. I'd say they should split the cost of a new phone, and everyone learns a life lesson about keeping an eye on the valuable things/children in your possession.
Kid insurance? You are the second person to say this.. what is this insurance that parents carry?
Load More Replies...OK, let me explain: When I know small children are going to be about, I'm always super-cautious about what can be pulled, grabbed, yanked, etc. It's just common sense, which is apparently not so much....
Load More Replies...NTA. The kid obviously wasn't on the table when he left, and she shouldn't be free to roam around like that anyway. If it was just spilled juice, then I might change my answer. But for a 1 year old to climb onto a table, spill juice and then smash the phone onto the floor? The mother owes you a new phone.
First of all, don't bring your kid to a party intended for adults. Secondly, if your kid destroys someone's property, you are responsible to compensate.
Why all the blaming the victim here? For all of you saying he should have had it in his pocket....I'm pretty sure we have all left our phone on a table while at a POOL party. This is 100% on the mother and she should replace the phone. I agree she doesn't need to upgrade it but I'm pretty sure OP wasn't after an upgrade, just a new to him replacement or equal monitory value. I get that mom is SUPER young but that is not a "get out of jail free" card when it comes to the destruction that child causes. She chose to have a kid. She is responsible for that child...its well-being AND whatever it manages to destroy in the wake of terror that small children are bound to create because that's their natural default setting.
Yeah this is the same kind of victim-blaming that we see from a range of other subjects. Yes, there are a number of things that he could have done to better protect his phone, and hopefully others learn from this BUT we are still talking about protecting it from someone who was destructively negligent, and that's the person who needs to pay for the damage. If Person A leaves their $400 on the table unattended and Person B comes by and steals it, then is caught. How much should Person B have to pay back? Would we say only $200 because Person A should have taken better care to avoid being robbed? No chance.
Load More Replies...Things can happen with toddlers even when they are closely supervised and of course I am responsible as a parent. That's why I have insurance that explicitly covers my small child.
Not his kid. Not his problem. The stupid bint left a one year old unattended in a yard with a pool. She's lucky that poor little spud is still alive. If she keeps going the way she is, that won't be a problem any more.
Load More Replies...NTA. Not the slightest. I'm actually fed up with people not taking the responsibility for their kids ... it's not that I wouldn't understand that they may cause some damage now and then, fine ... children are so, what would'ya do, ... but their parents have to cover the cost they cause. End of - no disussion or any needed. The same parents who refuse to take responsibility, often, are those who boast about their children, and how great and smart they are, and often, they're just not. But, dare one word... No, don't - wanna survive, huh...?
NTA. Yes you deserve your phone to be replaced, but the way the law works is it’ll be replaced at the current value it was at when it broke. You don’t get a brand new phone, you get one equal to yours prior to it breaking. I’d ask her to get you one off Craig’s list or marketplace. You can usually find them reasonably priced. Otherwise if you take her to small claims you’ll only be rewarded the price of the value and that’s up to the judge to decide what that is.
What, for real, some people think it is the posters fault for leaving their phone on a table? Dude no, parents are responsible for their kids and anything their child breaks. Go to the store and kid breaks something, you don't say that the store shouldn't leave things on tables or shelves because they know kids will be in there. No one but the parent is responsible, people shouldn't have to modify their behavior because people can't watch their kids.
a parent should always watch their kids. they should never dump that responsibility on someone else. kat in this case seems like she assumed everyone was watching her kid so everything would b fine but its a party ppl r having fun not group babysitting. this guy NTA kat is at fault here. i would gladly pay for any damage my kid cause to someone elses property and if i couldnt pay full amount id contribute to the cost. being a parent is a responsibility and until ur child can take responsibility on their own the parent is held responisible
anyone could have spilled juice on it and broken it and that anyone would have been responsible for paying to repair or replace it
In Germany you have to have insurance called "Haftpflichtversicherung" (Liability insurance) which covers for cases like that. I know that quite well because I destroyed an electric garage door of my moms friend as a toddler.
You don't have to. You need one for every motor vehicle you possess, but otherwise, it is voluntary, outside of running businesses, to which some are mandatory, accordingly to the kind and size of business. But it isn't a bad idea to have one. Also, a "Rechtsschutzversicherung", which covers your lawyer-cost in cases according to the contract, which essentially safes you from being outlawyerd by big corps pushing their s**t - otherwise, although you could know you'd win the case, you'd have to pay in advance and could possibly reclaim afterwards from the opponent. I'm sure there is no place on this earth where the actual law is obided by, by authorities, where these two aren't useful!
Load More Replies...Ironic how many people are attacking OP saying he should've been constantly supervising his phone... but oh no the PARENT doesn't have to supervise their TODDLER. I am getting real sick of the narrative that parents aren't responsible for their children and that letting them run feral and destroy everything is pefectly okay. Mother is 100% the asshole here.
I had a similar thing happen but it was kindergartener. I bought my son a new school jacket at the beginning of the school year. Another little boy was chasing him and grabbed his jacket. This child managed to put a huge rip in my son's new jacket. I called the childs mother and asked if she would be willing to replace it. She gave me a raft of crap about kids being kids. I agreed it was not on purpose but nonetheless, I was out a jacket. I have been raised to take responsibility for your kids behavior. I would have replaced the jacket if it had been my son ripping the other kids jacket. The mother in the cell phone scenario, was completely out of line not supervising her toddler. It is her responsibility to watch her child. It is her responsibility to advise guests to keep valuables away from a small child. Do not expect that people realize how distructive a small child can be. She is lucky she did not have a dead child. A cell phone is a small price to pay.
Cuts both ways. My phone, iPad etc are my responsibility, if I don’t take care of them then it’s my own fault. If there’s a child about then as an adult it’s up to me to ensure my property is secure. On the other hand I have a daughter, she’s now ten so she knows how to respect others property. When she was younger it was my job as an adult / parent to ensure she was observed / controlled. If she damaged something then it’s on me to help work out a solution, my negligence coupled with someone else’s has ended up with a cost. Surely the two can admit they are both at fault, had he been more responsible with his property then it wouldn’t have been a temptation. Had Mum been more responsible then the phone would’ve been safer. 50/50 split the cost and learn a lesson. Be thankful it was the phone that got damaged and not the child.
The parent(s) of the child is or are legally and morally responsible for replacing the phone. The only reason to refrain from asking for repayment is if the injured party can afford to replace the phone, and is aware that the parent can't. If there's no jnsurance and the phone-owner knows they're significantly better off than the young parent, they could consider accepting an apology instead of repayment.
It seems to me that the real problem here is that the teenage mother doesn't seem to have any type of insurance to cover for her toddler's damages. Because if that were the case, she would've said: "I am sorry that happened, but no worries, my insurance covers that." The prospect of having to pay for an expensive phone out of her own pocket is, of course, frustrating.
The mother is a lazy idiot who hasn't realized that her child means that she doesn't get to be a teenybopper any more. She DOES owe the LW a new phone. Period. This is not a discussion. When ANYONE'S child destroys someone else's property the PARENTS are responsible. ..../////...... And for those attacking this person for not having insurance - get stuffed.
Ikr, I don't know of any child insurance or walking around insurance to protect people that come in contact with you or your kids on the daily. If the party was at a house she owned or a apartment she rents,then maybe homeowners or renters insurance would cover it 🤔 but the deductible would probably be so high that she'd just end up having to pay cash anyway. For that matter, he could have carried phone insurance, cause that's a thing ppl do, right? Not saying it was all his fault, clearly we know mom was in the wrong. You're so right.
Load More Replies...So if the kid happened to have ended in the pool while mom/dad were busy chatting with other people, is it the other attendee's fault?
People were acting like nobody ever sets their phone down for a minute, especially to go do something. Some phones are huge and fall out of pockets anyway, plus when you're at a friend's place, you should be able to trust that you can set your phone down for a couple minutes without something happening. It wasn't carelessly left behind or tossed onto the floor, it was sat on a table. Parent is 100% responsible here. They do the same thing in stores; your kid damages any products then you're gonna pay for it.
What was this 1 y/o doing climbing up onto a table? And the guy clearly stated that she had not just spilled juice all over his phone, she had thrown it onto the patio and smashed it. As a parent it's your responsibility to a) watch your damn kid and b) pay for any damage they cause. NTA
Yeah, the parent should get then a new phone. It was their kid, and the parent wasn't keeping an eye on them, just assuming it was "someone's" job. Not fine. True they shouldn't have left their phone on the table, but, a toddler at a party with no other kids is a recipe for disaster
If it’s that expensive why not insured. And just have her pay the insurance 50 dollars to replace. But if not then you fault for leaving a breakable phone around an unattended daughter if you knew she wasn’t being closely watched she should at least help pay half since it was her kid.
I always play "devil's advocate. If someone's dog jumped on the table and knocked the phone off, would you still feel the same way? Toddlers are quick and unpredictable, I personally would just chalk it up to "accidents happen" and would HOPE that the mother pay or help pay, but not expect her to. But the fact that she is a mother at 18, I wouldn't expect her to have the finances to replace it.
Only half TA. Split the cost. Yes, Kat was irresponsible, as she should’ve been watching to her toddler, who could’ve gotten in much worse trouble, even injured (or worse, since there was a pool), bit keeping an expensive phone on a table where there as food and other party stuff is also irresponsible. So, two 19 year olds, pretty much equally, and immaturely, irresponsible with valuables; one human, one electronic, should split the cost of replacing the phone. Just be more careful with electronics next time, and tell Kat to get a damn babysitter!
First of all I would never leave my phone anywhere unattended to start with. Just because of the situation is like this. If you care that much about your phone then it should remain on your person. If this person values the friendship then split the cost to repair the phone and then move on
Both the OP and the parent ATA, at least partly. - OP - Don't leave your phone out places where it can be damaged, or stolen. And get a decent protective case for it. My phone is almost always on my person and has a decent case - I can't tell you how many times I've dropped it and it's still doing great. - Parent - having a kid means being responsible for it, even as a toddler. You need to be watching it, not just letting it wreak havoc in the background. I think they should both contribute to the cost of having the phone repaired, or replaced if it can't be repaired. Both of them need to take responsibility.
If it was that "expensive," there should have been insurance bought as well. Mom is responsible for the deductible. Owner should take responsibility for his carelessness. Something "expensive" should not just be laying around.
I see this as 50/50 responsibility. even adults can have accidents, spill a drink on the phone. take care of the stuff you care about. but the mum should also be watching her young child. she should pay for half of the phone.
I think it's 50/50. Yes, she should have kept close track of her kid, but OP should have kept track of his phone. What if it got broke because someone accidentally tripped and knocked it over? Or any number of a thousand scenarios that can and have happened to others. The only way to try and keep your phone safe is to make sure you maintain control and keep it on your person. They should share the cost, because both the mother and the OP were negligent in preventing this particular accident.
If you have ever watched a court show, a judge would rule that the party would ONLY be liable for the value of the used object, never the new price. Unless the phone is less than 12 hours used, the mom should offer 1/2 the price of a replacement not the full price. That is the grown up thing to do. (on both their parts)
If I'm at a party I deliberately wear pants with pockets to keep my phone in. If I saw someone else's phone left on a table, I would assume they'd lost it and try to find them. However, if I had a small child at that party, they would also be in my eyeline at all times. Mum should at least offer to contribute to the cost of repair/replace. I doubt a young mum like that would have the money to replace a phone. Maybe an agreement for half/half could be reached, or payments in instalments.
As a middle aged person, I would feel obligated to pay for any damage my kids did. And I no longer go to the kinds of parties where I have to worry something is going to happen to my phone if I leave it sitting on a table. But these are teenagers, and the sense of personal responsibility isn't the same. Obviously, the mother should have been watching the child. But the owner of the phone should have been more careful too, knowing he couldn't afford to replace it if it fell prey to wet pool towels, drink spills, careless drunk people, etc. I'd say they should split the cost of a new phone, and everyone learns a life lesson about keeping an eye on the valuable things/children in your possession.
Kid insurance? You are the second person to say this.. what is this insurance that parents carry?
Load More Replies...OK, let me explain: When I know small children are going to be about, I'm always super-cautious about what can be pulled, grabbed, yanked, etc. It's just common sense, which is apparently not so much....
Load More Replies...
97
72