<p>How did the young man know, immediately, off the top of his head, that his computer was covered while he was at college, and the amount of the deductible?</p>
<p>I think the plan is good, and if he has any smarts at all, he won’t be wanting her folks involved. Do keep us posted, and good luck!</p>
<p>D not at fault, and should not pay. </p>
<p>Perhaps the young man can try to get is deduct. from the university since they permitted him to use the computer in the dining hall, but did not provide a hook up right there at the table (JUST KIDDING!). Really, he was the one who created the unsafe condition - if he or the parents do not want to pay the $250, he is undoubtedly welcome in the college’s computer labs.</p>
<p>Your D may have to grow a pretty thick skin through this.</p>
<p>Our daughter’s laptop came with a 4 year policy that covers EVERYTHING. I jokingly asked if she got frustrated and threw it out the window, would it be covered. The answer was yes. Then the dorm insurance we bought also covers it with a deductible.</p>
<p>NYMomof2, that’s the whole point of insurance - to pay for your property whether you’re negligent or not. Otherwise, can you imagine the litigation? “You had a short in your wiring that you should have discovered before your house burned down, so we’re not paying on your homeowner’s insurance.” If you had to prove that you weren’t negligent before collecting insurance, no one would buy it.</p>
<p>Now, if someone else files a claim against you saying that you caused an injury (a liability claim), that’s when negligence comes into play. A third party does have to prove that you were negligent before they could collect against your insurance.</p>
<p>So in this case, the boy’s laptop should be covered (of course, depending on the particulars of the policy) without regard to negligence. But if the OP’s d were to file the proposed claim for personal injury or property damage against the boy, the insurer would require the OP’s d to prove that the boy was negligent.</p>
<p>Does that make sense?</p>
<p>We might be talking about 2 different kinds of insurance here. One is a specific policy that many of the computer companies (i.e. Dell) offer when they sell a laptop. The other is a homeowners policy that covers property even for kids away at school. Homeowners insu. would probably cover liability, were she to have tripped and fell and injured herself. The computer warrantee would not.</p>
<p>A word of WARNING to the OP. I wouldn’t have your daughter correspond with this guy via email, as what she writes could be taken as a confirmation of assumed partial liability/guilt or partial willingness to pay (attorneys out there- please comment). I recommend cellphone (no voicemail msg other than “please call me to discuss situation”). Just cover yourself.</p>
<p>jym, my response about insurance was referring to homeowners’ policies. The computer company policies are different (and usually don’t have a deductible, or they don’t call it that).</p>
<p>jym good advice about not communicating via email. The emails can be used to confirm her acceptance of blame.</p>
<p>I had a similar incident occur when I was at a restaurant. There was a cord across an aisle and I didn’t see it, as I was looking forward, not at the ground. I tripped, and although I didn’t fall, I wrenched the heck out of my back trying to keep my balance. The reaction of the managers at the restaurant was immediate. They were extremely apologetic, paid for my bill, gave me a gift card worth two meals, had me fill out an incident report, and made sure to let me know that it did not close my file, and that if I needed to go to a doctor, that they would pay for it. This is quite a different reaction than what she got from the guy…</p>
<p>Not only is he at fault, but if something had happened to your daughter, the university could be at fault (by omission). It happened on their property. I think if she needed to go to a university “court” they would be on her side and would be darn glad that she wasn’t injured.</p>
<p>Chedva, you were very clear, and I get your point. Thanks!</p>
<p>I wouldn’t put much stock in the parental conference. My D. was being harassed a couple of years ago by a kid in her school–repeated stupid TP-ing of our house and soaping of her car, etc. The final straw was the kid mailed her a dead fish. To me that crossed the line from stupid adolescent tricks to creepy and weird. D. knew who the kid was from his myspace posts. I called his parents and said I needed to talk to them about a TP-ing incident and got my ears pinned back by the kid’s father. He out and out lied, saying the kid had been watching TV with him all night, and refused to admit the possibility his precious had done anything, anything at all. </p>
<p>Creep. The kid is now at Penn. I hope he’s not still a creepy stalker.</p>
<p>I am wondering if your D knows anyone who witnessed the incident, as if the boy is this much of a jerk, he may lie about where the cord was.</p>
<p>That said, she should not pay a penny.</p>
<p>Any update?</p>
<p>
“May” lie? 27 years of trying cases tells me he will lie. But , like I said in post #2 on this thread - if it was my kid she wouldn’t be paying anything.</p>
<p>Another lawyer here…agree that your D should not pay anything. However, an offer to pay is NOT an admission of fault. To encourage settlement, the law prohibits use of settlement offers as evidence of admission of fault. A student-run court may not follow those rules, but I’m sure it would understand a simple statement that “I just wanted it to go away, so I made him an offer hoping it would. He pressed for more money, and insisted it was all my fault and so I said no.” </p>
<p>I would discourage the parental conference. Personally, I think that’s a bad idea. Sometimes the apple doen’t fall far from the tree. If you insist on a parental conference, two things may happen: (1)the parents may end up being witnesses for their kid, saying you said all sorts of things in that conversation and (2) it will go over like a lead balloon in a student court. The students may think your D was really at fault–cord clearly visible, etc.–but won’t admit it because of mommy and daddy. </p>
<p>I would try to find witnesses and ask them to sign their names to a simple statement describing what happened. I would also suggest taking a photograph of physical setting, showing where the outlet is in relation to the door, the absence of outlets near the table, etc. Just in case…</p>
<p>And I think email is fine–IF CAREFULLY WORDED.</p>
<p>Maybe I’m just dim, but I thought the OP indicated that there is a student court system at the college which handles cases of this nature. If so, why all the “creative” suggestions about suing for a slip and fall in small claims court, conferencing amongst parents, etc? There’s a system in place designed to handle the issue: use it. Or, more to the point, let D and the boy use it. That’s what it’s for. College is supposed to be educational - it will be an educational experience to go through a formal conflict resolution process - particularly one which is designed for college students. Getting clever and creative is more likely to create more problems than already exist, in my experience. </p>
<p>(By the way, the reason I’m not casting a vote on the CC “jury” is because after 33 years of practice, it’s my conclusion that if you only hear one side of a case, the chances are you’ll vote for that side, whereas once you hear both sides you might feel differently. And we’ve only heard one side.)</p>
<p>
Agrred. And that’s exactly why I posted my response in post #2 on this thread this way :
</p>
<p>Please clarify, are you guys suggesting that she go back and take a picture of the floor/area/outlet now? after the fact? Because I doubt anyone took the time to take a picture when it happened. What if the computer’s owner goes back and takes pictures that he’s doctored… meaning he claims he was sitting closer to the outlet. I just have to wonder if you’re taking pictures after the fact, either one could take a picture of an area that would support their own case. He could go back with a cord, tape it to the floor, and take a picture and say his cord was taped down. So it still becomes one person’s word against another. I still believe she shouldn’t pay anything if it’s as simple as reported by the OP.</p>
<p>Question for the lawyers: If OP’s D admitted fault, even partially, the insurance company could try to recoup their loss from her? (although the ins payout in this case probably too low for them to do so.)</p>
<p>Terwitt, I still think a photo of the area where the cord was strung would be useful. It will help those in the student court system to see exactly what the situation was. THe girl can communicate her position much more clearly with photos. I also agree with Kluge that the existing system should be utilized. Parental e-mails, implying countersuits, etc. could create a bigger mess. It’s likely that this boy is just pressing to see if the girl responds and comes up with some cash. He may have no real expectation of getting any, but may feel it can’t hurt to try. Sleezy, but not uncommon.</p>
<p>I think the lack of an apology is as disconcerting as the demand for payment. Let’s see – a deductible vs. potentially injuring someone else. Geez Louise, the boy is a jerk.</p>
<p>Is he threatening to take it to Student Court and have the entire college see what a jerk he is? Or is this a bogus threat to get her to pony up? Extortion is not attractive. I can’t believe he didn’t jump for joy at the overly generous offer of $125. Still, I would not favor any counter aggressive tactics because jerks are usually willing to escalate.</p>