advice please NSC regarding my sons school

[Hampden Park]

thank you all for the advice. I may well put my shorts on, go and do P.E. at his school and take someone else's watch from the box to make up for my son's loss.

seriously though, I am going to ring them tomorrow, then, if no joy, I will write to them asking for the full amount.

 

[ATFC Seagull]

I am amazed that the school took responsibility for the items.

However, as has been said above, this is a state school that will without question have the kids' best interests at heart. There may have been a **** up but taking 80 quid off them is only going to be taking it away from resources that would go towards education, including that of your son. Ultimately the reason the watch has gone is cos some **** has nicked it, and that isn't something the school can 100% control.

If I were you I would want to know that the school has done everything they can to identify the thief and rectify the situation, and accept that.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

The most important lesson has not been learned. Presumably two kids have nice new watches for which they or their parents did not pay for.

On the other hand, how many times have those watches been relinquished before without getting nicked?

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

thank you all for the advice. I may well put my shorts on, go and do P.E. at his school and take someone else's watch from the box to make up for my son's loss.

seriously though, I am going to ring them tomorrow, then, if no joy, I will write to them asking for the full amount.

Why didn't you get your son to ensure the school completed a Quarantined Property Form when looking after his expensive watch?
http://www.barrbeaconschool.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Behaviour-Policy.pdf

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

I need to know if your son is six or sixteen to make my mind up

 

[Hampden Park]

I am amazed that the school took responsibility for the items.

However, as has been said above, this is a state school that will without question have the kids' best interests at heart. There may have been a **** up but taking 80 quid off them is only going to be taking it away from resources that would go towards education, including that of your son. Ultimately the reason the watch has gone is cos some **** has nicked it, and that isn't something the school can 100% control.

If I were you I would want to know that the school has done everything they can to identify the thief and rectify the situation, and accept that.

times 2 ATFC. don't know what the other lads parents are going to do yet.

 

[Hampden Park]

I need to know if your son is six or sixteen to make my mind up

16 next week Simmo.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

On the other hand, how many times have those watches been relinquished before without getting nicked?

Never? Countless times? What has that got to do with children taking the opportunity to steal something and then turning a blind eye (assuming their investigation was pointless).

We had a hobbies room at school and a child was stealing from others. It was closed until the thief was outed and the problem was resolved. Nothing ever went missing again after that.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

Never? Countless times? What has that got to do with children taking the opportunity to steal something and then turning a blind eye (assuming their investigation was pointless).

We had a hobbies room at school and a child was stealing from others. It was closed until the thief was outed and the problem was resolved. Nothing ever went missing again after that.

Because if the answer is countless times, then it shows the majority of classmates in a good light, which weakens your 'the most important lesson has not been learned' generalisation.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

The £25 offer is a gesture of good will and not an admission of guilt. It is sad that what was meant to be a conciliatory gesture may end up being used as a stick to beat them with.

Your son shouldn't wear a watch of a value you are not prepared to write off as "one of those things". Your son has learnt a lesson in responsibility and some degenerate has a nice watch. Let it pass my friend.

 

[beorhthelm]

imo school responsible, but you really shouldnt hve £80 watches at school. should they shell out £280 for a nicked watch? or one claimed to have been nicked...

they must have known the PE routine and seen the risk, so a life lesson for the kids invovled i reckon.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

The £25 offer is a gesture of good will and not an admission of guilt. It is sad that what was meant to be a conciliatory gesture may end up being used as a stick to beat them with.

Your son shouldn't wear a watch of a value you are not prepared to write off as "one of those things". Your son has learnt a lesson in responsibility and some degenerate has a nice watch. Let it pass my friend.

Well said.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Because if the answer is countless times, then it shows the majority of classmates in a good light, which weakens your 'the most important lesson has not been learned' generalisation.

It's not a generalisation at all. The culprit will not be caught and will not have learned their lesson. People should be expected NOT to steal, as opposed to the flowery 'in good light' for resisting temptation to take something from someone else. Just put it down to poor luck then and move on?

 

[Hampden Park]

The £25 offer is a gesture of good will and not an admission of guilt. It is sad that what was meant to be a conciliatory gesture may end up being used as a stick to beat them with.

Your son shouldn't wear a watch of a value you are not prepared to write off as "one of those things". Your son has learnt a lesson in responsibility and some degenerate has a nice watch. Let it pass my friend.

fair comment Ninja. initially the school (deputy head I believe) said that they would carry out an investigation into the disappearance of the watches and that the school would look into refunding the cost of the watch, only for the battleaxe to step in and offer £25 without prejudice. hey ho.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

The £25 offer is a gesture of good will and not an admission of guilt. It is sad that what was meant to be a conciliatory gesture may end up being used as a stick to beat them with.

Your son shouldn't wear a watch of a value you are not prepared to write off as "one of those things". Your son has learnt a lesson in responsibility and some degenerate has a nice watch. Let it pass my friend.

He shouldn't wear something worth £80? The value is immaterial, surely? Does this extend outside the school front gates?

It should be an admission of guilt, if the school are happy for pupils to come with anything of value and require them to hand them over. I guarantee that they will be changing their policy on security henceforth.

 

[Hampden Park]

Why didn't you get your son to ensure the school completed a Quarantined Property Form when looking after his expensive watch?
http://www.barrbeaconschool.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Behaviour-Policy.pdf

thanks goldstone, doesn't seem to mention watches though. I will point this out to them.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

It's not a generalisation at all. The culprit will not be caught and will not have learned their lesson. People should be expected NOT to steal, as opposed to the flowery 'in good light' for resisting temptation to take something from someone else. Just put it down to poor luck then and move on?

Whether people are expected by others to steal or not steal is immaterial compared to the fact most pupils in the class do not appear to be thieves. It is not flowery but reasonable to suggest (if this is the countless PE lesson where the watch was handed over) that most have learnt the lesson that stealing is not for them... at least not for £80 time pieces.

 

[drew]

The principle here relates to the bailee/bailor relationship. Your son was the bailor and the school the bailee. The school accepted responsibility for the goods when they collected it for safe keeping (and no amount of disclaimers would, I believe, waive that). On that basis, the school had a duty to ensure the goods were returned to the correct people which they clearly failed to do and therefore are liable, a conclusion most have arrived at. The next question is compensation. You state the watch cost £80 however, under law the school are not liable on a 'new for old' basis. The compensation would be based on the replacement cost now less a deduction for fair wear and tear, in other words, the second hand value.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailment

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

16 next week Simmo.

I have never paid more than twenty quid on a watch in my entire life and at this moment I do not own one.
I just have a sixth sense to what time it is---
Still, if this had happened to my thirteen year old daughter I would now be making headlines in the ARGUS for all the wrong reasons

 

[Hampden Park]

The principle here relates to the bailee/bailor relationship. Your son was the bailor and the school the bailee. The school accepted responsibility for the goods when they collected it for safe keeping (and no amount of disclaimers would, I believe, waive that). On that basis, the school had a duty to ensure the goods were returned to the correct people which they clearly failed to do and therefore are liable, a conclusion most have arrived at. The next question is compensation. You state the watch cost £80 however, under law the school are not liable on a 'new for old' basis. The compensation would be based on the replacement cost now less a deduction for fair wear and tear, in other words, the second hand value.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailment

it was a crimbo present (last one). £80 new, offered £25. that is deducting £9 per month approx. for wear and tear.