Is student legally responsible for damage?

bobbyss

Would be grateful for any thoughts on the following.

If a student damages school property eg kicking and breaking a door or (on a smaller scale) breaking / destroying pens/other stationery items, (and is seen by one or more staff doing so , so there is proof ) should he or she be made to pay for the repair and/or loss?

Would they (ie their parents) be legally obliged to do so bearing in mind the damage was deliberate and willful.

If the answer is, yes, parents would have to cough up what law is that based on?

Thanks for your thoughts.

sdanseo

If the student is under 18 ordinarily you'd imagine the parents would be legally responsible for their sproglet's behaviour - but in a school are the teachers not acting in loco parentis and carry some responsibility regarding keeping the kids in line?

ravima

Why would parents be responsible? Why would teachers be responsible? If the student is of reasonable age and knows that what s/he did is wrong, then surely s/he is responsible ALONE.

We must all accept responsibility for our actions.

bobbyss

ravima wrote: »

Why would parents be responsible? Why would teachers be responsible? If the student is of reasonable age and knows that what s/he did is wrong, then surely s/he is responsible ALONE.

We must all accept responsibility for our actions.

Yes ravima. That would be my thinking.

The door damage could be euro 200 or more. So, do you think that the student should/must pay for this damage? That is where the parents responsibility comes in. A 14 year old is likely to be asking parents to fork out.

I am still interested in the legality of all of this. Is there a legal responsibility on parents to pay up for damage caused by their kids in school and if so what is it?

Thanks

Bepolite

Very likely a course of action in tort.

Of course the other way would be to offer the option of paying for it or a criminal record for criminal damage.

bobbyss

Bepolite wrote: »

Very likely a course of action in tort.

Of course the other way would be to offer the option of paying for it or a criminal record for criminal damage.

I see. So, if he refuses to pay, contact the guards to report it.

I am all for the idea of taking the consequences for your actions.

Unfortunately some students would not be bothered if it was reported and would be even less bothered by having a criminal record. It would not mean anything to him. Perhaps he already has a criminal record and the school would be unaware of this. That would not matter anyway. Meanwhile the school is out by 200 euro. What he would be bothered is having to pay 1 cent never mind 200 eoro.

Thanks

Bepolite

While I'm not sure if there is a recovery course available, the cost would likely be prohibative. There is noting to stop you asking the parents, I know my school would have done, but then we still had teachers that would have hit you on the head with a 50p piece - and we had alot less issues than schools seem to now.

... I'm off to get my pipe and slippers.

evolving_doors

Is a minor responsible for their actions? I suppose an analogy would be joyriders... did they ever have to cough up any money (or restitution of some kind)?.
Getting back to responsibility though..the parents handed over responsibility by loco parentis to the teacher (unlike a joyriding scenario), perhaps it could be reasonable to claim that the teacher in charge ALLOWED the situation to develop , so ultimately the teacher is responsible.
Depends how far this loco parentis extends. Is there a legal blurb on loco parentis...maybe it would be defined in tge code of conduct which the parents signed the son up to.

Getting money out of parents though!! Is it worth the legal cost, id like to see it go legal though out of interest.

hullaballoo

The age of criminal responsibility generally is 12 and in the case of some serious crimes, it's 10.

No Pants

bobbyss wrote: »

I see. So, if he refuses to pay, contact the guards to report it.

I'd get the complaint into the guards first. It may be leverage.

bobbyss

hullaballoo wrote: »

The age of criminal responsibility generally is 12 and in the case of some serious crimes, it's 10.

Thanks, I didn't know that.

Therefore if the school pursued it (with the guards, courts etc what are the things that could happen the 14-15 year old? Is his worst case scenario just to get that on his record?

Bepolite

bobbyss wrote: »

Thanks, I didn't know that.

Therefore if the school pursued it (with the guards, courts etc what are the things that could happen the 14-15 year old? Is his worst case scenario just to get that on his record?

Absent a spent convictions scheme in Ireland this is extremely serious.

Do we have any scheme for expunging juvenile records?

Victor

Bepolite wrote: »

Absent a spent convictions scheme in Ireland this is extremely serious.

Do we have any scheme for expunging juvenile records?

Yes. As I understand it, any conviction under age 18 is essentially wiped at age 21.

goz83

Victor wrote: »

Yes. As I understand it, any conviction under age 18 is essentially wiped at age 21.

That all depends. I have never had a conviction and was generally a trouble free kid/teen. I shoplifted once and was caught when I was 11 (can of Lynx ). But when I was 15 a couple of my friends and I stole a few beer kegs from a train. We got caught and helped the Gardai recover the kegs from the track. Nothing ever came of it, but years later, I went for a security job and the supervisor somehow got hold of this information. I asked how he got the information, but he changed his tune and was insisting that he checks everyones history and tried to backtrack. Long story short, I wasn't getting the job. So, the information is there, conviction, or not. I was over the age of 21 when I went for that job. The supervisor was an ex-guard and obviously abused the system to unlawfully gather information, which was actually irrelevant and was of a juvenile nature, or so the dpp thought, as they never took it any further.

Ken.

Would the school not suspend or expel the student. When I was in school some guys in 6th year done something with chemicals that caused foam to build up in the science lab. They were quickly caught and were told their parents paid for the £2500 clean up and damage to equipment or they were out the door. It was about a week to Christmas so being expelled would mean having to repeat 6th year. They remained in school so I assume the 4 sets of parents stumped up the cash. This was in 1992.

bobbyss

ken wrote: »

Would the school not suspend or expel the student. When I was in school some guys in 6th year done something with chemicals that caused foam to build up in the science lab. They were quickly caught and were told their parents paid for the £2500 clean up and damage to equipment or they were out the door. It was about a week to Christmas so being expelled would mean having to repeat 6th year. They remained in school so I assume the 4 sets of parents stumped up the cash. This was in 1992.

Expulsion would be an option. For the young scumbag of a student, suspension means a few days holiday and nothing more. Some parents could never afford even small amounts of money eg Euro 50.

Maybe there are perfectly good reasons why there seems to be a grey area of any legal responsibility on parents to pay up. I have not yet come across any law which says they have to. (Mind you I am not a lawyer or anything like that).

If you have parents who are well tuned in to their rights (whilst largely ignoring their responsibilities) they might well argue that the school can not threaten their son with expulsion if they do not pay for damage caused?

They might well argue that is what school insurance is for.

Pro Hoc Vice

goz83 wrote: »

That all depends. I have never had a conviction and was generally a trouble free kid/teen. I shoplifted once and was caught when I was 11 (can of Lynx ). But when I was 15 a couple of my friends and I stole a few beer kegs from a train. We got caught and helped the Gardai recover the kegs from the track. Nothing ever came of it, but years later, I went for a security job and the supervisor somehow got hold of this information. I asked how he got the information, but he changed his tune and was insisting that he checks everyones history and tried to backtrack. Long story short, I wasn't getting the job. So, the information is there, conviction, or not. I was over the age of 21 when I went for that job. The supervisor was an ex-guard and obviously abused the system to unlawfully gather information, which was actually irrelevant and was of a juvenile nature, or so the dpp thought, as they never took it any further.

A record of convictions of a minor would not be disclosed in say Garda vetting, but the record remains so to speak on PULSE. It would seem that someone unlawfully accessed PULSE and disclosed private data about you. At the very least a issue for the Data protection commissioner, plus a complaint to GSOC and possible civil and criminal sanctions on the persons involved.

hullaballoo

There is a process for minors involving the local juvenile liaison officer whereby minors meet with this officer rather than going to court. It's for small offences and both the victim and the minor have to agree to it.

It operates, iirc, on a similar basis to the adult caution scheme. The difference is that when the minor reaches majority, the slate is wiped. At least, that's what's supposed to happen. With an adult caution, the record of it remains forever, otherwise the scheme wouldn't work.

I'm sure googling "juvenile liaison officer" or similar would tell you whether the scheme applies in this situation. I'd do it but I'm on my phone and it's difficult.

Edit: heeor - http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/children_and_young_offenders/garda_juvenile_diversion_programme.html

goz83

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

A record of convictions of a minor would not be disclosed in say Garda vetting, but the record remains so to speak on PULSE. It would seem that someone unlawfully accessed PULSE and disclosed private data about you. At the very least a issue for the Data protection commissioner, plus a complaint to GSOC and possible civil and criminal sanctions on the persons involved.

It happened maybe 9 years ago. So, wouldn't be anything to chase at this point. To be honest, i am glad I didn't get the job, but I felt very wronged at the time. The guy thought he was being very smart until I said that My record was clean and he shouldn't have been able to access that information. He tried to cover his tracks, because I was called in for a final interview, even though I was told I would not be getting the job. Obviously, I didn't waste waste my time going in. My card was marked by a smug fcuker with nothing better to do.