Will I have to pay for damage my nephew may have caused on my neighbors plumbing?

[Philtan]

What is the name of your state? Washington

My nephew (who is in foster care and a ward of the state) will stay with us sometimes for overnight visits. On this particular visit we went to a barbecue at a neighbors. There were some other kids his age there and they were running around playing while the adults were all chatting.

We hear a boom and run to see what happened. Found out that someone had flushed a firework down the toilet and totally f-ed up my neighbors plumbing. All the kids pointed fingers at my nephew, though hes denying he did it. None of us know where the firework came from.

Now my neighbor is saying he is going to sue me if I don’t pay for damages. How likely is it I will have to pay?

Edited for the sensitive folks

 

[Just Blue]

What is the name of your state? Washington

My nephew (who is in foster care and a ward of the state) will stay with us sometimes for overnight visits. On this particular visit we went to a barbecue at a neighbors. There were some other kids his age there and they were running around playing while the adults were all chatting.

We hear a boom and run to see what happened. Found out that someone had flushed a firework down the toilet and totally (edited for language) up my neighbors plumbing. All the kids pointed fingers at my nephew, though hes denying he did it. None of us know where the firework came from.

Now my neighbor is saying he is going to sue me if I don’t pay for damages. How likely is it I will have to pay?

Please, do not use filthy language...read the terms of this site located at the bottom of every page.

If your nephew did cause the damage, and he was in you care while he did this, you may be responsible for the cost.

I'll tag a couple of the attorneys that volunteer here to hopefully chime in.

@Ohiogal @Taxing Matters

 

[adjusterjack]

Now my neighbor is saying he is going to sue me if I don’t pay for damages. How likely is it I will have to pay?

What is your nephew's age?

How much are the repairs going to cost?

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state? Washington

My nephew (who is in foster care and a ward of the state) will stay with us sometimes for overnight visits. On this particular visit we went to a barbecue at a neighbors. There were some other kids his age there and they were running around playing while the adults were all chatting.

We hear a boom and run to see what happened. Found out that someone had flushed a firework down the toilet and totally [messed] up my neighbors plumbing. All the kids pointed fingers at my nephew, though hes denying he did it. None of us know where the firework came from.

Now my neighbor is saying he is going to sue me if I don’t pay for damages. How likely is it I will have to pay?

Because you were acting in place of the boy’s parents/guardian at the time of the incident (in loco parentis), you can be held responsible for the property damaged by your nephew.

Washington state caps the amount of compensation that a parent (or parent substitute) is responsible for at $5000.

Here is a link to the law:

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.190

Do you believe your nephew when he says he did not flush the firecracker down the toilet? Has he done anything similar in the past that would require of you greater, closer supervision of him?

All of the children present at the barbecue probably had reasons to lie. I would want to know where the firecracker came from and I would want a bit more evidence before committing to paying for the property damage (although, admittedly, it does not right now sound too good for your nephew).

 

[Philtan]

What is your nephew's age?

How much are the repairs going to cost?

He’s 12
My neighbor said the plumber quoted him at 3k

 

[Philtan]

Because you were acting in place of the boy’s parents/guardian at the time of the incident (in loco parentis), you can be held responsible for the property damaged by your nephew.

Washington state caps the amount of compensation that a parent (or parent substitute) is responsible for at $5000.

Here is a link to the law:

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.190

Do you believe your nephew when he says he did not flush the firecracker down the toilet? Has he done anything similar in the past that would require of you greater, closer supervision of him?

All of the children present at the barbecue probably had reasons to lie. I would want to know where the firecracker came from and I would want a bit more evidence before committing to paying for the property damage (although, admittedly, it does not right now sound too good for your nephew).

Well, that sucks

Honestly, don’t know if I believe him or the other kids. He’s never done anything like this around us, but we only see him a few times a year. His social worker has never brought anything like this up.

I would like to know where the firework came from too. I know it didn’t come from my house. Could the liability be on someone else if I found out where it came from?

 

[Taxing Matters]

All of the children present at the barbecue probably had reasons to lie. I would want to know where the firecracker came from and I would want a bit more evidence before committing to paying for the property damage (although, admittedly, it does not right now sound too good for your nephew).

I agree. The problem I see is the the adults came running right after the boom. The other kids would not have had much chance to coordinate whom to blame in that period of time. It doesn't mean they didn't all point at the nephew to cover for someone else, but it's not a particularly helpful fact that they didn't have much time to figure out where to place the blame.

 

[Taxing Matters]

What is the name of your state? Washington

We hear a boom and run to see what happened. Found out that someone had flushed a firework down the toilet and totally f-ed up my neighbors plumbing. All the kids pointed fingers at my nephew, though hes denying he did it. None of us know where the firework came from.

If you can somehow get good evidence explaining who gave the firework to one of the kids, that may provide a better person for the neighbor to sue.

Now my neighbor is saying he is going to sue me if I don’t pay for damages. How likely is it I will have to pay?

There is no way to give you a firm percentage on that with the facts we have so far. It could go either way. The one thing that benefits you is that the burden is on the plaintiff (your neighbors) to prove it was more likely than not that your nephew did it. If there isn't any evidence to show that your nephew was more likely the bomber than any other kid, e.g. the court concludes that it might have been any of them, then you should win because the neighbor failed to meet his burden.

 

[quincy]

Well, that sucks

Honestly, don’t know if I believe him or the other kids. He’s never done anything like this around us, but we only see him a few times a year. His social worker has never brought anything like this up.

I would like to know where the firework came from too. I know it didn’t come from my house. Could the liability be on someone else if I found out where it came from?

If the social worker never mentioned any special concerns with your nephew, you would have had no reason to keep a close eye on him. That can be important from a negligence standpoint.

If the other kids at the barbecue are friends, I can see how they might want to blame the “new” kid for the damage. However I suspect they all played some role in blowing up the toilet, if doing nothing more than supplying the firecracker and daring someone to toss it.

The neighbor might have witnesses but I don’t trust that these kids are entirely reliable witnesses. Kids lie. If the one who supplied the firecracker can be identified - and it’s not your nephew - that would complicate any claim made by the neighbor. Someone else could be liable or there could be shared liability.

 

[adjusterjack]

My neighbor said the plumber quoted him at 3k

"Said"?

Do you have pictures of the damage?

A written estimate for the repairs?

Assuming the cost is correct, you might consider turning the claim over to your homeowner or renters insurance company so that experts can deal with your neighbor.

 

[quincy]

"Said"?

Do you have pictures of the damage?

A written estimate for the repairs?

Assuming the cost is correct, you might consider turning the claim over to your homeowner or renters insurance company so that experts can deal with your neighbor.

It might be too early to admit fault. I would hate to see the nephew blamed for something he didn’t do.

 

[Zigner]

Because you were acting in place of the boy’s parents/guardian at the time of the incident (in loco parentis), you can be held responsible for the property damaged by your nephew.

Washington state caps the amount of compensation that a parent (or parent substitute) is responsible for at $5000.

Here is a link to the law:

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.24.190

Please note that the law requires that the child be "living with the parent or parents.", and n overnight visit is not the same as "living with." It seems much more likely to me that the foster parents would be the ones on the hook, not the OP.

 

[LdiJ]

Please note that the law requires that the child be "living with the parent or parents.", and n overnight visit is not the same as "living with." It seems much more likely to me that the foster parents would be the ones on the hook, not the OP.

or perhaps the state as the state is the official guardian of foster children.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Please note that the law requires that the child be "living with the parent or parents.", and n overnight visit is not the same as "living with." It seems much more likely to me that the foster parents would be the ones on the hook, not the OP.

There isn't any case law suggesting that the statute extends to those who are in loco parentis (meaning a person who stands in the same kind of role as a parent at the time of the kid's actions) so it remains untested whether the Washington courts would say the OP was in loco parentis at the time of the kid's actions and read the statute to extend liability under it to persons who are in loco parentis. In other words, would the state courts read the statute literally to apply only to birth parents or also to those who are in loco parentis. Note that for the foster parents to be liable under the statute the same argument would have to be made — that the statute applies beyond just the actual natural parents of the children. The problem with that is that the foster parents were not the ones responsible for the supervision of the child at the time the toilet blew up. But to make it to that argument, they plaintiff has to first prove the kid was responsible for it in the first place. If the plaintiff can't establish that then the argument as to whether to read the statute literally or to read to include those in loco parentis doesn't matter.

I'm pretty sure the state would not have any liability for this. It wasn't the state's duty to supervise the child — that duty was was on the OP at the time of the incident. Furthermore, to sue the state successfully for this the plaintiff would need to find law in Washington that waives the state's sovereign immunity for this kind of situation.

There are clearly unsettled issues as to how the statute would apply in this case, common law liability is still preserved by the statute. Thus the plaintiff may try arguing that the OP is liable because the OP was present and in the role of superivising the child at the time but failed in the OP's duty to adequately supervise the child. That argument would require more evidence than relying on the statute (if it applied) because the plaintiff would have to also prove that the OP was negligent in supervising the child.

The bottom line here is that there are problems the plaintiff would have in successfully suing for this, the OP is not clearly free of liability either.

 

[adjusterjack]

It might be too early to admit fault.

Hmm. I wasn't suggesting that.