Insurance Company suing for damages

[redoct63]

YOUR STATE NAME - Virginia: My friend's four year old boy set fire to their apartment, they had no renter's insurance. now the insurance company is suing them for damages. the ceiling on what they can sue for is $2,500. she is a working mother with four children and no money for an attorney. the insurance company will not release the bill of complaint to her prior to trial. what should she do?

 

[Donna32669]

4 year old - Fire

Your friend is responsible for the acts of her minor child. Set up a payment arrangement with the insurer would be my suggestion. This may avoid a judgement against her. Be thankful the child was not hurt.

 

[redoct63]

Donna, thanks for the advice - and yes we are glad no one was hurt in the fire. Virginia law states that a parent is only responsible for the acts of a minor child if that child acted in a negligent manner, or has acted in that way before. He is too young to be considered able to make cognitive decisions, and therefore should not be held negligent. Anyone else have anything to add?

 

[justathought]

Maybe they're not finding the child negligent, but the parent (which changes the damage cap, if you based it on suing the child)? Why would they go after the child (with age/damage cap issues) when they could find the parent negligent in the care of... leaving him alone, not keeping matches secure, etc.

I am no way qualified to opine legally, but I think those would be things to think about.

 

[redoct63]

They are not holding the child negligent, but the mother for the actions of her four-year-old son. She tucked him in bed around 9 pm, checked on him before she went to sleep around 10:30 and at midnight, he pulled a lighter out of her purse and set the bedclothes on fire. The fire department gave her the number to a juvenile fire safety course, but when she called them, they told her he was too young to understand fire safety. This tells me that he was too young to understand his actions. She was not negligent, because she had no reason to believe he would go after a lighter after she saw him asleep.

 

[jlw1000]

I'm sorry, but the mother was negligent. First of all, she should have had renter's insurance. It is negligent not to. Most leases require a tenant to have renter's insurance.

Also, the mother should not have left a lighter where the child was able to gain access. I make sure my matches candles are kept on a high shelf out of my child's reach, and that my child can not climb up to obtain them.

 

[redoct63]

/well, I suppose that not having renter's insurance could be considered negligent if it was required in the state of Virginia. The lease did not specify that renter's insurance was required, so I would think that the land lord would be the negligent party, as far as the insurance company is concerned, for not including that requirement in the lease.

Also, the little boy did not EVER show an interest in lighters/matches/candles in the past, but had just been introduced to a fire safety class at daycare that day. A class in which the teacher did not see fit to tell the parents the children had participated.

 

[jlw1000]

Now you are trying to hold the Landlord responsible for your friend's lack of foresight to get renter's insurance. You also want to imply that the daycare was negligent for doing a fire safety class & not informing the your friend.

At what point does your friend ever take responsibility for her actions or lack thereof? I know when I rented at the age of 18, I had renter's insurance for the contents of my apartment. This was not in my lease, nor should it be. It's just that nowadays some landlords have it in their lease, so that if there is a situation such as your friend's they can be sure to be reimbursed for the damages they suffered. Instead of trying to get a tenant to pay for their responsibility because that can be quite difficult.

Seriously, the landlord did not leave a lighter for her child to play with, your friend did. As for the day care teaching the child fire safety, this should have been done by your friend prior to this time.

Caring for a child is a full time job & a parent has to try to head off any danger a normal person would think of. My child is 19 months old, & incable of operating a lighter or matches, but I keep them well out of his way. At some point a child will express an interest in these items, & is not going to inform the parent beforehand.

To put this another way, most parents try to keep cleaning products, medicines, and other hazardous materials out of a child's reach. (Usually in a high cabinet, or one that has been child proofed.) This is a foreseeable danger (as are matches, lighers, guns, etc.). If a child were to get into these chemicals it would fall under the parent's responsibility, since it is under their control. Would you blame the landlord? The daycare? The company that anufactured the product?

Bottom line, you friend is liable. If she wasn't the insurance company would not waste it's time on such a relatively small claim.