Should the Parents have had to pay in the first place for this?

So, there was a viral video that sparked outrage when a little boy in a crowded shopping Mall backed up just a little and accidentally knocked over a Teletubbies statue that broke. The Teletubby had absolutely no barriers surrounding it and was in a heavily visited part in the store, just standing there in the open. He is clearly seen trying to catch the Teletubby. The Parents had to pay a lot of money for the broken Teletubby. $33,000 Hong Kong money(About $6,700 US)


Rather than the public being on the Mall's side, the public was outraged that the Teletubby was out in the open with no barriers in a heavily visited part of the mall. Outraged Protestors said stuff like,"I'm an Adult and I'd back away from the crowd of People passing me by too especially during Covid. I could have easily broken this statue backing away from the crowd like this little boy did. Statue should have had barricades around it. " They also pointed out the store could have been sued if the Teletubby had fallen on him or other People instead.

The store gave the Parents the money back and apologized after the general Public protested the Parents paying $6,700 US. Even the store themselves admitted the statue shouldn't have been out in the open with no barricades in a heavily visited part of the store.

https://youtu.be/bAq8DIkS3wM

That was in another country.

Here in many if not all states parents have very limited liablitity, by statute, for the negligent actions of their kids.

The limitation on liability is usually quite low, maybe a couple grand, max.

I couldn't even begin to speculate, that is Hong Kong, which is super legally complicated just in its existence, basically China, but some different laws as it was annexed back from the UK. As for liability laws in China, or specifically Chinese Hong Kong who knows...

In America the answer (in most States) would be no. You are not required to pay for (accidentally) broken merchandise. And, the police cannot get involved. However, if the store wants to pursue a civil claim against you, you probably would be required to pay. (Again, this is Chinese Hong Kong, so none of this applies).

Quote: Gandler

However, if the store wants to pursue a civil claim against you, you probably would be required to pay.

that would surprise me unless they could show that it was intentional or a result of some inappropriate action.

Quote: DRich

that would surprise me unless they could show that it was intentional or a result of some inappropriate action.

It also depends on the value, if its some 3 dollar trinket, its obviously not going to be worth the time or money to take civil action. But, when its 5K+ maybe that is closer the threshold (I think the video said the USD conversion was over 6K).

But, as parents are generally responsible for monitoring their minors (that is why some stores don't allow unnacompied minors to enter, even if they do not sell anything that is age restricted), their (parents) negligence can be as simple as allowing or encouraging their kid to run around an aisle of ancient vases (random example). So the store would not be suing the kid, but their parents.

I would imagine for many stores 6Kish is close if not over the threshold where it could be worth considering some kind of civil action (or even just the threat of it to entice the parents to pay).

I think most people's natural reaction in a store if they break something is to assume that they have to pay for it. But, they actually don't. "You break it, you buy it" signs have no legal bearing. And, (unlike shoplifting) store employees cannot detain you for accidentally breaking something (and if they try to, they will get in far more trouble than you). So you can just walk out, and let the store decide if they want to sue you or not.

To some degree its why some stores will not support the prosecution of shoplifters for under a certain amount (which is rarely publicly available), because its not worth spending countless man hours doing police reports, interviews, compiling videos, depositions, going to court, etc.... to get somebody who stole a candy bar. Now, of course that is criminal so different, but the value concept is the same (how much time and money it will cost over just eating the loss).

The store claimed the kid kicked the Teletubby Statue, causing it to fall which is why the Parents paid the $6,700 US. The video proved this was not the case at all, he merely backed up a little into the statue backing up away from the crowd and caused it to fall. The public outcry of outrage as he clearly didn't kick the statue, but merely backed up to get away from the crowd is what caused the store to give back the money to the Parents. It would have been a completely different story if he really had kicked the Teletubby Statue that way like what was claimed at first.

I have read reports that the boy in this video developed PTSD over this. I wonder how much therapy bills his Parents eup will end up paying for his PTSD.