The People's Court: Should I Pay for New Brakes?

[Noumenon]

Just wanted some people's opinion on who's at fault and what you think the legal system would make me pay if we did it that way.

I let my nephew play in my sister's car and he pulled the parking brake. She drove around in it all day and fried the back rotors. She didn't notice because the car's idiot lights are defective and always on.

My brother-in-law always hates when I let his son play with things that aren't toys or touch his stuff. I feel like I ought to offer to pay for the new brakes. Should they accept? If we were on Judge Judy, who would have to pay?

 

[Relique du Madde]

Tough call. Your sister should have checked the parking break... But more importantly, letting children play inside of a car isn't the wisest thing to do especially if they are playing with the parking break and the car's other controls.

If you were put on Judge Judy you would have to pay. She would also say the same thing I said but in a castrating manor.

 

[Pyrex]

IMO, you're both at fault. If nothing else, in the interest of family harmony you should offer to pay (at least) half the repair cost.

 

[Noumenon]

Tough call. Your sister should have checked the parking break... But more importantly, letting children play inside of a car isn't the wisest thing to do especially if they are playing with the parking break and the car's other controls.

If you were put on Judge Judy you would have to pay. She would also say the same thing I said but in a castrating manor.

Thanks for your reply. It helped give me the motivation to do the right thing and e-mail offering to pay. I can see Judge Judy now explaining to me how a car is not a toy for a three-year-old. That would be embarrassing.

 

[frankthedm]

She drove

Then it is her fault.

My brother-in-law always hates when I let his son play with things that aren't toys or touch his stuff.

Yeah, with good reason. I think this is a shining example.

I feel like I ought to offer to pay for the new brakes.

Only as a gesture of goodwill.

Should they accept?

Depends on their financial situation and if they perceive it as charity.

Judge Judy

Would lambaste the anyone so oblivious to drive around with the parking brake on. I have to disagree with the above posters. The driver is the one solely responsible for the operation of a car. Does not matter who did what to the cars controls, you sit in that drivers seat and the onus is on you before you even turn the key. Unless the kid pulled wires or cut brake cables, you would not be responcible.

 

[nerfherder]

Just wanted some people's opinion on who's at fault and what you think the legal system would make me pay if we did it that way.

The driver is responsible for operating a car correctly - and that includes taking off the parking brake. I find it difficult to imagine not noticing it was on, though, warning light or not.

However, I think offering to pay was a decent thing of you to do. Especially since it was you who let a child operate the controls of a car.

Hopefully, that will smooth things over between you and your sister/brother-in-law.

 

[Noumenon]

It is quite easy to operate a car with the parking brake engaged -- unlike a forklift, which isn't supposed to move at all even with the pedal to the floor. I have to put something on my seat every time I use my parking brake because otherwise I don't remember until the little light warns me. My sister doesn't use her parking brake ever, and doesn't even know where it is, so I sure wouldn't hold her responsible for someone else setting it.

If you ask me my brother-in-law is as responsible as I am, for deeming the car driveable when none of the warning lights work. Something is going to go wrong if you do that, it just happened to be caused by me instead of by low oil or something no one had a hand in. I should probably check to make sure my understanding about the warning lights is correct.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Just wanted some people's opinion on who's at fault and what you think the legal system would make me pay if we did it that way.

I let my nephew play in my sister's car and he pulled the parking brake. She drove around in it all day and fried the back rotors. She didn't notice because the car's idiot lights are defective and always on.

My brother-in-law always hates when I let his son play with things that aren't toys or touch his stuff. I feel like I ought to offer to pay for the new brakes. Should they accept? If we were on Judge Judy, who would have to pay?

Why didn't she have the parking brake on while the car is parked?

I always put it on, even when the car is parked on flat ground.

Geoff.

 

[nerfherder]

It is quite easy to operate a car with the parking brake engaged -- unlike a forklift, which isn't supposed to move at all even with the pedal to the floor. I have to put something on my seat every time I use my parking brake because otherwise I don't remember until the little light warns me. My sister doesn't use her parking brake ever, and doesn't even know where it is, so I sure wouldn't hold her responsible for someone else setting it.

If you ask me my brother-in-law is as responsible as I am, for deeming the car driveable when none of the warning lights work. Something is going to go wrong if you do that, it just happened to be caused by me instead of by low oil or something no one had a hand in. I should probably check to make sure my understanding about the warning lights is correct.

Your sister is responsible for knowing how to operate her vehicle, it's her responsibility to know how all the controls work, and it's her responsibility that the car is properly maintained and is safe. Unless the law is different in your country/state.

Sure, you can operate a car with the parking brake engaged. I did it myself a couple of weeks ago. Started manouvering the car from its parking space and immediately wondered why it felt wrong. I noticed that before I noticed the warning light. I guess it might have only been lightly pulled on, or might be very ineffective on your sister's car - but then I can't see how that would have worn down the rotors. If there's enough force to wear down the rotors, then you should be able to feel that braking when you're driving.

Ultimately though, it's not about who is legally right and wrong, it's about getting on with family. Did they accept your offer to pay for new brakes (and did it really need new rotors - I'd have thought it would just have been pads required)?

 

[Noumenon]

Why didn't she have the parking brake on while the car is parked?

I always put it on, even when the car is parked on flat ground.

I don't believe that's common. The only reason I use the parking brake myself is because I got used to using them on the forklifts at work. But I don't feel like it's really necessary to use it because I figure the car companies would have had to design it to most people's usage patterns and make the Park strong enough to hold most of the time. (Looks like I should be doing it though.)

Your sister is responsible for knowing how to operate her vehicle, it's her responsibility to know how all the controls work, and it's her responsibility that the car is properly maintained and is safe. Unless the law is different in your country/state.

I am pretty liberal and to me this kind of personal responsibility is a legal fiction designed so the state can apportion damages when somebody gets in a crash. We can't really expect every individual to go through some kind of pre-flight checklist before setting out in their car. However, I did ask about the legal aspects and that's probably the way it would be ruled.

Ultimately though, it's not about who is legally right and wrong, it's about getting on with family.

Yes -- I was not looking for support for the idea of not paying, I knew I would have to apologize and make it right even if I wasn't to blame.

(and did it really need new rotors - I'd have thought it would just have been pads required)

I'm really confused. After my sis told me about the rotors I went Googling, "range rover," "parking brake on," and I found several stories about people who did this. But now when I Google again, or look back through my history, there's nothing there! But it wasn't a dream -- the searches I did on "jetta parking brake on" are still there, I remember being interested that my car didn't have as many horror stories as the Range Rovers. Well anyway, my brother in law claims that the parking brake only has a "locking mechanism for the transfer flywheel" and can't wear out the brakes at all, but something electrical is wrong instead.

I'm sorry this isn't making sense -- I thought I'd confirmed with Google that wearing out your pads is a common thing from leaving the parking brake on, and I knew my BiL took a different car to work because the brakes weren't working right.

Anyway, it's too bad all the legal responsibility seems to be falling on my sister because her behavior is the only one that seems like an innocent victim to me.