Is it reasonable for the owner to ask me to pay the amount he spent by the time he bought it? The price was ridiculously high. The camera is deeply devaluated. I can buy something twice as good in quality with less than half the price.
2006-07-17 23:54:05 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
by right i can just even legally get away with it cuz theres no legal contracts for borrowing between us. It was all friendly. Its just plain goodwill on my part that I am offering to pay. Plus, he doesnt even have the receipt anymore when it was bought a few years back. He doesnt have proof that the camera was worth that amount when he bought it.
2006-07-18 00:02:28 · update #1
i think he's trying to extort money from me from with his unreason. I can even get a very good lawyer with less than what he's asking me already!!!
2006-07-18 00:04:16 · update #2
if i pay him the current value of the camera, it would be ridiculously low. Less than 10% of what he originally paid for. The camera is really old. 5 years. hes my friend too, so i think well result to buying him a new one. Upgraded model.
2006-07-18 02:49:38 · update #3
It seems to me two things: you lost the camera and you want to replace the camera. But what do you replace? If it were a TV or a car that got 'lost', an insurance company would only give you cash to replace the used item. The insurance company would not give you money to buy a new item.
So how to you replace the camera? Can you go to eBay and determine the selling price a similar make and model camera? This seems like the best and fair, market place determined way of replacing HIS camera. Then if there were a range of values, I would offer to give the higher amount of money, after all you did lose his camera.
Small claims court would most likely not rule to give him the purchase price of the camera AND I don't believe that he is entitled to the value of the NEW camera for a couple of reasons:
1. The camera you lost was not new. He was able use and enjoy the camera before it was lost and therefore is not entitled to recieve the purchase price for the camera. This argument supports finding the selling price of similar cameras from eBay.
2. Technology has advanced. If a new similar or same brand name camera can be purchased with twice the technology at half the price, a REASONABLE man would not purchase old technology at twice the price and half the value. In essence when the insurance company gives you the money for the 'lost' TV or car, you would go out and get the best value for that money. This argument also supports finding the price on eBay of a similar camera.
Apologize profusely, make sure you get everything in writing, and Good Luck.
2006-07-18 02:29:10 · answer #1 · answered by vbrink 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
speak with the owner and explain the benefits of the new camera to them. for example. what Megapixels are, what Zoom is, and other details which will make the camera you buy them, a better deal.
They may also be afraid that they will not be able to use or understand the new camera, so take them to a shop where the camera is and teach them how to use it.
Show them the benefits over the old one you lost
If they persist in wanting the old camera do a search on the internet maybe E-bay etc
2006-07-18 00:03:36 · answer #2 · answered by D 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well it sounds like you want to do the right thing.
If you can replace the camera same make and model and it costs you less, I don't see a problem or even upgrade his camera and still spend less money I'd think it was ok. Your replacing the camera, not what he originally spent.
2006-07-18 00:01:50 · answer #3 · answered by fosplicer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It seems to me you are obligated to replace the camera with one of equal or greater value. If he paid $1000. for the camera five years ago, and the same or better camera today costs $200., that should be acceptable. Of course he wants more money. He could buy a brand new camera, and pocket the difference!
2006-07-18 06:14:40 · answer #4 · answered by Tiss 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you need to replace it. If you can get the same brand, the same features for a better price then that is not unreasonable. But what you think is quality and the owner's idea of quality could be two different things.
Its not your place to determine that he paid too much. You are the one that lost it by being careless and irresponsible.
2006-07-18 00:00:15 · answer #5 · answered by sahel578 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Speaking as a lawyer, if you were careless in losing the camera (and you probably were), you probably owe the owner the current market value of the camera, but not what he paid for it originally.
2006-07-18 01:16:01 · answer #6 · answered by AnOrdinaryGuy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Talk to the guy for goodness sake. Offer to get him a new camera which you think will compensate his loss. Convince him why this new camera would be just as good or better than the one you lost. Keep it as amicable as possible. Good luck.
2006-07-18 01:37:02 · answer #7 · answered by JK 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'd just go and buy the exact same camera and give it to him then tell him to stick it where the sun don't shine! maybe hes asking for more money to get a better camera and making you pay.
2006-07-18 00:06:13 · answer #8 · answered by traceylolanna 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If she doesn't furnish then you definately ought to inform her to compensate you for the digicam, $450 is distinctive money to allow bypass purely because your chum does no longer elevate the placement of paying you decrease back. exceptionally even as she lost it. The digicam became her duty once you let her borrow it. it is her duty to pay you decrease back.
2016-12-01 20:07:56 · answer #9 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
either pay him the money he/she is asking for, or give him/her something that is of equal value NOW. degradation of the equipment should be taken into consideration when deciding on things like this, i'd say. it's pretty easier to convince someone that your money is worth the thing you lost by actually using that money to get something equivalent.
2006-07-18 00:00:40 · answer #10 · answered by hapones120 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋