Whos fault is it if an underage minor purchases an item that is not approved by the parent?

Question

Nothing illeagel or inappropriate, just clearly unnessessary for the child and expensive. Lets pretend it is a body lotion.

A minor comes in a store and buys a lotion that is $70. the child later comes back with parent and the parent has a fit with the store clerk because a no refund policy.

Whos right and whos wrong? the parent or the store clerk?

EVERYONE SEEMS TO HAVE A GOOD ANSWER. AND THE RIGHT ONE TOO. IM GONNA LET THE VOTES DECIDE THIS ONE.

Answer 1

Its not up to a store clerk to decide who can buy what, except in the case of clearly delineated rules like video game or movie restrictions.

Why did the parent let this child off on their own - carrying $70 no less??

Typical parents these days - blame everyone but themselves.

Answer 2

Ok, a purchase in the states is a contract then the store couldn’t enter into a valid contract with a minor. (Expect for necessaries, food, clothing, shelter, medical care, etc)

Now whether a pair of $150 jeans is a necessary or not is open for discussion.

Now you are going to have to prove that the minor purchase the item. Read get a lawyer which an hour of time will cost much more then the $70. Until a judge orders it, the store doesn’t have to provide you with anything, surveillance tape, etc to help your case.

The store could also claim damages from the parents, claiming they are responsible for the damages their child caused. This would be for something they could not re-sell, lotion for example. Once the lotion leaves the store they could be forbidden from re-selling that item, or they would not be willing to take the chance of a lawsuit if something went wrong.

Now if you pursue this action, don’t be surprised if you and the minor are banned from the store. They have no obligation to sell to you or to the minor.

Answer 3

It will depend on the law of the country in question, but if it's the US or UK then ALL the other posters are wrong.

A minor child has no legal standing to enter into a contract, and can cancel that contract at any time, with the exception of contracts to purchase "necessities" (food, etc)

A cash purchase at a store IS a contract. If a minor buys something and doesn't want it, they can take it back and cancel the contract. If the item is still new, then the store has NO choice but to give a refund, whatever their "policy" may be.

The fact is, of course, that many stores will simply refuse, knowing that a parent is unlikely to file a small-claims court case over a $70 bottle of lotion - but he could if he wanted to.

Richard

Answer 4

Unless there is an age restriction on the item, the fault lies with the child (assuming the child is not a very young child). If the child is old enough to have knowingly selected the item and to make payment for the item, fault is with the child. Secondary fault lies with the parent, for failure to actually parent the child. A store clerk has no responsibility to police the purchases of children unless as stated above the item being purchased has an age restriction. Possible exceptions would be adult orientated items from a store such as Spencers, as some of these items may not have actual age restrictions, but should require a store policy of no sales to minors.

Answer 5

The store clerk.
A sale is not a contract, it is a transaction and there are no laws limited the age a person can carry out a transaction.

As long as the policy is posted, or the customer is in some way made aware of it, the store or clerk have no fault. The parent may not approve of their child's spending habits however it is no fault of the store.

Answer 6

Since the child has not purchased something illegally, the store clerk is simply doing his/her job. For all he/she knows, the kid is filthy rich, and $70 is nothing for a bottle of lotion. For the clerk to question the expenditure would be equivalent to prying.

I don't even know that "fault" is the appropriate word; "responsibility" is more like it, and THAT rests squarely on the shoulders of the parent.

Answer 7

If the child has made a payment for the item, then it is sold. If there is a no refund policy that mom or dad gets angry about, he or she should direct their anger towards the child, and upon themselves for not explaining to the child that $70 is too much to spend on body lotion. However, if the child bought the items with money that he or she earned at a job, then the parent really is just shooting themself in the foot if he or she gets mad.

Answer 8

The store clerk has no responsibility to parent the child. So if the parent has a problem with it then it's the parent's fault.

Answer 9

i could think of, that oldsters would desire to be conscientious proper to the hazards in contact for teenage eating. And with this in suggestions, they does not enable their babies to drink any alcohol in any admire. i think that during Europe, with undesirable eating water, babies may well be allowed to have a small quantity of wine with a meal. by using fact wine is so prevelent in most of the worldwide places. and exceedingly the place wine is made. yet while mom and father' choose for his or her babies to proceed to be healthful, they won't enable something till the teen is eighteen or older. it somewhat is in simple terms too ordinary for babies to love the flavor of a few alcohol drinks, so forbidding them to drink, is the final answer to warding off any dependancy interior the destiny.

Answer 10

If the product is legal and under no restrictions...

it's not the stores fault.