Althouse: "A 5-year-old boy in Plymouth, England, was given a $24 invoice for missing a friend's birthday party..."

January 20, 2015

"A 5-year-old boy in Plymouth, England, was given a $24 invoice for missing a friend's birthday party..."

"... in an unusual dispute that appears to be heading to court."

54 comments:

rhhardin said...: They're not asking the court to decide whether enough is enough.

Taking it to court says enough is enough.

It's a symbolic action.; 1/20/15, 10:12 AM
Rumpletweezer said...: The appropriate response: Pay the bill; never let your child socialize with anyone in that family.; 1/20/15, 10:25 AM
The Godfather said...: Leaving aside sending the "invoice"(which was a really stupid thing to do), if the party-givers are out the $25, then the parents of the no-show invitee should apologize and pay the money.

The bigger question is: What kind of people throw this kind of party for a 5-year old?

I am not a robot.; 1/20/15, 10:26 AM
Wince said...: A gift offer or at most an offer for unilateral contract (no RSVP mentioned).

Even stretching the latter, there was no acceptance by performance = showing up.; 1/20/15, 10:31 AM
Matt Sablan said...: I always was taught that anything under $100 isn't worth fighting over, just consider it the cost of learning who you can trust with things.

But, then again, this is dealing with children, so the lesson may be different.; 1/20/15, 10:31 AM
lgv said...: Two wrongs. How pathetic.; 1/20/15, 10:36 AM
prairie wind said...: If the invitation was accepted, he should have gone to the party. Saying that he had a better offer (time with grandparents) is not an excuse. Alex's parents need to teach better manners.

If the hosting parents didn't provide contact information, Alex's parents had no way to let them know Alex wouldn't be able to come. The birthday boy's parents need to eat the $24.

If the parents have involved the boys in the dispute--Alex is pictured with his dad, so, yeah, that's involved, and the birthday boy doesn't play with Alex anymore, so that's involved--they should all be ashamed of themselves.; 1/20/15, 10:45 AM
Mark said...: Should this really be titled:

Parents of billed kids embarrass him forever on the internet

While the parent who sent the bill may be over the line, calling the newspapers to try to shame bill-sending-lady isn't what I would try to teach my kid.

What a remarkable example for their kids both sets of parents are ...; 1/20/15, 10:55 AM
traditionalguy said...: But what about the implied social contract that a birthday present and attendance is expected in our circle, and we reciprocate when your kid is honored.

That must be the motive for asserting there is a "bill" they owe.; 1/20/15, 10:59 AM
paminwi said...: Maybe these idiots should have planned some Pin the Tail on the Donkey at home. Much cheaper and probably way more fun.; 1/20/15, 11:09 AM
lemondog said...: So the kid was overbooked. Wasn't his iPhone scheduler working?

Wonder how much Gramps would have billed.

Suspect he would have gotten a better deal if he had gone to the party and stiffed Gramps.; 1/20/15, 11:17 AM
Thorley Winston said...: A gift offer or at most an offer for unilateral contract (no RSVP mentioned).

Even stretching the latter, there was no acceptance by performance = showing up.

Actually it sounds more like promissory estoppel if they had accepted the invitation to the party and the birthday boy’s parents had reasonably relied on that acceptance of the invitation to spend $24.00. However the part that I’m not clear on is what their damages were since they presumably would have paid it otherwise (perhaps they would have instead invited a different child who would have provided a gift instead of the child who didn’t attend).

Either way, it’s a trifling amount (probably less than the cost of filing the claim in small claims court) and embarrassing yourself and your children by acting this way over such a small slight is not the lesson that parents should be teaching their children.; 1/20/15, 11:18 AM
cubanbob said...: The parents who billed the other kid's parents for not showing up ought to be fined 20 times the amount by the court for assholery. It's an invitation. They offered it.A gift. If the kid had attended they would have been out the money so they are no worse off by the kid not attending. The asshole parents could have tried to negotiate a reduction with the vendor but they didn't.

Anyone who has ever organized a party or social event knows that one almost never get a 100% attendance as usually there is one or more no-shows for whatever reason. If the kid had gotten sick and couldn't attend would the asshole parent's have billed the kid's parents?; 1/20/15, 11:18 AM
tim maguire said...: Bad behavior all around. The party parents should have anticipated a certain number of no-shows. That's just reality.

They should have eaten the bill for the no-show child and said nothing. Having demonstrated no class or style by handing the little no-show boy a bill, the parents of the no-show boy should have paid it and said noting. They instead demonstrated no class or style by making a stink about it.; 1/20/15, 11:23 AM
Brando said...: This would set one hell of a precedent--imagine getting an invoice for standing up your date.; 1/20/15, 11:26 AM
Brando said...: As for this case, I sympathize with the party throwing and invoicing parents--they laid out money based on their RSVPs and people cancelling without adequate notice makes you eat the cost. $24 isn't a big deal, but if there were several kids who flaked out it'd add up quick.

That said, if this is a big concern then you have to make this all clear up front to the other kids' parents so they know this isn't the same as flaking on showing up to a cake and pizza party. Which, frankly, is the only type of party little kids should be given. Ski park sounds a bit posh!; 1/20/15, 11:33 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: Too bizarre.

Don't invite the no-show kid next year.

OR

If you get a nonsense invoice from a crazy person, ignore it.; 1/20/15, 11:37 AM
Deb said...: Good grief. How about just not inviting them to future parties?; 1/20/15, 11:52 AM
Big Mike said...: I've thrown fairly elaborate birthday parties for my boys back when they were young, though not nearly that elaborate and especially not that elaborate when they were still pre-school. I assumed the full costs of the parties out of my own pocket. I don't see why the family who threw the party don't do the same.

Did the invitation include RSVP contact information? Did the invitation say that there would be a fee per attendee charged by the ski park? Perhaps the Alex's parents might have sent him off if they knew that.; 1/20/15, 12:03 PM
Ann Althouse said...: It's bad to cancel on the party that had a high cost per child. You ought to know that and follow through with the acceptance and see the grandparents on another occasion. Seems like an easy out.

It's bad to send the invoice, but there was probably more to that step, some real outrage at the effrontery of canceling.

Once you get the invoice, you should feel bad about provoking it and think they're being gauche. But if that happened to me, I'd send a note apologizing for canceling and paying the $24. Avoiding them in the future isn't much trouble, as it seems obvious the kid didn't like the birthday boy too much.

Going to court and going to the press to humiliate the birthday family... that's truly disgusting.; 1/20/15, 12:45 PM
Ann Althouse said...: The birthday boy also expected a gift, and with an expensive party, presumably an expensive gift is expected. In that view, maybe the invoice should have been for $48. The cancellation family gets off easily paying only $24.; 1/20/15, 12:47 PM
MadisonMan said...: My vague recollection about this -- I read about it yesterday: The parents of the no-show initially RSVPed that he'd be there, but then plans changed, and they couldn't find the contact info to un-RSVP.

Rudeness all around. I'd've just paid the invoice (or say that I never received it -- really -- putting an invoice in a boy's bag and *not* expecting it to be smushed to the bottom underneath three notes from the teacher, a couple of folders of un-done english work and a rotten banana?); 1/20/15, 12:50 PM
Brando said...: "The birthday boy also expected a gift, and with an expensive party, presumably an expensive gift is expected. In that view, maybe the invoice should have been for $48."

I don't know about the gift--after all, gifts may be expected but are technically voluntary. Unless the invite said "a $24 gift is required for admission".; 1/20/15, 12:59 PM
Brando said...: Back in my day (my autobiography is titled "My Lawn, and How to Get Off It") the "nicer" birthday parties were bowling parties. What happened to bowling parties? No one ever got an invoice for a no-show at a bowling party.; 1/20/15, 1:01 PM
Brando said...: This does sort of hit home for me though because we do host a lot of parties, from big cocktail parties to smaller dinner parties, and the RSVP etiquette is frequently violated. When you have to plan for a larger group, and timing is important, flaking out can be the bane of your whole event. It's really not hard in the days of "e-vite" to simply let the host know if you're a yes, no, or maybe, and update that maybe as soon as it migrates to a "yes" or "no." A group of 30 when you expected 12 or vice versa can ruin your day, and is really unnecessary.; 1/20/15, 1:04 PM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: The right thing to do would be to ignore the invoice and give the birthday boy a gift with a note of apology for not being able to attend.

But, once the parent goes beyond just sending an invoice and threatens to sue you, your social obligations are extinguished.; 1/20/15, 1:15 PM
lemondog said...: What's the point of such elaborate parties for 5 years olds?

Seems to me it's more about the parents insecurities then the kids.; 1/20/15, 1:25 PM
JAORE said...: I suspect the $24 is dwarfed by the insult to the precious little birthday boy. Heavens there might even have been tears...

The world needs a heaping helping of "suck it up".; 1/20/15, 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: We used to still send the gift with a note if we had to cancel. This would be met with a thank you and noises to the effect that "your presence is present enough."

It is so hyper-competitive now that this type of thing is just looked on as teaching the kids to stand up for themselves.; 1/20/15, 2:02 PM
Wilbur said...: As a step-grandparent to several chidren, I was astonished to see the trouble and expense EVERY parent seems to go to for EVERY child's obligatory birthday party for EVERY birthday.

By crackey, when I was a youngin', the birthdays in our family were celebrated by getting to request what the family dinner that night would be.

Nowadays, a minimum $300-$400 outlay is expected. Moreover, the parents not infrequently can't afford it, either.; 1/20/15, 2:04 PM
Anonymous said...: As far as not socializing with or not inviting the kid next year - I think it's really bad when parental decisions lead to edicts from on high that they can't talk to a certain kid. It's generally not the kids' fault. They just get confused. They'll forget about it in a month.; 1/20/15, 2:06 PM
Rob said...: Ann Althouse wrote: The birthday boy also expected a gift, and with an expensive party, presumably an expensive gift is expected. In that view, maybe the invoice should have been for $48. The cancellation family gets off easily paying only $24.

It seems to me that even accepting the logic of the parents who sent the bill, they'd be entitled to either the $24 cost of the non-attending kid or the gift he would have given. Your notion of giving them the value of the admission price plus the gift is an example of double counting the damages.; 1/20/15, 2:17 PM
Real American said...: Fuck the invoice giving cunt family. No 5 year old owes you shit. The only thing these entitled cheap ass fuckbags were deserving of was an apology and had they politely explained that they had purchased a ticket for the no show kid, I'm sure the parents would have paid up, but giving a 5 year old a bill for non-attendance erases that obligation. They ought to be embarrassed for their cheap ass douchebaggery. And it's doubly insulting that they went to the kid's school and put it in his backpack. WTF kinda creepy shit is that?

And if we're going to get all legal, then remember that contracts with 5 years aren't fucking enforceable, and they're probably void ab initio in the first place.

My message if I received the invoice would be (1) Eat the $24 and (2) eat shit.; 1/20/15, 2:22 PM
Thorley Winston said...: I don’t know how much my parents spent on my birthday as a kid but the ones I remember most fondly involved going sledding in the evening, home for a dinner of hot dogs or pizza plus a chocolate birthday cake and then a sleep over with my friends that usually involved watching a movie or two that my parents rented for us to watch.

Boy was I deprived ;); 1/20/15, 2:25 PM
Mark O said...: De minimis non curat lex.; 1/20/15, 2:30 PM
paminwi said...: Favorite birthday party that my son remembers: we had a Peter Pan party - black eyepatches for the kids, they all made swords out of cardboard and aluminum foil, treasure hunt around the yard (treasure in a shoe box buried in the garden) and searching for the crocodile in the house (the tick tock was a kitchen timer - imagine getting 8 boys quiet enough to search for the timer!)

He remembers it to this day and he's 30 years old!

Hardly cost me a thing!

You can have fun without spending a lot of $!; 1/20/15, 2:50 PM
Valerie said...: Asking a child to pay for missing a birthday party?! It's crazy that with so many important issues being decided in the legal world that this topic is receiving so much attention. It's a good thing I haven't been fined or all of the events I have forgotten to attend.; 1/20/15, 3:27 PM
Quaestor said...: Parents should stay away from children as much as possible. Parents should feed their children, clothe them, make sure they're reasonably clean, provide safe and comfortable sleeping arrangements, be certain they attend school, and occasionally visit the doctor and the dentist. Otherwise, stay clear.

So-called "quality time" has proven itself pernicious. Take sports, for example. Long before Little League there was sandlot baseball. Totally unsupervised by alleged adults, the kids who went on to dauntlessly wade into Nazi machine-gun fire on Omaha Beach learned sportsmanship on vacant lots, often littered with broken bottles and rusty bits of cast iron, using only minimal equipment and no safety helmets. (I know this because I grew up watching lots of Our Gang shorts.) Today all kids are dragooned into youth sports leagues where they learn from the parents just how goddamned important their games really are.

And toys... Adults used to be content to either express their emotional commitment by buying their kids toys, or to make fortunes manufacturing and selling toys. Now however, thanks to that ubiquitous crew of self-righteous killjoys known as the Baby Boomers, toys have to be safe -- made of non-toxic, non-swallowable bits -- and peaceful. No horrible war toys, you vicious capitalist brutes! Result: Denied realistic toy guns, today's kids play with real guns. Take chemistry sets, for example. My chemistry set was awesome, while I didn't have the materials to make explosives; I at least had the capability of making something sufficiently noxious that that stupid kid from around the corner could be made violently sick if I could persuade him to eat it. Today's "chemistry sets" are hardly worthy of the name. The only hazard they present is the remote possibility of tripping over the box and falling headlong down the stairs. Result: Today's kids have no interest in chemistry, hence the awakening Yellow Peril across the seas.

Now we have this bizarre situation in England, caused entirely by asshole parents on both sides. If the party had been left up to the kids, the no-show might have sparked a schoolyard brawl. (Unlikely, though, kids attach little significance to birthdays beyond "I'm older, now I can go on the Tilt-A-Whirl.") Playground fisticuffs often cement lifelong friendships. Lawsuits do not.

(more typos corrected. jeez i'm such a putz.); 1/20/15, 3:54 PM
SeanF said...: Althouse: The birthday boy also expected a gift, and with an expensive party, presumably an expensive gift is expected. In that view, maybe the invoice should have been for $48. The cancellation family gets off easily paying only $24.

In that view, I'd be entitled to sue you for the value of your gift if you said you'd come and then didn't - even if the party cost me nothing to throw.; 1/20/15, 4:54 PM
BudBrown said...: RSVP means RSVP. And 5 is not
too young to start learning about
it. My mom was calling me anti-social by 5. But then can you teach
honor?; 1/20/15, 6:32 PM
Ann Althouse said...: My math is based on:

1. An unused, wasted ski package was purchased.

2. The present that should have corresponded to the slot was not received.

You may say: But what does it matter that the purchased slot was unused. The parents may have hoped to get to zero by receiving a gift worth the amount of their outlay, but from the point of view of the birthday boy:

1. He was stood up by a friend for whom his parents made a comfy slot.

2. He also expected a present.

He was wounded twice. $48.; 1/20/15, 7:10 PM
Joe said...: So, if the kid had showed up, they'd still be out $24. So how did they suffer a loss?

Anyone who puts birthday parties for friends ahead of family is a fucking asshole.; 1/20/15, 7:14 PM
Rob said...: 1. The sensible analysis of damages one would expect of a law school graduate never showed up.

2. I also expected the professor would change her analysis after her error was pointed out to her.

I was wounded twice. $1.48; 1/20/15, 8:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Back in Victorian times, all the street-urchins and ragamuffins would be rounded-up and sold ten bob a head onto sailing vessels, or worse.

This is a cakewalk.; 1/20/15, 8:39 PM
Anonymous said...: No one has mentioned here that the invoice carried the name of the ski center where the birthday party was held. I assume this means the mother of the birthday boy tried to make it look as if the bill came not from her but from the ski center. A spokesperson for the ski center claimed it was not, and did not want to be, involved in this contretemps and further described the use of the center's name on the invoice as "fraudulent."; 1/20/15, 9:02 PM
Lindsey said...: I read that this ended up in the press as the parents had a tete a tete on Facebook.; 1/20/15, 9:19 PM
wildswan said...: What if you got a bill from the DNC for being on their e-mail list but never donating? I've read those emails that get posted. It's clear that the DNC expects something. RSVP or anyhow "respond, send voluntary payment" is there all the time and also party invites, dinner invites, birthday celebrations. Pay up - we know where you live. Choice, privacy, manners - all gone in the Day of Big Data. The invoice is in the mail.

So the friend who sent the invoice for the birthday party is just training up the little boy to take his place in the new world of orders; 1/20/15, 9:31 PM
Anonymous said...: I've seen this story all day and this is the first time I processed that this was in the UK.

Woo hoo! It's not US! It's not US!; 1/21/15, 1:24 AM
RMc said...: Althouse is trolling herself again, I see. Where's Crack Emcee when you really need him?; 1/21/15, 7:14 AM
SeanF said...: Althouse: ...but from the point of view of the birthday boy:

1. He was stood up by a friend for whom his parents made a comfy slot.

2. He also expected a present.

Really? You're going to double down on the claim that a person who says they'll come to a party but then doesn't is liable for monetary damages? Because the inviter now has a legal claim to both their presence and their presents?

Really?; 1/21/15, 8:20 AM
CStanley said...: Completely ridiculous all the way around.

The parents who backed out at the last minute showed poor etiquette. If they had been forced to do so because of illness or something it would be understandable. Personally, even if in that situation I didn't have contact information for the parents I would have phoned the venue and asked to get the message to the parents (being aware of the fact that the start of a party can be held up while waiting for late arrivals and as host you don't know how long to wait for people who might not show,)

However...the bad manners of a guest is no excuse for the host family's response in this case. When you throw a party you invite the number of people that you are willing to pay for, period. That there will be a discrepancy between that number and those who show up is a given, and you hope that most people will do you the courtesy of responding in time so that you can reduce your costs accordingly- but you have to accept that some won't do so.

It would be bad enough if this were an adult party but involving the kids and modeling this behavior is repugnant.; 1/21/15, 8:55 AM
Sydney said...: What would Miss Manners say? I do not think she would approve of either set of parents.; 1/21/15, 9:24 AM
Anonymous said...: 1. Parents should not give expensive birthday parties for children. Especially at exotic locales. Whatever happened to ice cream and cake plus some simple games--dress-up for girls, roughhousing for boys? No "goody bags" (the recipients just throw out that stuff anyway), no elaborate entertainment.

2. Once you have accepted an invitation to a social event, it is rude not to show up just because you've subsequently received a better invitation. Children are never too young to learn this basic rule of etiquette.

3. Once you have RSVP'd yes to a social event. You are obliged to show up. Period. Exceptions are illness, death, or emergencies in the family. In that event, you are obliged to notify your host or hostess as promptly as you can under the circumstances.

4. If your host has spent money to buy a ticket to something on the basis of your RSVP, and you don't show up, you are obliged to reimburse your host--or at least offer to do so. That's a basic courtesy.

5. Conversely, it's rude for hosts not to tell guests in advance that they'll be outlaying money on the basis of the guests' RSVPs--so the guests will realize that their presence is expected. Surprising them afterwards with a bill is just as rude as a no-show.

6. No one, child or adult, is ever "expected" to bring a gift as the "price" of attending a social event, be it a birthday party, a wedding, or whatever. Gifts are nice, but they're given ex gratia, which is why they're called "gifts," not "payments." It is perfectly acceptable for a child to show up at a birthday party with no gift at all or a simple token gift, such as candy bars or flowers picked from the back yard. What if the child's parents had just lost their jobs and couldn't afford a $24 toy?

7. Raising a child to "expect" presents from anyone--including the child's own parents--is a great way to raise a spoiled brat.

8. And don't get me started on the despicable practice of having children open their birthday presents at the birthday party. This practice is acceptable only at adult birthday parties where the guests have brought cheap token or joke presents--which are the only kind of presents acceptable at an adult birthday party.; 1/21/15, 10:12 AM
JackOfVA said...: Perfect case for application of de minimis non curat lex; 1/21/15, 11:07 AM