[News] Boy, 5, given £15.95 invoice for missing friend's birthday party

[TonyW]

My youngest was about 7 when he went to a friend's party and was given a party bag full of Man Utd branded stuff. Ruler, pencil, rubber...that sort of stuff. Completely of his own volition, he took everything with Man Utd out the bag and handed it back to the mother of the party boy. "I don't want these thankyou. I support Brighton".

I was a proud dad that day.

Awesome.
What a great kid.

 

[BigGully]

Look the the invoice is bloody stupid, but not just to turn up when there is a cost per person, I mean it quite obviously is an organised trip that has a cost, its hardly cake and jelly around their house.

As with all these parties the birthday boy probably made a list that included ALL his classmates, so Mum had to have a cut off point which excluded some, so just not to have the courtesy to make some effort to get a message to the Mum is pretty much a poor show too.

 

[edna krabappel]

Textbook "sad face" expressions for the newspaper photos though. Well done to all concerned. Credit due all round.

 

[spring hall convert]

Purely on a technical point, how can the mother be out of pocket? Presumably, it was paid for in advance based on a predicted number of children. The alternative, that it was POTD, would not have left her forking out for the child. So the payment was a sunk cost and therefore the mother is no better or worse off if any of the children subsequently showed up.

Exactly the point I came to make. What a ****ing turd this woman is.

 

[leigull]

I don't quite get it

You arrange a party for 10 children
You agree the party cost of £15.95 per child = 159.50
One child does not turn up cost of party is still 159.50 it isn't 175.45 so how is the mother out of pocket

IF it was agreed that each child pay £15.95 for the activities at the party and one child, who had agreed to go, then didn't turn up then yes mummy would be £15.95 out of pocket and I would say reasonable (if not notice given) to ask for a contribution from the missing child's family

Presumably if the kid had said he couldn't go in advance, then the mother would only have paid £143.55 to begin with (or got someone else to go instead), so as to avoid a wasted £15.95.

 

[BigGully]

Exactly the point I came to make. What a ****ing turd this woman is.

I am missing soemthing here, so ......

She pays £15.00 a head and pays for 10 @ £150.00

1 no show means that she paid for 9 @ £150.00

But I suspect that she had other children that would of filled in should her full quota not of attended.

How is she not losing out ? ( I am not on her side by the way )

 

[Buzzer]

I am missing soemthing here, so ......

She pays £15.00 a head and pays for 10 @ £150.00

1 no show means that she paid for 9 @ £150.00

But I suspect that she had other children that would of filled in should her full quota not of attended.

How is she not losing out ? ( I am not on her side by the way )

Because she paid £150. She would have paid £150 if, subsequently, 1 child had turned up or 10. The unit cost may have risen per child but the TOTAL cost remains £150. She neither lost nor gained anything by children dropping out after the £150 was paid.

 

[surlyseagull]

I would think the mother was also spurred on by the other muesli mothers "I wouldnt have that I would send them an invoice " then they slink off after the dirty deed is done and watch the repercussions at a safe distance while slagging her off.

 

[BigGully]

Because she paid £150. She would have paid £150 if 1 child had turned up or 10. The unit cost may have risen per child but the TOTAL cost remains £150. She neither lost nor gained anything by children dropping out after the £150 was paid.

But she paid for 10 children @ a cost per child.

If she had as I suspect a demand form her little soldier in access of 10 children then another child might have taken the place for the no show.

She might have committed to 10 @ £150.00, but 10 then did not go, isnt that the point ??

 

[Ernest]

I was NEVER invited to ANY birthday party when I was at school

 

[Billy the Fish]

The worst thing about all of this is that none of the parents have the bollocks to confront each other directly!!! This whole thing happened becuse none of them can be bothered to talk to each other. Some people really do see to be incaable of having personal relationships

Derek Nash and his partner Tanya Walsh discovered the £15.95 "no show fee" invoice after it was slipped into their son Alex's school bag

His partner confronted Ms Lawrence in a series of posts on Facebook in a bid to resolve the situation

Their facebook conversation is embarrassing. Also Derek sounds like a right cock!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11355215/Childs-birthday-party-no-show-fee-Parents-Facebook-row-in-full.html

 

[ATFC Seagull]

I can't believe everyone is taking this story at face value based on that article. I await the "revisionist" articles appearing.

 

[spring hall convert]

I am missing soemthing here, so ......

She pays £15.00 a head and pays for 10 @ £150.00

1 no show means that she paid for 9 @ £150.00

But I suspect that she had other children that would of filled in should her full quota not of attended.

How is she not losing out ? ( I am not on her side by the way )

Because £150-£150 = £0

She didn't lose out financially. Perhaps her poor Johhny was scarred for life from the rejection but that's a different issue. A small claims court should treat this with the disdain it deserves, a waste of everyone's time (including mine.)

 

[pastafarian]

I was NEVER invited to ANY birthday party when I was at school

This explains an awful lot

 

[rippleman]

Sheesh! The woman's a complete loon....particularly as she has said that her son (the birthday boy) won't be allowed to play with his mate at school. That is just pathetic; I'm guessing she's desperately in need of parenting classes.

And she has zilch chance of a successful outcome in the County Court. There was never a contract to pay anything.

How to make yourself look like a dreadful parent and a complete nutjob - all for the sake of £16! Well done mum!

 

[Buzzer]

But she paid for 10 children @ a cost per child.

If she had as I suspect a demand form her little soldier in access of 10 children then another child might have taken the place for the no show.

She might have committed to 10 @ £150.00, but 10 then did not go, isnt that the point ??

I think the phrase 'out of pocket' is the key. She agreed with the ski place a price of £150 based on a number of kids. The only legally binding transaction occurs here and at that point she is £150 down and it becomes a sunk cost.

I would add that if she was that worried about making sure that all the children turned up then she should have done due diligence and phoned round to double check before booking. Legally I can't see she has a leg to stand on because the invitation is just that...an invitation and in contract law are unenforceable.

 

[symyjym]

To carry out the court action through Small Claims costs around £75 to instigate, and there is more of a chance that sheel loose that money as well.

 

[beorhthelm]

i hope these people keep to their own little world, because they are welcome to it. as 5 yo i think i went for a picnic on the downs for my birthday.

 

[dazzer6666]

I feel sorry for the kid that didn't attend. He had his print-at-home ticket, but it wouldn't scan so he couldn't get in. When he complained and started crying some yellow-jacketed official took offence to his blubbing and sent him away.

 

[Papak]

Source: http://jnlplymouth.co.uk/birthday-parties/

Half hour Sno-tubing & 3 Toboggan ride per child followed by the birthday meal

4-12 yrs £15.95 13 yrs+ £16.95