My Toddler Broke LED Screen While at Harvey Norman, Who Says They Don't Have Accidental Cover?

My son and wife were at Harvey Norman, looking out for refrigerator when my toddler threw his water bottle on a TV which smashed the screen.

Unfortunately, I was at home finishing my overdue masters project. Little fellow has been taught lesson and we will continue to be more vigilant. Officials at store have mentioned they do not have accidental cover, we have never faced this issue before and presume that stores like Harvey Norman will have accidental cover to cover similar to other emergencies? Have been asked to pay $1000.00.

Model smashed Samsung UA65NU8000

I have emailed ACCC and Choice online. Response awaited

What shall I do, need help?

  1. Cough up $1000
  2. Go on the legal policy/ACCC path
  3. Mod: Removed (Illegal/Inappropriate)

Related Stores

Harvey Norman
Harvey Norman

Comments

  • +265
    1. Cough up 1000$
    • +65

      $1,000.

      • +41

        I really hate when people place the $ after the digits.

        • +4

          Well you don't say dollar one thousand when you speak, do you?

          • +2

            @Zachary: I used to have a uni tutor who would say amounts like that. Instead of saying "fifty dollars", she would say "dollar fifty". Took me a while to get used to that.

            • +13

              @Slabdog: 99% of people would take them to had said "$1.50"…. your tutor would have gotten into a truckload of misunderstandings

          • +4

            @Zachary: yes but when you write it down , you use the sign before the amount. Just like silent letters in words… its taught in school. May be some people skipped too many classes.

            • @Ryxxi:

              May be some people skipped too many classes

              How about this?

              The sign for cents is placed after the amount: 25¢

          • @Zachary: It’s more dollar sign one thousand to be exact

        • +3

          Why is it $10 but not %10??

      • +10

        I have received 30+ up-votes and won a badge that says popular comment.

        I hate you all.

    • +57

      Pay for the TV, ensure you buy it with Harvey's comprehensive warranty.

      Return the TV the next day.

      • +9

        that's clever, is it a joke or will it actually work?

      • +1

        Genius

      • +1

        Thats the OzBargain way @drDarsh there is your answer

      • +1

        When they delivered it, it arrived broken.

    • +51

      … were at Harvey Norman

      That was the first mistake

      • Q. Is Gerry too cheap to have insurance?

        He's certainly not too cheap to demand high prices!

        • +1

          Their insurance doesn't cover OP. Just like if you crash into someone's car - their insurance won't save you.

          • @HighAndDry: Why not?

            Damage by someone that throws a bottle at the shop window is covered (but not excused). But not by someone that throws a bottle at the stock?

            The shop is covered for fire and theft, and the stock would be covered in some way too. Why does this not also cover the OP? A toddler can never be trusted to not throw a bottle, and no parent/guardian can limit their every action, so negligence may not be a solid claim. I am not sure anyone would really want to rule on such a circumstance.

            • +2

              @resisting the urge:

              Damage by someone that throws a bottle at the shop window is covered (but not excused).

              Covered for the owner. The insurance company would still go after the bottle-thrower. The bottle-thrower isn't off the hook.

              A toddler can never be trusted to not throw a bottle, and no parent/guardian can limit their every action

              I mean, if that's true, it would have been negligent for the parents to have taken the toddler into the store in the first place. Parents are responsible for their kids.

    • I doubt you can be held legally responsible for your toddler's actions.

      However the morally right thing to do would be to find out the actual cost price of the TV and offer to pay that. Whether they have insurance is no concern of yours.

    • Ask for the repair receipt and cough that up. Don't just hand over $1000. And don't accept a receipt from them - accept a receipt from the repair company.

      "Yeah no worries - send me the receipt from the repair company please"

      Make sure the receipt says it has been paid and the payment method.

      • What if the repair is greater than $1,000?

        • Wonder how much the broken TV as spare parts would cost? I know that a lot of proprietary electronics can have exorbitant pricing.

      • +5

        Pretty sure they're not repairing it - they're just writing it off and charging OP their cost price.

      • Make sure it is an invoice and not a quote

  • +95

    I guess your toddler better lawyer up, or pay up.

    • +2

      Else, somehow figure out a way to let the little guy work it off? LOL

      • +12

        One way ticket to Myanmar, Cambodia or Bangladesh will do the trick.

        • +1

          That will be a vacation, not a lesson.

    • +16

      Better Call Saul

    • +1

      LOL now I'm just picturing a court room with a toddler sitting on the stand as a defendant.

      • +4

        I'll take "Who shot Mr. Burns?" for $1000

        • +1

          Only fair if the judge is also a toddler, and has a plastic mallet

  • +146

    I don't know what the legal answer is, but if it was me I would pay the $1000. It really sucks, but unfortunately the damage is your fault and you are responsible for it. Being a parent is expensive for many many reasons!

    • +5

      Thanks wizzy, this is the beginning for us ;)

  • +18
  • +2

    Ouch. Not much choice other than to pay

    • +4

      Or offer a store credit for Gerry’s next purchase from you.

      • You can always pay it off interest free, the ads scream that till the cows are home, assembled in the yard and long after they were sent to the knackers

  • +64

    Cough up the $1000.

    Even though the damage was caused by your kid, it wasn't accidental damage.

    My thoughts might be different if the tv was placed in a way that it was reasonably forseeable that someone might come along and knock it over or damage it accidentally etc.

    In this case, the damage was caused by a projectile.

    • +68

      But if a Clive Palmer ad was on TV, well… totally justified.

    • +15

      it wasn't accidental damage.

      How did you ascertain the toddler intended to cause damage by throwing the bottle?

        • +17

          Hahaha ok then

        • +26

          Nah, I don't think so.

          Toddler has no mental capacity to make such a conscious decision to damage the TV, much less understand the concept of damaging an item by throwing something at it followed by it's consequences.

          Mentally insane people have far greater understanding of the world around them and they've gotten away with murder, and instead locked up in an asylum.

          • +3

            @Blitzfx: Just to add up to what Blitzfx said, a toddler doesn't have a fully developed frontal cortex, hence you can't reason with them sometime.

        • +28

          Are you a parent? Toddlers are terrible at foreseeing consequences.

        • +3

          I think the question is more about the guardian taking responsibility. Whilst I understand kids mess up and I don't know the lead up to the throwing however I don't think it is to much for a retailer to expect the guardian to take reasonable steps to prevent damage

        • +4

          Lol u got kids ?

      • +14

        Maybe the tv got in the way of the bottle?

      • +20

        How did you ascertain the toddler intended to cause damage by throwing the bottle?

        Damaging a TV in a shop by throwing a bottle doesn't have to be intentional, but it is definitely negligent. The shop did not contribute to the damage by placing the item in a precarious position for someone to come along and knock it over or damage it easily.

        Although I don't know the details around the legalities, but I think it's pretty clear that parents should have control of their kids out in public.

        • +2

          Although I don't know the details around the legalities, but I think it's pretty clear that parents should have control of their kids out in public.

          ….yeah they should have their kids on leashes…

          • +3

            @Zachary: When you have a kid and dog on a lead each, one is a very good boy, guess which. XD

        • but it is definitely negligent.

          A toddler can't be negligent.

          • @trapper:

            A toddler can't be negligent.

            The parents can - by not providing sufficient supervision of their child.

            • @bobbified: That's not what you said above though. I was responding to

              Damaging a TV in a shop by throwing a bottle doesn't have to be intentional, but it is definitely negligent.

          • @trapper: But their parents can.

            • @HighAndDry: Yes, but that wasn't his statement.

              • @trapper: They also said:

                but I think it's pretty clear that parents should have control of their kids out in public.

                Pedantically you're right, but the meaning seemed clear enough.

    • Even though the damage was caused by your kid, it wasn't accidental damage.

      A toddler can't have 'intent' lol

  • +16

    Sorry but
    It is as good as your wife smashing it

    Yeah credit card fraud - What could go wrong there

  • +3

    what did Gerry say?
    .

    • +67

      Gerry said a tax on all imports will protect his LED Screens.

      • +51

        Gerry says water bottle was bought from Kogan

        • Gerry says the water was sourced from Amazon, in response to his "come hell or high water" comment.

    • +14

      Gerry says go to JB Hi-Fi, they seem to be more into all that smashing thing.

  • +32

    Overdue masters project.. nice! Whatever you saved on that masters clearance sale has now been lost.

    • +1

      I think it was a Masters Degree … . Project. O.P. will have the money soon, no doubt, to pay for it. With a Masters in …. Business ?

      • +2

        If he is a actual doctor "drdarsh",he probably makes $1000 in a couple of days .Peanuts!!

        • +5

          Hours

      • jedi master, working on mind tricks

  • +20

    Harsh, but no different to your kid doing it at home.

    • +2

      Maybe House Content Glass Breakage insurance ?
      My mother once opened her vanity mirror and a perfume bottle fell onto the ceramic sink, breaking it. Insurance covered it.
      But then, she was that kind of person who could sell Ice Cream machines to the Finns.

      • +1

        It also happened in her own home, to her own property. How does a child under the supervision of their parent breaking something in a retail store remotely similar?

      • +3

        some home and contents insurance packages cover public premises i beleive so worth investigating.

        our mother would have had to pay excess and her premiums gone up, so must have been some good shit

      • +1

        But then, she was that kind of person who could sell Ice Cream machines to the Finns

        That would actually be lucrative, they probably eat more ice cream per capita than the rest of the world.

    • +107

      Are you serious? You break someone else's stuff, you pay for it.

      OP the store is being very reasonable. They sell the TV for $2k, and they are only asking for $1k. Start being a dick about it and they might go for the $2k.

      All it will take is them to lodge a very cheap small claims claim against you and you will be up for more than $1000. Just adult up and cough up.

      • -32

        I am simply suggesting that the OP ensures he is liable for the damage before paying.

        I do not know the legalities of the situation as described.

        A toddler cannot be held criminally liable. I am wondering if the parent of said toddler can.

        My kids smashed $90 of ceramic tiles in a shop one day. I paid on the spot (the cost of the tiles that the store paid for them, not the retail price).

        $90 is different to $1000.

        • +12

          If my kid smashed your tv would you be sweet if I said your problem

        • +15

          My kids smashed $90 of ceramic tiles in a shop one day. I paid on the spot

          Why did you pay?

          It's like you knew you were responsible for your kid.

          • -4

            @ozhunter: Again, not relevant to my replies thus far.

            My questions have only been about the parental legal liability.

            But for completeness, I did wonder at the time, but it's a local small shop and I wouldn't want them out of pocket for my kids errors. Plus my kids weren't toddlers and their worldly knowledge was higher than a toddler.