You must live in a very unique area. Every school my child has attended from the first day they drove to school at 16 and up to graduate school now clearly states on the parking pass that the school is NOT responsible for damage that occurs when choosing to park in the school parking lot.
You are also a very unique provider with very unique parents because I dont know a single provider that would so willingly pay for a child's gold earrings without even knowing for sure tne child had both of them upon drop off. :confused:
and in 20+ years have never had a daycare parent that would dream of even expecting me to pay for, let alone actually accept money from me in that situation.
I, too treat people the way I'd like to be treated; equally, fairly.
I agree with you that new clothing is not a luxury but if I choose, as a parent, to buy an expensive item of clothing I understand that its also MY choice as to where and in what situations my child will wear said clothing. Consequently, what happens to that clothing item in those places/situations is my responsibility and liability because I choose those things. EXCEPT in situations where the adult in charge acted negligently or did not have permission to do X.
The provider in this situation did NOT act negligently and more than likely had parental permission to go to the museum.
The entity that failed to act with due diligence was the museum by not posting signs....which are usually required by insurance, city, government and/or public safety laws/ordinances.
You, yourself said you had issue with the dangerous chemicals the children were exposed to... one would think the museum had an obligation to its visitors/customers to CLEARLY mark these hazardous substances for anyone that may get near them.
I dont think the provider (OP) is at all responsible for replacing the children's jackets.
You are also a very unique provider with very unique parents because I dont know a single provider that would so willingly pay for a child's gold earrings without even knowing for sure tne child had both of them upon drop off. :confused:

I, too treat people the way I'd like to be treated; equally, fairly.
I agree with you that new clothing is not a luxury but if I choose, as a parent, to buy an expensive item of clothing I understand that its also MY choice as to where and in what situations my child will wear said clothing. Consequently, what happens to that clothing item in those places/situations is my responsibility and liability because I choose those things. EXCEPT in situations where the adult in charge acted negligently or did not have permission to do X.
The provider in this situation did NOT act negligently and more than likely had parental permission to go to the museum.
The entity that failed to act with due diligence was the museum by not posting signs....which are usually required by insurance, city, government and/or public safety laws/ordinances.
You, yourself said you had issue with the dangerous chemicals the children were exposed to... one would think the museum had an obligation to its visitors/customers to CLEARLY mark these hazardous substances for anyone that may get near them.
I dont think the provider (OP) is at all responsible for replacing the children's jackets.
Comment