NYC -In 01/09 my 17 y/o daughter went on a weekend senior class trip with her HS. She borrowed a roommate's MP3 for the weekend. Whenever she left the room, she would leave her electronics on the dresser. On the day of departure to return home, the MP3 player went missing. All occupants of the room were searched (except the MP3 owner) and anyone who came in contact with the room. The MP3 player was not found. They notified the younglady's mother about the situation before departing. My daughter was upset and said she would pay for the missing item. The senior adviser drew up a paper which indicated that my daughter would either replace the item or pay $150.00 (what the mother said she paid) within three weeks. Additionally, this paper had no description of the item. The school informed my sister about the issue and the promise signed by my daughter. I purchased the item for my daughter and 4-5 days later it was returned by the parent with the claim that it did not work. I retrieved the merchandise and tested it myself (it did infact work); however, I returned it to the store for a refund. The school tried to force me to pay for the item based on that paper my daughter signed and said they would prevent her from participating in future senior activities. I informed them that I didn't care because they got my daughter to sign a form without my knowledge. I also indicated that it's obvious this parent wants $150.00 instead of a new replacement.
After looking up the history of the item, it launched in 2007 @ $150.00. However, today's price is $99.00. Is the paper my daughter signed binding? If so, for what amount?
Please help us - Thank you
After looking up the history of the item, it launched in 2007 @ $150.00. However, today's price is $99.00. Is the paper my daughter signed binding? If so, for what amount?
Please help us - Thank you