Hi to all.

Here is the question.

I went on a car trip to a neighbour country 3 weeks ago, for a one day excursion.

My cousin asked me if I could buy some things for her friend in the city I was going to. I agreed.
Value of things was around $200, which she gave to me before the trip.

I bought the things, I've put them in my car's trunk and returned home.
I returned by night 1am, parked car in front of my apartment, and as I was tired I left things in the trunk. By the morning my car was stolen along with the things in the trunk.

As she gave me the money before, what is in your opinion the ethical and moral thing to do in this situation? To give her the whole sum of money, a part, none....

thanks for your answers

As you accepted the money before hand, you should either deliver the merchandise or return the entire sum of money.

Hopefully, your insurance will make you whole rather than this being an expensive lesson.

Tricky one!

I take it that the loss is not covered by insurance.

But it boils down to this; you agreed to look after a friend’s property - initially cash, then goods. You left the property in the boot of your car overnight because you were tired with the result that, when the car was stolen, the property was lost.

I think the fact that you feel motivated to explain or excuse your decision to leave the property in the car shows that you accept that doing so involved a risk; this wasn’t the best way to care for your friend’s property.

If you had dropped her $200 in the street before buying the goods, I think you’d feel obliged to make it up to her. This isn’t substantially different; you took a risk, even if a small one, with her property and, unfortunately, the risk materialised and the property was lost. I understand why you took the risk but the fact is that you chose to take it and, having made that choice, you should accept responsibility for the consequences. You should offer to repay your friend the $200. (She may, of course, reject the offer.)

Well, it is already a expensive lesson as my insurance does not cover neither the car loss neither the property inside of it.

So either way it is the total loss.

When it comes to the risk part, there is always risk involved, I could have taken the stuff in my apartment, and an earthquake could destroy my bulding, a fire could catch my building or a bunch of things for which risk exists, but I'm not sure how much responsibility or influence I could have on them. I also had my property in car which I could also taken out, but it is crying over spoilt milk.

Man who knows where he should break his leg, for sure wouldnt go there.

As it all started out as doing a favour, and it turned out as me looking after property. Is it just another proof of "being good is the same as being fool"??.

For example the friend of cousin has saved the some amount of money, time and effort by me doing the favour for her.

Does it comes down to that by doing the favour I agreed to take all the risks and that she takes all the profits from the whole thing?

It didn’t “turn out” as you looking after her property; looking after her property was the favour.


Short answer: Yes. That’s why it was a favour.

Longer answer: You didn’t take all the risks; just the ones you controlled. In this case you, not she, decided whether the property would be left in your car overnight, and you made that decision based on your comfort and convenience, not hers. You put her property at risk to save yourself the bother of carrying it up to your apartment.

Note that I’m not condemning your choice; it may have been a perfectly reasonable choice. The risk to her property was a small one - but, unfortunately, it has materialised. I’m just saying that because it was your choice, you have to accept responsibility for the outcome, even though it’s not - obviously - the outcome you wanted or hoped for.

From the point that my choice led to loss of her property it has sense. But it is from this point of view when things already happened. Would it also be my responsability to repay if I for example I took the things from the car to my apartment and then my apartment got robbed?

I'm also wondering what would be the right thing to do if for example I got in a car accident, someone rear ended me and destroyed her property? Would it be my responsibility based on the fact that I made a zillion unrelated choices to be in that place in that time?

Risk of my car being stolen always exists, it could be stolen from me on the road at gun point...etc, risk of someone rear ending me was there also... I think my action did not make any risk bigger, I just missed the chance to make risks smaller, and they materialised.

But what is on my mind now, does it come that I took all the risks and her all the "benefits" from doing that?. In this case my actions had some effect on the outcome of her property loss, but what in case where is no such a situation - things destroyed when someone rear neded me and the driver went hit&run?

I think the distinction between the cases you suggest and the case that actually happened is that, in the real-life case, you consciously took a risk that you didn’t need to take, and that didn’t inevitably arise out of the favour you were asked to do.

Suppose, when driving back to your own city with her stuff in your boot, you stopped to refuel and, while you were in paying for your fuel, someone stole your car (and contents). You weren’t careless and you took no risks. You didn’t, for example, leave the keys in the car when you went in to pay.

I’d say in that situation you have no responsibility to her; the loss lies where it fell. She chose to ask you to carry her goods in your car, and she accepts the risks that inevitably go with that.

But she didn’t ask you to leave her goods in your car on the street overnight. You chose to do that, so you created that particular risk and should accept responsibility for the outcome.

(You could argue, I suppose, that you also left your own stuff in the car, so you took as good care of her stuff as you did of your own, and she can’t expect more than that. But, in the end, I don’t think that’s good enough. I’m entitled to take risks with my own stuff for my own convenience, or indeed just for kicks, if I want to. But I’d accept that if I’m looking after other people’s stuff for them, I can’t be quite so cavalier.)

Thank you all for your responses.

I decided to repay all the money and I had the bad luck of doing business with very complicated person, who made it unnecesary complicated.

She even insisted that she would take only half of the money and that I should repay her the other half if I ever found the car. She insisted and took half of the money, just until few hours when she called and asked the other half if i still wanted to give it to her.

Well, as someone said, very expensive lesson.

Thanks all!

I think she should understand your situation, it is not your fault that your car was stolen. In my opinion you should not return the money.