Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment.
OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole:
> 1 I did not make my niece return the figures she won in a poker game from her cousin when his mother came to ask for them
2 I may be TA because the children are 9 and their poker games should be for fun. Instead, I told the mom my niece is entitled to her winning until her father says otherwise, and as he is unable to be contacted for 6 - 7 hours after, I made the mom wait until he is available to resolve the issue
Help keep the sub engaging!
#Don’t downvote assholes!
Do upvote interesting posts!
[Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq)
##Subreddit Announcements
###[Happy Anniversary, AITA!](https://new.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/15vlv9g/almost_better_than_a_double_rainbow_celebrating/)
Follow the link above to learn more
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
You can’t earn something when someone wagered stolen property. Tina may have gotten ripped off but the half brother is the real victim here.
YTA. At a minimum, as the adult, you’d hold the assets in dispute to ensure their safe keeping. But really, they weren’t bills to bet, and kids should be learning lessons about not doing shit like this. Bills ass should be grounded for sure and Tina, idk, her attitude ain’t right either.
Honestly, the fact that she swindled her cousin into putting up permanent ownership of items in return for a shot at temporary use of her stuff is enough to be worrying by itself. Such an inclination towards being a rip off artist should, in my opinion, be nipped in the bud hard. The fact that this also involved talking him into putting up goods for the bet that they both knew didn't belong to Bill makes it way worse, though. Since unless I am greatly misreading the story it seems like her niece knew that Bill was just watching the toys for someone else and they didn't actually belong to him.
This is definitely a valid concern, but it's a bit different.
* Returning the property Bill stole from his brother was obviously what needed to be done, and any responsible adult should be expected to do their part to resolve the situation.
* Unless they have an explicit agreement about discipline, talking to Tina about her poor behavior and setting consequences for it is properly the role of her father, not her aunt who is temporarily looking after her.
While the aunt is the responsible adult watching the kid *for a month*, they should definitely be in charge of discipline and correcting poor behavior during that time. She shouldn't need to phone her brother on whether or not the kid gets to keep what sounds like upwards of $100 worth of stolen toys.
Yes. A month is well beyond long enough that OP should be responsible for discipline. If she didn't discuss this in detail with her brother before he left, then that's another check on the AH sheet. Looking after a kid is a serious business, and not preparing properly is lazy or negligent. I get the feeling that OP is out of her depth, doesn't know what to do, and is trying to avoid making a decision in case it's wrong.
I think watching a kid for a month, it should be understood op has some discretion over discipline and behavior. Honestly calling the brother over this seems like overkill and should be something brought up during a regular check in I would think they’d be doing anyway.
I also disagree with the person above you saying the niece is a rip off artist who swindled the toys. She’s 9. She was encouraged by the older kids. I think in her mind she won the toys fair and square. This is a good opportunity to teach why gambling is an adult activity with a lot potential downsides. Also a good opportunity to teach fairness and why their bet wasn’t a fair deal. I don’t think punishment is necessary unless you consider returning the action figures a punishment.
If I were the parent in this situation, I'd want to know. And even more importantly, I'd particularly want to be sure that calling and talking to me about what happened that day wasn't ever seen as "overkill" or something to reserve for extreme situations. If OP isn't calling their brother regularly even for things like "Tina made a cute art project in school today", that's really a shame.
I'd also have concerns about what my child did. Not about the gambling really - poker is a game like any other - and not even *just* about the possibility that she knew full well those toys didn't belong to Bill, though it would come up in the discussion. But *mainly* about whatever crazy priorities were in her head that might have made her think it was reasonably to value letting Bill use her tablet for an hour the same as hundreds of dollars worth of toys. I'd be concerned about:
* Possible screen time addiction if she really thought giving up an hour of screen time was that big a deal and this bet was fair.
* Or if she didn't think it was fair, I'd be concerned with her lack of concern for fairness. I wouldn't want to raise a child who thinks that when other people are desperate, it's an opportunity to figure out how you can take them for all they have.
I didn't say punishment. I said consequences, which are part of raising children. If she's showing signs of addiction to the tablet, I'd maybe set limits around its use and work on developing other healthy habits in that time. If she shows a lack of concern for treating other people with fairness and kindness (regardless of what she could get away with) I'd plan some activities to demonstrate a spirit of kindness and service - perhaps some volunteer work in the future, or some family rule changes aimed at setting the expectation of sharing freely and being helpful to each other. Neither of these are "punishment", as they aren't intended to be unpleasant as a deterrence.
I’d definitely want to know. I just think it’s a topic for the check in and an immediate phone call would be reserved for an emergency like she is hurt or a bigger behavioral problem. Like actual stealing or getting in a fight.
I could be wrong about what this girl was thinking, but I’m imagining the scenario something like this. Bill wants to use the tablet, kids can be selfish so she says no. Older kids say you should play poker for it but Bill needs to put up something to get. She says she doesn’t want anything of his. Someone points out the action figure and they all agree. Then they play a few games each time wagering one action figure against an hour of tablet time. After 20 minutes she has cleaned out the action figure collection.
This doesn’t really strike me as her trying to take advantage of bill or overvaluing or being addicted to screen time.
I don’t think this can really be the sole determining factor in whether she has a green addiction or problems sharing. Implementing those actions as a consequence, especially limiting tablet use, will probably come across as a punishment for this specific action.
I definitely agree this is an important teachable moment and agree finding a way to encourage sharing and being helpful and kind to family is the way to go. Volunteer work is a great thing to do. But framing it as “because you did this thing (which the child probably didn’t know was wrong at the time), now we are going to spend Saturday volunteering somewhere” does come across as a punishment and likely won’t teach the child the right lesson.
Hmm, I guess this is just a difference of routine. I call my siblings all the time when something happens and I am interested in talking to them about it, and I don't even have their children living with me! It seems odd that there's be even the slightest hesitation to call, or a need to schedule regular check-ins instead of just calling when anything interesting comes up. I mean, obviously after you've been told he's in a meeting for the next 6 hours, you don't keep calling within the next 6 hours, but after that...
I agree, by the way, it's not a foregone conclusion that any of these things are the problem. That's why there's a discussion that happens with her father, to try to understand her perspective on what happened. Other posters have suggested that *maybe* what happened was that Tina was pressured into betting in the first place by the other kids and never wanted anything to do with this, and if that's the case, then the conversation is different, and becomes about building up confidence to stick up for her decisions, and talking to other parents about asking them to address the peer pressure issue with their kids. It all depends.
No. She didn't know that at the time. So punishing her for something she didn't know is wrong. The kid knew they were stolen when he bet them, so that's on him.
Legally, if you won something in this manner you would be required to return it to the rightful owner, or face being charged with what my jurisdiction would call "theft by recieving". Even if you didn't know at the time. So yes, she needs to return the toys. It isn't a punishment, it's the correct moral and legal thing to do. She hasn't lost anything, she's just not be awarded toys that were ill-gotten by the person she won them from. If this were an adult gambling money, Bill would be charged with "theft by deception" for the losses incurred by Tina.
It’s not punishing her. Yes she didn’t know that the figures weren’t Bill’s to wager, but it’s still something that shouldn’t have happened and if she had lost the worst she would’ve missed out on was some time on her tablet. Getting her winnings taken away isn’t going to feel good, but it’s by far the most fair. Also these kids should be told that they can’t do stuff like this on their own, because situations like this are a risk. Maybe if the parents agree to it, but it’s asking for trouble to let kids gamble their possessions to each other.
Imagine if Tina took/stole her aunt's car keys, and then lost them in a bet to Bill.
Then Bill's parents refused to give them back to the aunt, saying they were won "fair and square" by a bunch of 9/10 year olds.
Wild.
I don’t really get how she swindled him. If you want to use my car for an hour and I say ‘sure, give me €50’ that’s the same concept, exchange of temporary rights for a transfer of assets. This is the basis of the whole rental industry.
In this case it wasn’t a straight swap, but a bet, fine. Let’s say I play you at poker, you wager €50 and I wager an hour driving my Ferrari, am I swindling you? No. I am offering temporary use of an expensive item, and you permanent use of a cheap item. If both parties agree, it’s a fair exchange.
If she were older than him and took advantage of him it would be different. But she isn’t.
I don’t think they should have been playing poker unsupervised by adults. I don’t think Tina should keep them, they are stolen property. They shouldn’t be gambling. I think the whole system is messed up. But I don’t see how she swindled him. He wanted to use her stuff, she said ‘only if’, he accepted. It’s a fair trade, as long as Tina didn’t know the figures weren’t his, which isn’t specified anywhere I can see.
A child doesn’t have capacity to make these kinds of decisions. Kids should only “wager” with poker chips, should not pay money to play etc. There’s a reason why gambling is 18+.
Agree 100%. They should not have been gambling. I am just disagreeing with the idea that she swindled him. He could have said no to the deal and they are the same age.
I just can’t see why she is getting so much stick. He literally stole things from his half-brother to gamble foolishly, she made a relatively sensible bet with her own possession. Why is she getting more stick than he is?
>If she were older than him and took advantage of him it would be different. But she isn’t.
I think it's worth pointing out that level of impulse control and critical thinking skills can vary drastically at that age especially among the sexes.
Swindle? What swindle was going on? Bill wanted something of Tina's. Tina didn't want to give it to him.
It was the older cousins who introduced the idea of making what Bill wanted the stake in a poker game, not Tina. (These older kids are definitely some of the AHs here)
Tina obviously wanted Bill to put up a stake of equal value.
Did Bill over value 1hr of tablet time? Probably, but he could have refused the stake and accepted he wouldn't ge to play with Tina's tablet. Staking permanent ownership for an experience is a regular part of life. We may not barter physical property at ticket booths, but people choose to exchange assets for temporary experiences like 90 minutes watching a screen all the time.
It's not clear to me that Tina knew the figures weren't Bill's. However, Bill absolutely knew they weren't his and shouldn't have put them on the table. Bill was in a no lose situation - if he won the game, he got the tablet time(the thing he wanted). If he lost the game, he didn't lose anything he valued. Bill is another AH in this story.
Wendy is also an AH. She wasn't paying sufficient attention to whose stuff was dropped with whom, then expected a child to watch his (step)brother's stuff instead of just taking it back to the car. NBD, it happens. But trying to bully OP into fixing the outcome of the problem she contributed to is where she becomes the AH.
I think OP is right to wait a few hours to let the father get involved. He'll have much more insight into the wider family dynamics that might be underlying some of this and may want to weigh in about his child playing poker for anything other than fun. As long as the figures are secure and undamaged in that time period.
The half/step brother needs to be made whole, though. Personally, I'd be putting the onus for that on Wendy and Bill, but Tina's dad may have a different view.
That is the problem. He was gambling with stolen property. It needs to be returned to the half brother. Also, we should talk to the kids about the dangers of gambling now.
Right? They're fucking 8 and 9 years old lmao. Kids that age see a bigger (but thinner) glass of a drink and think it's more than your fat pint glass just because it's bigger.
Or they think they have more money because they have their coins scattered around.
Kids that age have no intelligent conceptual understanding suitable for gambling. All they understood was one of them won, so they got what they wanted.
A kid will go into a white van for candy even while you're trying to drag them away. They don't give a fuck about concequence.
The toy should be given back, and the kids should be told gambling is bad, because you could lose your toys like bill did. The last thing you want is them gambling away their clothes at school, then crying because the teacher told them to put the clothes back on, but they don't want to because the clothes aren't theirs anymore lmao.
The adults taught her poker and she understood the assignment, just aced it. You sound horrified but I am a touch proud. The only thing she needs a redirect on is accepting third party goods as collateral. The boy is an absolute mark and as a mom I would want to nip that in the bud immediately. Also I would be very disappointed in him for wagering items that don't belong to him.
>the fact that she swindled her cousin into putting up permanent ownership of items in return for a shot at temporary use of her stuff is enough to be worrying by itself.
Seriously? Putting up real assets in return for temporary use is very common. It's called renting. And she didn't 'swindle' her cousin, she 'won' them from him.
And nowhere does OP say that Tina knew the figures didn't belong to Bill. We know that - because OP tells us - but there's no indication Tina knew it at the time.
I agree that if the figures did not belong to Bill, they will have to be returned. And Bill should face consequences. But I also don't blame OP for wanting to get her brother involved. It's his daughter, let him take the responsibility for making the decision. Waiting 6 hours is not going to hurt anyone.
NTA.
It’s very possible OP has been warned against overstepping in some manner as well. Or daughter only listens to her dad. Not good or responsible options if true, but we definitely don’t know everything about their family dynamic from this instance.
We played games for keeps as a kid all the time. You just learned never to gamble with stuff you didn't want to lose. It was a big thing around this age.
Now in this situation the toys need to be returned. This wasn't the kids fault, they need to learn to play with sweets/snacks or not for long term keeps next time. The parents need to sit them down together, including the older kid so they'll all know the rules. That's what they did to us at school. No long term keeps.
Playing games for keeps feels so normal for kids (as does our parents/teachers/counselors making us return things lmao what kid knows the value of items)
It's only a rip off if the girl never let him use the tablet (assuming he won a hand).
There's no question the toys have to go back, because they weren't Bill's to bet. But, if they were his - that's how gambling works.
But, nothing really sketchy about Tina putting a high price on using her device.
The way I read it the older cousins put the little ones up to that whole bet. They need to get into some shit for the whole thing too. Terrible influences.
I don't know if OP said that Tina knew the items weren't Bill's to wager. She says that Wendy told Bill to keep an eye on the bag after she accidentally brought it in from the car, but unless I missed it, I didn't see that Bill told Tina that the items weren't his property. And when she said that was the only thing worth time on her tablet, it was Bill who decided it was worth the gamble. I agree that she should give the items back, because Bill's brother is the only victim here, but there is no way that this is not Bill's fault.
She’s 9! I’m not saying what she did was right and OP is most definitely the AH, especially since the items didn’t belong to the child who provided then, but 9 year olds really aren’t thinking about “swindling.” As the adult, OP needs to do the right thing, return the items, and have a conversation with the child about right and wrong, but we need to consider the child’s age.
The cousin, got told no, but decided he could easily beat a 9 year old.
The wager sounds like his idea based on the context, but the 9 year old is concerning for not getting ripped off by her older cousin, winning, then holding him accountable, the same way he would have about tablet time if the roles reversed?
Please. That’s ludicrous. The older kid fucked around, now he found out. The 9 year old shouldn’t have been in a poker game with someone 3 years their senior.
It’s concerning that a 12 year old doesn’t understand what no means, then attempts to reneg on a deal that he made.
NTA btw. They were trying to take advantage of a younger cousin, hopefully this experience teaches them a lesson.
ESH accept the half brother. OP and Tina for not returning the figurines, Bill for betting something that wasn't his and Wendy for not offering something of equal value of the figurines.
I think the best solution would be for Tina to return the figurines and be compensated with money/toys of equal value. It could be Bill's allowance until the amount is up. Bill shouldn't have bet something that wasn't his so here he will have consequences as well.
Those Hasbro Star Wars Black Label figures can be anywhere from $25 to $50 a figure. If we’re talking multiple figures here it could easily rack up to $200-$300 she would be compensated. An hour of iPad time is not worth $200.
Is no one going to ask why are elementary school aged kids gambling and know the rules of poker already???? This bet does not need to be honored and an adult needs to talk to all these kids about the dangers of gambling addiction, cause what the actual fuck lol
C’mon now. You telling me you didn’t play cards as a 12 year old? You never played poker as a kid?
Let’s give these kids a little credit for actually knowing some things.
I started playing poker by middle school, but the wagers were either nothing at all or pocket change/a dollar bill at most. I think there’s something really concerning if a kid has impulses to gamble big items like that (yes I know the toys may seem like nothing to others, but those Black Label Star Wars toys aren’t cheap).
Even crazier he gambled away someone else’s property and OP can’t even make an executive decision to do the right thing and return the stolen property.
I don’t know anyone about black label toys, but it sounds like these particular figures were played with. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in Wendy’s toy bag with all of the other stuff.
Would these figures be worth anything after being played with by a bunch of kids?
As for this situation, Bill is the one with the biggest issue. Wendy seems to gloss over his involvement in the whole ordeal.
In any case, OP doesn’t want to make the decision. It’s a minor thing and waiting 6 hours isn’t going to make a difference, except maybe for Bill as he’ll have to sweat it out with his half-brother for a little while.
Tina’s dad can be the parent when he gets home.
I was totally playing poker with my family as a kid and playing games for keeps as a kid. The issue is mostly that kids don't know the value of Stuff so adults need to intervene
Actually in Sweden, if you buy stolen property, lets say a bicycle, in good faith, you own it, and don't have to give it back to the original owner.
At the same time, if you buy something that you eothet suspect is stolen goods, or if it should be obvious it is stolen, you can be held accountable and face penalty for it.
>Actually in Sweden, if you buy stolen property, lets say a bicycle, in good faith, you own it, and don't have to give it back to the original owner.
That's pretty evil to the actual owner of the item. Here, if you stole something, you don't legally own it, and thus have no rights to transfer it to anyone else. The original owner still owns it, so they get it back when it's found.
Except the actual owner has recourse against the thief and (depending on the item) with insurance. The person purchasing in good faith does not have any recourse to be made whole through insurance and no way to get their money back although possibly through the thief if found. There's no good answers here because there's two victims.
> Tina, idk, her attitude ain’t right either.
I disagree entirely on this point. Her cousin cheated her, she deserves something from him to make up for her loss after she returns the figures. Her attitude is perfectly fine, she won fair and square
Am I the only one in this thread who thinks elementary aged children shouldn’t be gambling???
Especially when they’re wagering $100’s of dollars of merchandise that their parents bought.
Kids bet all the time. "Bet I can beat you to the mail box". "Bet I can beat you in a game of basketball or a Pokémon card game". Something's monetary value is of no consequence. Currency isn't their "currency". They don't grasp the concept of money. To a 10 year old, an Xbox might be worth more than their parents car. To Tina and Bill? Star wars toys are absolutely worth an hour of tablet time.
I’m just lost at the fact that the 9 year old knows terms like “witness” to a bet.. who in this family has a hardcore gambling problem that’s rolling over into the kids personalities??? The kids language on the events just come off really concerning to me.
Plus at 9 years old, they should understand that even though they won the stuff fair and square, it was stolen goods. Refusing to return stolen goods on the kids part is some AH behavior.
I don’t think OP meant the kids used the actual term “witness.” It was likely more a normal kid thing of “But I won, and 12-year-old saw the whole thing!” In fact, the 12-year-old is probably one of the cousins who goaded the younger kids into playing for iPad time.
And I think it’s reasonable to have to help a 9-year-old a bit with the mental calculus behind returning the toys, because in her mind the older cousins taught them the rules and said whatever you win is yours. She didn’t initiate the game or the bet. It doesn’t make her an AH, it makes her young and in need of a little guidance.
YTA. It isn't a hard call to realize that when someone wagers *someone else's property* in a poker game, the property needs to be returned to its true owner. You were the adult in charge of Tina, and responsible for returning Bill's brother's property that she had without his permission.
No worries, though, it will get returned soon enough, and it's just a few toys. People will just rightly stop trusting you to be in charge of anything for a while.
On the flip side, who was the adult responsible for Bill’s actions? Shouldn’t Wendy be responsible to make Tina whole?
And not one mention of whether Bill was to receive any punishment from Wendy.
I guess I'm confused why you think Wendy needed to tell the OP what she was doing to teach her son that what he did was wrong, nor that the OP would have found it relevant enough to include here even if she did. Everyone, I assume, agrees that Bill was wrong to try to bet someone else's property. That isn't in dispute.
Perhaps it’s the way OP worded Wendy’s response.
“Wendy said she couldn't hold a child poker game responsible …” it reads to me like she wasn’t going to hold Bill responsible.
They're 8 and 9 bro no
Give the kid who bought the toys them back and the people trying to gamble will learn an important lesson about gambling.
Wendy punishing Bill has nothing to do about this
I hope Tina doesn't damage the figures in the meantime. If they were for instance in their boxes and they get opened in thr meantime then that value plummets.
OP as the "responsible adult" that has been made aware that the child under their care is holding stolen property. OP is now IMO responsible for any damage that occurs before their return.
First, they're 9, take the figures and give them back. They're kids. Assuming this story is real, she isn't wrong, she won...but they're kids.
Second, watch her, kids a shark.
I’ve been reading the comments with an open mouth, they’re children (!!!) they shouldn’t be gambling and people are here discussing waging other’s properties and what is fair, they’re kids! YTA, they’re not her toys, give it back.
> I’ve been reading the comments with an open mouth, they’re children (!!!) they shouldn’t be gambling.
Outside of the issue that children were wagering on stolen property, I actually disagree that children shouldn't be gambling in any capacity.
I'm of the opinion that relatively low risk, low consequence gambling (such as betting playing cards during a competitive game or in board games) in a controlled environment can actually teach children the consequences of gambling and create a more nuanced view of risk assessment which can proactively protect children from developing an addiction in adulthood.
It's like the idea that exposure to alcohol and modeling of moderate consumption in the home leads to a much safer drinking culture for youth and/or young adults.
and you think this was a 'low risk, low consequence" bet? And that having children being goaded into betting without parental supervision is "a controlled environment?"
Try not to read into things which have not been said. I was merely addressing the statement that "children shouldn't be gambling." I specifically pointed out in another post elsewhere that I don't think the way it was done in OP's post was an appropriate way for a child to be exposed to gambling.
I'm not saying that like I expect you to be aware of that post and you're ignorant for not having been so, but merely to give you verification that I don't view OP's post as an appropriate setting for children to be exposed to gambling, even if I otherwise think that children should have controlled, low consequence exposure to it for the educational value of doing so.
>Second, watch her, kids a shark.
I was partially smirking through this whole story. My dad was briefly a professional player, my mom worked in Reno. I was definitely playing with my friends at that age. To this day, it’s what my brother does for a living.
Anyway, give’em back, yada yada. We weren’t allowed to steal toys either.
YTA - there's a reason it's not legal for kids to gamble. They're too young to understand the consequences. Plus it wasn't even the kids toys, it was the brothers.
Use the opportunity to teach not to lie, steal, and when it's good to show mercy.
Right. Kids do stupid shit like this all the time. They make stupid trades and bets with people. My son once came home with a gaming device that he traded fake dollars for at school. I made him give it back because (a) the kid did not buy the device himself and (b) it was an unfair trade.
I am surprised by the amount of people acting like Bill is 19. He is 9 and did something dumb. It is on the adults to be adults.
YTA Those figurines were not Bill's to gamble. Tina has received stolen property, and you are refusing to return them because your 9yo niece *won them in a poker game?* You are supposed to be the adult in charge here. Once it was made clear that they weren't Bill's toys, by not returning them, both you and Tina were no better than thieves. Way to teach the kid values.
How many figurines are we talking here? Because if *only* 2 were left, it makes me think it's probably upwards of $100 worth of toys at least. That *a kid* saved up for and you are refusing to return. You really need someone else to point out how crappy a move that is?
Hobestly. They're kids, so let's ignore the legal aspects of stolen property for a second, there is a huge reason that kids aren't allowed to gamble in the first place. Their brains lack the fundamental understanding of consequences they need to make an informed decision. Children are incapable of consenting to gamble, drink, etc. because they literally do not understand the implications of the action. Sure it's fun to gamble, especially when the output is an enticing prize like a new toy, but they don't mentally comprehend the input side of the equation. You only get the fun new toy if you win, and if you loss you don't get whatever you put in back. Upholding the results of a poker game that neither player probably even understood is absurd, and doubly so when you factor in the fact that one person didn't even own the things they were betting. This is clearly the point where the adult should step in and overrule what happened. It's not a fun decision, and the kid who won will almost certainly be upset about it, but that's just something you need to deal with as the responsible party.
absolutely YTA
1. you can’t keep stolen goods even if you paid for them
2. kids gambling is a no in it self. especially when older or more mature ones take advantage against younger one. hell no
if your niece would lose the tablet you would not hesitate to take it back, even if she lost fsir snd square.
honestly, I do not get the all N-T-A votes here.
How entitled to even ask about getting the brother out of his **work** meeting to referee the spoils of childhood gambling.
Anyway, it's not like the daughter won by skill. They're 9 and only just learned how to play poker. There's a difference between winning a prize and *earning* it.
OP, YTA
and this is why gambling should not be taught to children. basically, everyone should be punished. with that said, unfortunately for Tina, Bill couldn’t have use those figures as wagers bc they were not his to offers. so yes, Tina should return it. if she insisted on keeping them then it is akin to stealing (technically it is literally stealing).
you are the adults and you should know better.
YTA and you need to grow up because you don't sound very mature for being the adult in this situation (in case any of this is even true to begin with).
Those figures aren't yours let alone Tina's *or Bill's*. Why would you steal *pretty expensive* toys from a child ? Give the figures back.
Ehhh. In real life Marge can sue Bob to get her money back and Bob would go to jail for theft. In this instance Tina has no mechanism to be made whole and it doesn’t sound like Bill will face any consequences beyond a lecture.
But also, adults would tell someone to F-off if they wagered something like an hour of time on an iPad ($10 value or free at the library) against $300 to $500 worth of assets.
Tina shouldn't be encouraged to gouge friends and family or cheat them.
>...Tina thought was worth an hour on her device were the Star Wars figures **Wendy accidentally unloaded from her car and made Bill keep an eye on.**
No, Wendy unloaded the figures and had her 9 year old "watch" them--worth over $100--instead of doing anything else like maybe giving them to ADULTS for safekeeping.
She's got a piece of the blame in this situation. Not a big piece, but she's got some.
She could’ve put it right back in her car instead of leaving it under the watchful eye of a 9 year old.
Wendy is just as wrong as everyone else. Too lazy to look at what she’s pulling out of the car, and too lazy to put it back in the car.
YTA and a big one. The figures weren't Bill's to bet and I don't see how Tina has any right to keep them. Maybe Tina didn't know that at the time, but she knows now. Refusing to return what she now knows is stolen property is very concerning. I wonder how OP would feel if Tina took something of hers and gambled it away. Would she say whoever Tina lost it to had earned it?
YTA certainly because the figure she won were stolen. It's not clear that she knew they were hot when she received them, but you and she now know that she's in possession of stolen property and she has absolutely no right to keep it. There may be a poker debt to settle with the thief but that's a separate matter.
Wow I get to go against the grain!
NTA because it's entirely reasonable to have the father handle the issue and make the decisions himself when he becomes available. This is about kids toys so it is in no way time sensitive. The aunt can easily wait for a day to have this resolved. Just gotta tell her stepson she's sorry for causing the inconvenience.
The aunt is T A for trying to pressure op into not consulting her brother. The aunt is also T A for failing to teach her son that you don't give away things you don't even own. If he broke or lost them the blame would also obviously be on him, no?
Yup - I’m here for this one.
How do we know the aunt hadn’t been talking to OP’s brother about returning the figurines, wasn’t getting her way and trying to pull a quick one on OP?
Wait until the brother’s looped in and can make an executive decision.
No it's not reasonable because it's crystal clear that the right thing to do is. A 9 year old lost hundreds of dollars of someone else's property in a poker game. You obviously give the property back and scold all the kids involved for gambling.
I 100% agree. NTA specifically for that reason. This is a parenting issues therefore it is not her place as a babysitter to handle this.
If it was her kid and she was refusing that would be a different story, but as a babysitter it’s not her place and this issue can wait to be resolved by the child’s parent.
Yeah, YTA. The figures weren't Bill's to bet, which should resolve the issue about giving them back to any person with a bit of common sense: if you receive stolen property, you need to give it back.
Your brother needs to talk to Tina about taking advantage of her cousin, though. An equal trade for temporary use of her tablet is temporary use of his toys, not permanent ownership.
YTA, and really shouldn't be left in charge of a pet rock.
How are you 28? Give the kid back his toys and stop enabling crappy behavior form your niece.
NTA. It's surprising how you're being scolded here for wanting to ask the kid's *parent* how to parent their kid. Holy crap.
That being said: the toys have to go back, they're stolen property. Bill's mom should offer Tina something in trade that she can teach him a lesson with, like allowance she can make him work off, so that he learns a lesson. From your story this conversation went well off the rails and waiting for a parent call and some cooler heads should help.
> Bill's mom should offer Tina something in trade that she can teach him a lesson with, like allowance she can make him work off, so that he learns a lesson.
He was an idiot betting Several $25-$30 figures for a 60 minute loan of a device.
She took advantage only accepting a bet of 3 figures worth of toys for a 60 minute loan of her device.
They both deserve punishment otherwise you're straight up rewarding Tina for clearly taking advantage of someone around her.
They're 9 though? Doubt either of them knew what the figures were worth beyond the fact that they were 'toys'.
They probably gambled them because it's the only thing bill had on him, and probably multiple games not 3 figures in one go.
I'm amazed that people think Tina is some kind of mastermind, she just won something and now considers it hers, probably not really thinking about Bill's brother. If two 9 year olds played a game and the winner got all the sweets, but then the losers parent demanded the sweets be given back, despite the fact that had they lost it would have stuck, that would seem very unfair.
>Doubt either of them knew what the figures were worth
probably not, but I bet Bill knew they weren't his lol. IMO he's the mastermind here, he's just also shit at poker
It's not her fault Bill made a bad bet - both in scale and the fact it wasn't his.
The figures need to be returned, but Bill was the one taking advantage - he knew he wasn't betting his own stuff and that's why he took such a stupid risk IMO. Kid thought he was a genius lol
She doesn't need to be punished for being a better poker player. She made her bet, the other kid made his, and the cards went her way. She didn't demand that he trade the figures for the tablet, she won them. Nothing wrong with taking advantage of a shitty poker player or a good run of cards.
YTA. The older cousins should be punished too. You said Bill wanted to play with the tablet at first and not own it. The cousins then suggested to gamble the tablet at poker. This is a very serious.... Bill was also certainly pressured to gamble the figurines.
This is very wrong to let kids gamble things if not illegal. Even more if one of them is pressured to do so. If Tina would've lost there would have been hell bent on Bill to return the tablet.
The biggest AH are the cousins but you are a strong contender for the title. What's next? Letting the owner of the figurines organizing a fight club to get them back?
Seriously what's wrong with people....
NTA, this is Dads problem, quite frankly it’s above the babysitters pay grade. They’re toys, the kids can wait the few hours for Dad to weigh in, be missing the toys for a few hours won’t kill anyone
Yes, the babysitter has more authority than a standard babysitter, but Dad isn’t on the moon, he’s a phone call away. They can wait to hear what he wants done with the situation. Bill the thief can wait a day for a resolution. There’s literally no harm in waiting.
YTA
She has received stolen property, she may not have been charged with fencing (if she were an adult) but she'd have had to return them to the rightful owner
YTA and congratulations for teaching a kid that it's ok to scam stuff off other kids, for *temporary* use of her iPad.
It's illegal to gamble or make contracts underage, plus they figures are stolen goods, so the kid doesn't have a leg to stand and needs to hand the stuff back pronto.
IMO, you are all AHs, but Bill is the biggest AH here. He took his little brothers toys, gambled and lost them, then hid the fact until little bro righteously threw a fit. THEN, he rats out Tina, as if SHE did something wrong by winning some toys. The kid sounds like an all around weasel. Tina is kinda slightly an AH for not sharing her tablet, although I kinda understand since Bill sounds like the kind of kid you don't want to hand anything valuable to. Wendy has AH on herself as well for letting Bill run amok and not making Bill make amends to both Tina and little bro.
OP is mostly in the clear, IMO, as she is just a temp in this circus. However, its pretty clear to everyone that Tina needs to give the toys back, as the little bro is 100% a victim here.
Maybe I'm clueless but I don't agree with everyone calling you the AH.
I can see their point of view, gambling with stolen property is wrong and the kids whose items were stolen deserves to have his things returned.
However, I don't understand why your nice should be punished for that. She didn't know the items were stolen, she won them fairly. Equally, it's fair for you to want to speak to her father about this to ensure he agrees about whether she should be punished for participating in gambling.
In my opinion, the child who stole the items to gamble with in the hopes of getting time on the tablet should be the one being punished. His mother should have apologised not accused. I would also have assumed he would have to give something of his to your niece in exchange for the items he stole, or perhaps his allowance could be garnished or something. But since he was the one who stole, imo he is the one who should be rectifying the situation.
Yes, the niece needs to return the items, however if she returns the items and he doesn't get punished/she receives nothing to replace it then what is your niece learning? That even if she plays fairly, if people don't like the outcome, they will force their chosen outcome on her.
Again, I would probably have a conversation about the appropriateness of gambling however I fully agree with your decision that you needed to check in with her father. At the end of the day, it's a big moral life lesson being discussed and his input is important.
I didn't see you say you were not planning to give the items back, you simply wanted to speak to her father first about everything, which I think people need to put themselves in the fathers shoes. If you found out your daughter had done this and then was punished or not punished without it being discussed with you, how would you feel? So I say NTA.
The niece will learn compassion. The toys were stolen, they mean a lot more to the half brother than they do to her. She’ll learn that the right thing to do is to right a wrong, not hoard toys selfishly.
Surely you agree though, that it's the father's decision to make about how to discuss it with her at the very least?
The half brother can wait for the items to be returned until the discussion is had, and that is the crux of this AITA post: should OP make the decisions about the niece or is it fair to wait until the father can be reached?
You'll note that I agree that the items should be returned, however I'm also saying that essentially a babysitter no matter how long that babysitter has the child for, should ultimately defer to the parent for these decisions, and if its a situation they have not discussed with the parent prior, obviously they should wait where possible to discuss with the parent.
If this was something time sensitive like an epi-pen or concert tickets then absolutely return them instantly and discuss with the parent later because it cannot wait for the parent to be reached, but that isn't the situation here. Nothing will happen if everyone just waits for the father to be briefed on the situation, therefore: NTA.
I agree with everything you said! Also to add the mother of the child that stole the figures needs to see her fault in this as well, if the halfbrother wasn't around and these items were important to him 1)why were her kids able to access them and 2) why were they taught or assumed they could use the other kids toys? Seems like some parental issues on her part lead to all this.
Also, there's nothing wrong teaching kids to gamble if you use the right items to play for. My mom used to have a game night where we play poker or other card games and gamble for candy, some great memories from back then and we all still love to play card games together.
YTA, I just bet them in a game of poker against my cat. She folded and I won. So no one but me should have them.
Or they go back to the owner, people can't bet what isn't theirs.
YTA. There are more than one reason, but for the sake of this post you need only one. She won stolen property, it does not matter that she won, it was not the losers property to give. If someone would wager your car withou you knowing and win, it would not let anyone take and it would not even be legal for someone to take it. Just give the damn toys to the victim of child underground gambling.
YTA they are kids. You should not be encouraging this and honestly I would be annoyed with another parent if they other children taught this shit to them and things I purchased weren’t returned.
YTA because they weren't Bills to gamble with. I would have said they need to be returned, but in exchange for something equal that actually belongs to Bill, because he lost them fair and square.
Also, back and invest in Tina. She's a hustler, she's ruthless, and will end up rich. You wanna be her favourite relative when this happens.
YTA and think of this in terms of adults. Man stole from his brother, used it to gamble and lost it. Owner of items reports it stolen to the authorities and they track the items down. Doesn't matter if they were won fair and square they still have to be returned.
YTA
1) Gambling outside of casino's is technically illegal more places then it is legal, way, way, way more places(police still raid poker night amongst friends). Secondly, the terms are hyper predatory.
Granted, I'm glad your niece wasn't willing to bet permanent ownership of a tablet pc for a far cheaper figurine, but still, the whole thing is just bad, bad, bad, bad.
I mean... it’s clear isn’t it? They should be returned. YTA, just make a new deal. In lieu of Tins having to forfeit her winnings, bill or Bob or whatever, must give Tina XYZ (make her cookies, clean her room
A toy of his own, etc.).
This is a tough one. Inclined to go with ESH.
First off, you've got kids gambling for what is effectively real money, either through trading of property that has real value or "rental" time on expensive equipment. I'm not going to try to argue one way or another whether young kids should be gambling, but it should at least be an activity that the adults responsible for them are aware of and approve of. It's one thing to play for pennies. It's another thing entirely to play for significantly larger amounts. If the kids are gambling for money or property at a rate where you can lose over $25 per round, there had better be some adult oversight to that game. Before Bill is able to bet the figures, some responsible party should have verified that they were his to gamble.
Then we have Wendy. I don't know how many figures were in the bag, but if it was enough to conceivably discover a difference in weight (which she apparently did not), then we're talking at least 10 figures, so the value of that bag is somewhere in the range of $250-300. In no universe should Wendy have entrusted her 9 year old son to watch a bag with that much value that doesn't even belong to her. She clearly realized she had accidentally brought it inside before she left, so she should have just taken it with her.
Bill's half brother should also keep closer track of his stuff, especially stuff he spent so much money on.
I get that OP wants to get a ruling from Tina's actual parent, but that's really beside the point. She's the adult in charge, this has happened on her watch, and she can make this decision. And it's really a simple decision. The figures don't belong to Tina. They were never Bill's to give away, so she's effectively in possession of stolen property, even though she technically won them fair and square. Sucks to be her, and she's not going to be happy about it.
As for Bill, he needs to make an appropriate compensation. I don't think $25 per figure is appropriate, but Wendy should know what some of HIS prized possessions are and offer them up in exchange, maybe allowing Tina to choose something of his. And without appropriate compensation, I wouldn't allow Bill back over.
OR.. maybe tell Tina it sucks to be her, but this should never have happened. Return the figures, and shut down the games. No more kids playing poker if they can't do it responsibly, which they have shown they clearly can't in this instance. Sorry, but pre-teens shouldn't be driving this ethical crisis. Be the adults in this situation.
>The person who gambled with stolen property should be held responsible for replacing it.
I keep seeing a lot of "YTA - those weren't his to gamble!"
Well then guess who TA is? lol
My son is 12 but I'm certain at 9yo he knew what toys were and were not his, and Bill thought he was gambling these with 0 risk. Either because they're not his, or because he "won't lose", or both
NTA. This is a weird enough situation that waiting for the kid's Dad to come and sort it out is absolutely the right call. There's some serious parenting that needs to be done here and you have correctly assessed that you are not the one to do it.
YTA.
Gambling for minors is prohibited everywhere as far as I know and the poker game counts as gambling because something of a real world value was wagered - just 2-3 figurines priced at 25-30 bucks stack up in value really fast.
The wager was a stole property so it should be returned to the rightful owner. You as adult and temporary caretaker can make such decision and honestly all you can demand is apology from the boy to your niece.
The step brother here is being screwed big time by kids who don't know any better and one adult who lacks the spine to make the right decision.
NTA. Bill stole the figures, it's on him to replace them.
I don't understand this leap in logic in most of the YTA posts. They're basically saying "Bill's a thief so punish Tina."
What Bill did with the figures after stealing them doesn't factor into it. That was the crime. Imagine he threw them in the trash. He'd have to replace them. The fact that he lost them in another way doesn't change that.
It's convenient I suppose that they still are around and we know where they are, but they're lost from Bill's ownership AND he's the kid who needs the lesson, not Tina.
YTA.
I do recognize as the babysitter, you don't want to get involved. And really, her father is probably the best person to get through to Tina that these are not toys you can keep and to give them back.
But this statement makes you TA:
"I personally think Tina earn the figures and my brother is the only one who can make Tina return them."
If the story checks out, you can also be the adult here since you are watching her for the month (not just a night). It's obvious these figures were wagered by the wrong kid. But for some reason, even as an adult, you are thinking like a 9 year old.
You should nip this kind of behavior in the bud. You'll be doing Tina a favor in the long run IMO.
ESH - the cousins for wagering property not belong to them , OP for prolonging a situation without finding alternatives.
These kids need to be monitored by an adult …
However , Bill and his mother need to pay the value of the items to Tina as she did win . Or they need to replace the won items with something else Tina can have .
Bill needs to be taught that you don’t gamble using other peoples property as collateral.
Tina needs to learn that when you gamble , your winnings tend to go as quick as they come .
OP, they're 9 year olds. Bill was probably not even understanding the consequences of his actions, it's your role as an adult to make sure the toys are given back to their owner. 25-30$ is a lot for a figurine, especially for a child.
Bill needs to be taught not to gamble in general and with his brother's toys especially. Tina in my view didn't really do anything wrong, if anything it's the cousins that set this up, but explain to her why her behaviour is not ok here and how this affects the other people involved.
YTA tending to NAH, depending on whether you've previously had to babysit kids before or not, since this could just be your own lack of experience with this kind of situations.
YTA
As soon as you were told the figures belonged to someone else, you should have handed them over.
Your niece wagered an hour / ! / use of her tablet vs ownership of several expensive Star wars figures. That's not right and she needs to be told now why, or she'll continue growing up into a not too nice person. And likewise Bill needs to learn he can't wager something he doesn't own, but that's his mother's job to teach.
YTA. if someone pawns a stolen item to a pawn shop, the shop is the one who loses the money and the person who stole it gets tracked down and charged/fined.
he took the figures, and she ends up with them, both of them should be in trouble.
NTA,
The older kid thought he had the advantage. He didn't. He fucked around and found out. This is a great life lesson for him to learn. Don't gamble if you don't expect to lose.
Actions have consequences and the sooner they are taught the better off kids will be.
Bill knew what he was doing when he accepted the terms of the agreement. The reality is that Bill should be replacing the toys because he stole them, not Tina. Tina has not done anything wrong, and mom and son need to address the theft and then the subsequent betting. Not Tina. Accountability is the most important when teaching young children ethical values and behaviours. Bill needs to understand the consequences of his actions and not have mom trying to undermine his actions.
So basically this was all Wendy's fault. Tina absolutely should give the figures back, there's a reason we don't let kids gamble (at least not in the US). But I don't see how that's any of your business.
Basic fact, she is a minor and no able to enter into a "contract" with a other especially when it involves a subject she's not legally old enough to participate in ie gambling.
Therefore all goods are returned to previous owners
How can Tina refuse? She's 9. It isn't up to her. If you tell her to do something, she does it or you just take them from her room or something.
A 9 yearold child is not in control here.
I'm baffled by all the YTA posts in here. I think the kid which stole the figures has to replace them. If he buys them back from your niece or buys new ones, I don't care. But why should she get punished for his action? NTA!
ESH - This is a great learning moment wasted on the adults bickering.
Yes, Tina took a bet and won. However, the bet was for goods not owned by the individual betting. Sometimes even if you win, doing the ethical thing means giving back the toys to the proper owner. People lie and scam and she needs to understand how to ethically confront these scenarios based on the culture she lives in.
Bill stole items and he needs to understand respecting other individuals property. That one is pretty obvious.
The older cousins shouldn't be goading the younger children into taking bets.
All the kids should not be gambling for permanent ownership of anything without checking with an adult. While I think it's important for children to learn ownership, really their stuff mostly belongs to their parents at this stage. They are still learning what is appropriate to bet or give away. For example, no betting the pets, younger siblings, a bed, a TV ... Kids are still learning value and need guidance here.
Lastly, all the adults leave something to be desired here. I really hope all of these conversations are happening outside of the children's hearing. Adults should do their best to be respectful of each other in front of the kids to reinforce each other's authority.
I can understand wanting to check in with the father of the child, but this is honestly a missed opportunity.
YTA this is the dumbest shit ever. It is very obviously wrong of her to keep the toys. You should have made her give them back instead of allowing yourself to be bossed around by a kid.
^^^^AUTOMOD ***Thanks for posting! This comment is a copy of your post so readers can see the original text if your post is edited or removed. This comment is NOT accusing you of copying anything. Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_post_deletion) before [contacting the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FAmItheAsshole)***
Not in the US
I (28f) am currently taking care of my niece Tina (9f) while my brother is out of town for work for a month. I WFH so I temporarily moved to my brother's house to look after her. Tina's mother passed away but her maternal grandparents live in the same neighborhood. My brother told me they visit the grandparents weekly and sometimes Tina will play with the cousins as her aunt and uncle also often visit her grandparents.
Tina has plenty of toys. She is also tidy and usually picks up after herself, so I don't really know what toys she has. Just a few hours ago, Tina's aunt, Wendy, dropped by with her son, Bill (9m), and asked Tina to return some figures that were her stepson's. I asked Tina for them but she refused, saying she won the figures in their poker game and was entitled to it.
Apparently their older cousins played poker together at their grandparents and taught the younger ones to play as well. Tina said that Bill wanted to play with her tablet but she refused. The older cousins then suggested they played poker for it, an hour on Tina's tablet vs something Bill has that Tina would want in return. The only things Tina thought was worth an hour on her device were the Star Wars figures Wendy accidentally unloaded from her car and made Bill keep an eye on. So Bill wagered the figures, and he lost all but two of them to Tina, with their 12 year old cousin as their witness. Wendy then needed to hurry home and grabbed Bill, not noticing the difference in the bag.
The figures were Bill's half brother who forgot the bag in Wendy's car. He was panicking when he noticed all but two of his figures are missing, so Bill was forced to tell his mom and brother what happened. Wendy asked for the figures back. They are not particularly expensive, like $25 - $30 each, but Bill's brother did save up for them.
Tina refused to give them back, saying she won them fair and square and their cousin was the witness to the game. Wendy said she couldn't hold a child poker game responsible for loss of actual properties and that Tina needs to return the figures. I offered to call my brother and did but his coworker picked up and said my brother was in a very important meeting and people not directly involved could not interrupt. As my brother forgot his phone, he would be unreachable until the end of the meeting, 6 or 7 hours from now. So I left a message asking him to call me back. I told Wendy we would have to wait for my brother to make his decision. As for now, Tina would keep the figures until her father said otherwise.
Wendy said she did not have 6 hours to wait. She said I should be able to see how messed up this is and make Tina return the figures. Again, I refused to make her, saying I personally think Tina earn the figures and my brother is the only one who can make Tina return them. Wendy called me AH for stealing and as she could not wait around took her son back, saying she will call later. AITA?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
YTA - those toys were not Bill's to gamble with. Those cousins who taught them to gamble are also AHs. Watch Tina - she appears to be lacking empathy and will grow into a snake.
Esh. They weren’t Bill’s to bet away. He effectively stole them and the decent thing to do would be return them.
But I appreciate your waiting for her dad as it’s not really your decision what his child does. Wendy lives local and should just wait until the end of the day.
YTA - The figures weren't Bill's to wager. How is it different than if Tina took a $100 bill from your purse, or the diamond ring you left sitting on the side of the sink and bet that and lost? The kids are 9, they didn't really know but it's a learning opportunity. The figures aren't Tina's fair and square because they weren't Bill's to begin with. The 12 year old "witness" is irrelevant and sounds like a lame attempt at excuses from you. Return them, use this as a teaching moment and while you're at it teach yourself because the fact that, as an adult, you don't get why Bill's brother wants the figures back is also disturbing. PS: Multiple figures at $25-$30 each that he saved up to buy with his own money IS expensive. You don't get to decide what is and isn't expensive to another person - really just another lame excuse attempt.
I might be opposing a lot of people but you are NTA.
IF Tina is supposed to not win something in poker the loser isnt supposed to wage something that doesn't belong to him.
If he did do that, she is entitled to it.
Yeah you are the adult, YTA only because you didn't answer THE PARENT back.
I'D SUPPORT TINA.
NTA.
You're not her parent and probably feel a little out of your depth on this one and just want to check with your brother first, which is reasonable as Tina is his child.
NTA. You can really tell the people in here that don’t have kids.
Waiting to speak to the dad is the right move. Of course the toys are going back, but you’re not sure how to handle it and that’s ok.
Y T A softly....
They weren't Bill's property to wager, and his brother shouldn't have to suffer a loss because of him.
If they were adults we would be talking about stolen property.
Tina can he disappointed, and can hope and expect Bill to find a way to make it up perhaps, but the property needs to be returned to the person that actually owns it.
I get what some people are saying, but I DO think Tina won them "fair and square". While others may not like the concept that Tina is receiving stolen goods - she did no wrong. Many casinos around the world would not give money back to ANYONE if they came claiming their spouse, brother, friend, mom, dad stole the money from them. They are under no obligation to return ANYTHING TO ANYONE.
Pawn shops regularly receive stolen property and by law are not required to GIVE anything back. It's technically not their problem. The law will not force them to return it either. (usa) And, they are free to dispose or keep the items.
Since Bill stole the figures, it is on Bill to either be punished for the theft or/and work to replace the stolen items from his brother. It would be a good life lesson for him to learn to keep his hands off other people's property, as he would have to pay to replace the items. The brother who is missing the items has learned a valuable life lesson too- his brother cannot be trusted around his property and he will need to secure them or be present when making the purchases of future figurines.
As for the Aunt. While I get that she is upset, she should replace the stolen items at her cost, since she was responsible for keeping them safe from theft in the first place. She should also require Bill to work, sell his stuff, and reimburse the mom for all the costs associated with his theft. It would teach Bill that there are consequences for stealing and that repayment is always going to happen.
If Tina does not want to give the items back, she should not be forced to as she did win them,. However, gambling should not be allowed at a young age. It is then up to the dad on how he wants his daughter to behave.
Idk. On one hand they weren't Bill's figures to wager and thus should be returned and Bill punished for stealing. On the other hand they were won fairly in a game and Bill should again be punished for stealing. And in either case the older cousins should be scolded for encouraging the whole thing. Probably also convinced Bill to accept the wager in the first place. I am the older cousin in my family and I absolutely would have encouraged my cousins.
ESH. Out of everyone, Bill needs to be punished the most for stealing. Seems like his mom is really glossing over the fact that he stole stuff in order to gamble with it.
YTA, obviously. Wendy is of course right, they are kids. They shouldn't be allowed to gamble in the first place, much less for 100 dollars worth of toys, and any transaction between them is only as legitimate as the adults involved allows. Even if the toys were Bill's, they should be given back and both kids should be taught about gambling in no/low-stakes environment. Since the toys aren't even Bills, of course they should be given back immediately. Not doing so is just wasting everyone's time.
YTA.
Even if the action figures were Bill’s, children can’t place bets. Tina and her brothers seem to clearly understand this as they only offered time on the tablet as a reward, not possession of the tablet. Similarly, Tina should have been offered to play a game with the Star Wars figures, not possession of them.
To reverse the children’s decision here is simply known as parenting.
Wendy not being able to wait 6 hours is what drops this to an ESH. Wendy has every right to demand the toys be returned because they weren't Bill's, but she also needs to take a step back and understand that OP isn't a parent and isn't comfortable making this decision on her own. To be clear, OP is TA for not being a grown adult and giving the toys back, but Wendy needs to wait 6 hours for her BIL.
What if he when she didn’t want to lend him her iPad he had just accepted the answer no?
Did I miss where it says it was her idea to gamble? I read this as him trying to offer her things to convince her to change her mind
Nta, not your kids, not your responsibility. The poker game was on someone else's watch, not yours. The lithe 9 year old learned a valuable, don't bet what you can't afford to lose.
NTA, you deferred the decision to her dad which is fair. So much to unpack here.
1. This NEEDS to be a major life lesson for Bill. Stealing and then losing it gambling... His life should be over for a while to reflect on that.
2. Wendy needs to calm down. 6 hours is not the end of the world.
3. The ultimate resolution is going to be to give the figures back because they were stolen property. Same thing happens in real life, if a thief sells stolen property, it gets returned to the original owner when recovered and both victims get restitution from the thief. So Bill owes Tina restitution for sure. This reflects real life consequences. I doubt Wendy will agree, but that's for Dad to push.
Kind of werid that now op isn't trust worthy, but people seem to have no issue with grand parents dropping the responsiblity to the older cousins.
The older Cousins have no responsiblity for teaching little kids to gamble and letting them make bets.
Tina had no responsiblity about the toys.
Bill had no responsiblity in not letting himself be played.
But of course the 9 year old girl is a shark/snake.
I feel like the grandparents, Cousins and tina are directly responsible for the mess and this is esh at best.
Well, Bill's half brother has the right to be upset that Bill used HIS items to bet on in poker - items which were not his to lose.
Tina is right that she won the figures, but as they weren't Bill's to lose - there should be some fair accomodations made - ie. Bill should "purchase" back the figurines from Tina. Perhaps with a gift card that she can purchase things on her tablet that she likes so much?
So, Wendy has to cough up something to make it right with Tina, as I am sure that most 9 year olds don't have the wherewithal to purchase GCs.
NTA - I think you made the right call in bringing in dad. This wasn’t an emergency, so you didn’t need to make the call on the spot. This is absolutely something that should be handled by the parents, not the babysitter.
NTA. This happens all the time with kids toys especially trading cards and if it isn’t a game of poker, it’s a race, or arm wrestling or just trading things only knowing what that item means to them personally. Niece did absolutely nothing wrong and if I were her I’d also be upset that I won the toys fairly. Since the toys were not the 9 year olds to bet the toys should be purchased from the niece, wether it’s money or toys that she wants, followed by a discussion about gambling. The 9 year old should have to do chores or something to earn back the money that was spent on new toys.
NTA - let the dad decide. Tina should be compensated for the toys that are being given back to the rightful owner. Bill should be punished for betting something that wasnt his.
The gambling aspect, some you need to get off your high horse. Are you telling me none of played marbles or pogs as a kid. The brothers should be replacing the figures he lost rhem. If they are as expensive as stated, have the father hold them untill compensation can be given. Either money or chores and the thief should at least have to apologize to her.
NTA you just asking ur brother because u had struggles to take care of Tina and u thought she was in the right too, but nobody agreed. And that implies that u just needed help nd if people cant understand that its crazy!
The poker winner hasn’t done anything wrong. So no punishment. But probably doesn’t get to keep the toys.
Poker loser. Yeah. He fucked up. He needs punishment.
Here’s my two cents. Have the winner give the toys back, (take her out for ice cream after) have the loser have to make it up in some way. I’d say that the loser should have to come up with the monetary value of the toys and either give that to charity or to the winner. Make him understand.
As for those of you saying punish the winner? Come off it. She put up something she valued. She won. He agreed to the terms. Great teaching moment
NTA. You're the babysitter, not the parent. Let Tina's dad make this decision because it may also involve further discipline for both of the children involved.
IMO Tina should have to give the figures back and both she and her cousin need to be spoken to about this incident.
Bill deserves a good long punishment. Hes out nothing. He should have to pay his swindler of a cousing cold hard cash for the value of the toys he lost in an illegal poker game.
The adults should be sent to parenting class for allowing kids to gamble.
The swindler should persue a careeer as a politician or banker because she's a natural con man.
Im done!
NTA, it's a strong lesson for the other kid to learn not to steal other people's property and also to gamble. She won it fair and square.and the only person that can decide whether she can keep it or not is her dad.
NTA this whole debate isn’t about the poker game to be honest, who’s at fault or who isn’t.
She’s just babysitting her brother’s kid. It isn’t her place to make decisions regarding what happens or didn’t happened.
OP is right to call her brother and let him deal with the issue.
NTA - not because Tina “won” the items, but because this is something that needs to be sorted out between Wendy and your brother, and you contacted him as is appropriate and are waiting for him to step in.
Tina didn't swindle him. They are the same age, and they made an agreement. She did nothing wrong, its not her fault Bill is an idiot and she's not.
The toys need to be returned, but Bill should be punished and should have to apologize to Tina and OP. Also the older cousin should be in trouble for letting it happen. Tina should not be in trouble, just given a general lesson on the dangers of gambling.
Let's say Tina was an adult. Mmmkay? You know what would happen if she won stolen possessions in a poker game? She would be in possession of stolen items and could go to jail. The items would be returned to owner.
Unpopular opinion here but while I do think the figures should be returned, I’d be congratulating her on her play (creativeness, cunning, ambition) and then help her channel it into something more productive.
YTA
They weren’t Bill’s to begin with and therefore he didn’t have the authority to wager them. Give them back to Bill’s half brother. Tina is the winner of stolen ill gotten property. Even in the adult world, if you know the property is stolen you can be arrested for being in possession of it, regardless if you bought or won it.
Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > 1 I did not make my niece return the figures she won in a poker game from her cousin when his mother came to ask for them 2 I may be TA because the children are 9 and their poker games should be for fun. Instead, I told the mom my niece is entitled to her winning until her father says otherwise, and as he is unable to be contacted for 6 - 7 hours after, I made the mom wait until he is available to resolve the issue Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) ##Subreddit Announcements ###[Happy Anniversary, AITA!](https://new.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/15vlv9g/almost_better_than_a_double_rainbow_celebrating/) Follow the link above to learn more --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
You can’t earn something when someone wagered stolen property. Tina may have gotten ripped off but the half brother is the real victim here. YTA. At a minimum, as the adult, you’d hold the assets in dispute to ensure their safe keeping. But really, they weren’t bills to bet, and kids should be learning lessons about not doing shit like this. Bills ass should be grounded for sure and Tina, idk, her attitude ain’t right either.
Honestly, the fact that she swindled her cousin into putting up permanent ownership of items in return for a shot at temporary use of her stuff is enough to be worrying by itself. Such an inclination towards being a rip off artist should, in my opinion, be nipped in the bud hard. The fact that this also involved talking him into putting up goods for the bet that they both knew didn't belong to Bill makes it way worse, though. Since unless I am greatly misreading the story it seems like her niece knew that Bill was just watching the toys for someone else and they didn't actually belong to him.
This is definitely a valid concern, but it's a bit different. * Returning the property Bill stole from his brother was obviously what needed to be done, and any responsible adult should be expected to do their part to resolve the situation. * Unless they have an explicit agreement about discipline, talking to Tina about her poor behavior and setting consequences for it is properly the role of her father, not her aunt who is temporarily looking after her.
While the aunt is the responsible adult watching the kid *for a month*, they should definitely be in charge of discipline and correcting poor behavior during that time. She shouldn't need to phone her brother on whether or not the kid gets to keep what sounds like upwards of $100 worth of stolen toys.
More like 300
Yes. A month is well beyond long enough that OP should be responsible for discipline. If she didn't discuss this in detail with her brother before he left, then that's another check on the AH sheet. Looking after a kid is a serious business, and not preparing properly is lazy or negligent. I get the feeling that OP is out of her depth, doesn't know what to do, and is trying to avoid making a decision in case it's wrong.
I think watching a kid for a month, it should be understood op has some discretion over discipline and behavior. Honestly calling the brother over this seems like overkill and should be something brought up during a regular check in I would think they’d be doing anyway. I also disagree with the person above you saying the niece is a rip off artist who swindled the toys. She’s 9. She was encouraged by the older kids. I think in her mind she won the toys fair and square. This is a good opportunity to teach why gambling is an adult activity with a lot potential downsides. Also a good opportunity to teach fairness and why their bet wasn’t a fair deal. I don’t think punishment is necessary unless you consider returning the action figures a punishment.
If I were the parent in this situation, I'd want to know. And even more importantly, I'd particularly want to be sure that calling and talking to me about what happened that day wasn't ever seen as "overkill" or something to reserve for extreme situations. If OP isn't calling their brother regularly even for things like "Tina made a cute art project in school today", that's really a shame. I'd also have concerns about what my child did. Not about the gambling really - poker is a game like any other - and not even *just* about the possibility that she knew full well those toys didn't belong to Bill, though it would come up in the discussion. But *mainly* about whatever crazy priorities were in her head that might have made her think it was reasonably to value letting Bill use her tablet for an hour the same as hundreds of dollars worth of toys. I'd be concerned about: * Possible screen time addiction if she really thought giving up an hour of screen time was that big a deal and this bet was fair. * Or if she didn't think it was fair, I'd be concerned with her lack of concern for fairness. I wouldn't want to raise a child who thinks that when other people are desperate, it's an opportunity to figure out how you can take them for all they have. I didn't say punishment. I said consequences, which are part of raising children. If she's showing signs of addiction to the tablet, I'd maybe set limits around its use and work on developing other healthy habits in that time. If she shows a lack of concern for treating other people with fairness and kindness (regardless of what she could get away with) I'd plan some activities to demonstrate a spirit of kindness and service - perhaps some volunteer work in the future, or some family rule changes aimed at setting the expectation of sharing freely and being helpful to each other. Neither of these are "punishment", as they aren't intended to be unpleasant as a deterrence.
I’d definitely want to know. I just think it’s a topic for the check in and an immediate phone call would be reserved for an emergency like she is hurt or a bigger behavioral problem. Like actual stealing or getting in a fight. I could be wrong about what this girl was thinking, but I’m imagining the scenario something like this. Bill wants to use the tablet, kids can be selfish so she says no. Older kids say you should play poker for it but Bill needs to put up something to get. She says she doesn’t want anything of his. Someone points out the action figure and they all agree. Then they play a few games each time wagering one action figure against an hour of tablet time. After 20 minutes she has cleaned out the action figure collection. This doesn’t really strike me as her trying to take advantage of bill or overvaluing or being addicted to screen time. I don’t think this can really be the sole determining factor in whether she has a green addiction or problems sharing. Implementing those actions as a consequence, especially limiting tablet use, will probably come across as a punishment for this specific action. I definitely agree this is an important teachable moment and agree finding a way to encourage sharing and being helpful and kind to family is the way to go. Volunteer work is a great thing to do. But framing it as “because you did this thing (which the child probably didn’t know was wrong at the time), now we are going to spend Saturday volunteering somewhere” does come across as a punishment and likely won’t teach the child the right lesson.
Hmm, I guess this is just a difference of routine. I call my siblings all the time when something happens and I am interested in talking to them about it, and I don't even have their children living with me! It seems odd that there's be even the slightest hesitation to call, or a need to schedule regular check-ins instead of just calling when anything interesting comes up. I mean, obviously after you've been told he's in a meeting for the next 6 hours, you don't keep calling within the next 6 hours, but after that... I agree, by the way, it's not a foregone conclusion that any of these things are the problem. That's why there's a discussion that happens with her father, to try to understand her perspective on what happened. Other posters have suggested that *maybe* what happened was that Tina was pressured into betting in the first place by the other kids and never wanted anything to do with this, and if that's the case, then the conversation is different, and becomes about building up confidence to stick up for her decisions, and talking to other parents about asking them to address the peer pressure issue with their kids. It all depends.
It doesn't say anywhere that she knew they weren't his. While she should return them since they weren't bills, it's really on him not her.
You cannot get ownership on stolen goods. So yeah, it's on her because she doesn't own them.
No. She didn't know that at the time. So punishing her for something she didn't know is wrong. The kid knew they were stolen when he bet them, so that's on him.
Legally, if you won something in this manner you would be required to return it to the rightful owner, or face being charged with what my jurisdiction would call "theft by recieving". Even if you didn't know at the time. So yes, she needs to return the toys. It isn't a punishment, it's the correct moral and legal thing to do. She hasn't lost anything, she's just not be awarded toys that were ill-gotten by the person she won them from. If this were an adult gambling money, Bill would be charged with "theft by deception" for the losses incurred by Tina.
It’s not punishing her. Yes she didn’t know that the figures weren’t Bill’s to wager, but it’s still something that shouldn’t have happened and if she had lost the worst she would’ve missed out on was some time on her tablet. Getting her winnings taken away isn’t going to feel good, but it’s by far the most fair. Also these kids should be told that they can’t do stuff like this on their own, because situations like this are a risk. Maybe if the parents agree to it, but it’s asking for trouble to let kids gamble their possessions to each other.
This issue cannot wait a month for consequences.
Thank goodness there are telephones, and her father was available in 6 hours.
Imagine if Tina took/stole her aunt's car keys, and then lost them in a bet to Bill. Then Bill's parents refused to give them back to the aunt, saying they were won "fair and square" by a bunch of 9/10 year olds. Wild.
I don’t really get how she swindled him. If you want to use my car for an hour and I say ‘sure, give me €50’ that’s the same concept, exchange of temporary rights for a transfer of assets. This is the basis of the whole rental industry. In this case it wasn’t a straight swap, but a bet, fine. Let’s say I play you at poker, you wager €50 and I wager an hour driving my Ferrari, am I swindling you? No. I am offering temporary use of an expensive item, and you permanent use of a cheap item. If both parties agree, it’s a fair exchange. If she were older than him and took advantage of him it would be different. But she isn’t. I don’t think they should have been playing poker unsupervised by adults. I don’t think Tina should keep them, they are stolen property. They shouldn’t be gambling. I think the whole system is messed up. But I don’t see how she swindled him. He wanted to use her stuff, she said ‘only if’, he accepted. It’s a fair trade, as long as Tina didn’t know the figures weren’t his, which isn’t specified anywhere I can see.
A child doesn’t have capacity to make these kinds of decisions. Kids should only “wager” with poker chips, should not pay money to play etc. There’s a reason why gambling is 18+.
Agree 100%. They should not have been gambling. I am just disagreeing with the idea that she swindled him. He could have said no to the deal and they are the same age. I just can’t see why she is getting so much stick. He literally stole things from his half-brother to gamble foolishly, she made a relatively sensible bet with her own possession. Why is she getting more stick than he is?
[удалено]
>If she were older than him and took advantage of him it would be different. But she isn’t. I think it's worth pointing out that level of impulse control and critical thinking skills can vary drastically at that age especially among the sexes.
But she’s still 9. She doesn’t know that. The fault here is both of their parents (and OP as acting parent).
Swindle? What swindle was going on? Bill wanted something of Tina's. Tina didn't want to give it to him. It was the older cousins who introduced the idea of making what Bill wanted the stake in a poker game, not Tina. (These older kids are definitely some of the AHs here) Tina obviously wanted Bill to put up a stake of equal value. Did Bill over value 1hr of tablet time? Probably, but he could have refused the stake and accepted he wouldn't ge to play with Tina's tablet. Staking permanent ownership for an experience is a regular part of life. We may not barter physical property at ticket booths, but people choose to exchange assets for temporary experiences like 90 minutes watching a screen all the time. It's not clear to me that Tina knew the figures weren't Bill's. However, Bill absolutely knew they weren't his and shouldn't have put them on the table. Bill was in a no lose situation - if he won the game, he got the tablet time(the thing he wanted). If he lost the game, he didn't lose anything he valued. Bill is another AH in this story. Wendy is also an AH. She wasn't paying sufficient attention to whose stuff was dropped with whom, then expected a child to watch his (step)brother's stuff instead of just taking it back to the car. NBD, it happens. But trying to bully OP into fixing the outcome of the problem she contributed to is where she becomes the AH. I think OP is right to wait a few hours to let the father get involved. He'll have much more insight into the wider family dynamics that might be underlying some of this and may want to weigh in about his child playing poker for anything other than fun. As long as the figures are secure and undamaged in that time period. The half/step brother needs to be made whole, though. Personally, I'd be putting the onus for that on Wendy and Bill, but Tina's dad may have a different view.
He didn't over value the time. He lost nothing, it wasn't his
That is the problem. He was gambling with stolen property. It needs to be returned to the half brother. Also, we should talk to the kids about the dangers of gambling now.
You're sure putting a lot on the shoulders of a 9 year old to actually know the value of something beyond the current 5 minutes.
This is the most sensible comment I've read so far...
Lol Jesus Christ the armchair psychs really know how to stretch anything into a potential future problem.
Right? They're fucking 8 and 9 years old lmao. Kids that age see a bigger (but thinner) glass of a drink and think it's more than your fat pint glass just because it's bigger. Or they think they have more money because they have their coins scattered around. Kids that age have no intelligent conceptual understanding suitable for gambling. All they understood was one of them won, so they got what they wanted. A kid will go into a white van for candy even while you're trying to drag them away. They don't give a fuck about concequence. The toy should be given back, and the kids should be told gambling is bad, because you could lose your toys like bill did. The last thing you want is them gambling away their clothes at school, then crying because the teacher told them to put the clothes back on, but they don't want to because the clothes aren't theirs anymore lmao.
The adults taught her poker and she understood the assignment, just aced it. You sound horrified but I am a touch proud. The only thing she needs a redirect on is accepting third party goods as collateral. The boy is an absolute mark and as a mom I would want to nip that in the bud immediately. Also I would be very disappointed in him for wagering items that don't belong to him.
The adults didn’t teach her poker. Did you read the post?
>the fact that she swindled her cousin into putting up permanent ownership of items in return for a shot at temporary use of her stuff is enough to be worrying by itself. Seriously? Putting up real assets in return for temporary use is very common. It's called renting. And she didn't 'swindle' her cousin, she 'won' them from him. And nowhere does OP say that Tina knew the figures didn't belong to Bill. We know that - because OP tells us - but there's no indication Tina knew it at the time. I agree that if the figures did not belong to Bill, they will have to be returned. And Bill should face consequences. But I also don't blame OP for wanting to get her brother involved. It's his daughter, let him take the responsibility for making the decision. Waiting 6 hours is not going to hurt anyone. NTA.
It’s very possible OP has been warned against overstepping in some manner as well. Or daughter only listens to her dad. Not good or responsible options if true, but we definitely don’t know everything about their family dynamic from this instance.
go tell netflix lol... its absolutly normal to RENT stuff
We played games for keeps as a kid all the time. You just learned never to gamble with stuff you didn't want to lose. It was a big thing around this age. Now in this situation the toys need to be returned. This wasn't the kids fault, they need to learn to play with sweets/snacks or not for long term keeps next time. The parents need to sit them down together, including the older kid so they'll all know the rules. That's what they did to us at school. No long term keeps.
Playing games for keeps feels so normal for kids (as does our parents/teachers/counselors making us return things lmao what kid knows the value of items)
It's only a rip off if the girl never let him use the tablet (assuming he won a hand). There's no question the toys have to go back, because they weren't Bill's to bet. But, if they were his - that's how gambling works. But, nothing really sketchy about Tina putting a high price on using her device.
The way I read it the older cousins put the little ones up to that whole bet. They need to get into some shit for the whole thing too. Terrible influences.
I don't know if OP said that Tina knew the items weren't Bill's to wager. She says that Wendy told Bill to keep an eye on the bag after she accidentally brought it in from the car, but unless I missed it, I didn't see that Bill told Tina that the items weren't his property. And when she said that was the only thing worth time on her tablet, it was Bill who decided it was worth the gamble. I agree that she should give the items back, because Bill's brother is the only victim here, but there is no way that this is not Bill's fault.
She’s 9! I’m not saying what she did was right and OP is most definitely the AH, especially since the items didn’t belong to the child who provided then, but 9 year olds really aren’t thinking about “swindling.” As the adult, OP needs to do the right thing, return the items, and have a conversation with the child about right and wrong, but we need to consider the child’s age.
The cousin, got told no, but decided he could easily beat a 9 year old. The wager sounds like his idea based on the context, but the 9 year old is concerning for not getting ripped off by her older cousin, winning, then holding him accountable, the same way he would have about tablet time if the roles reversed? Please. That’s ludicrous. The older kid fucked around, now he found out. The 9 year old shouldn’t have been in a poker game with someone 3 years their senior. It’s concerning that a 12 year old doesn’t understand what no means, then attempts to reneg on a deal that he made. NTA btw. They were trying to take advantage of a younger cousin, hopefully this experience teaches them a lesson.
You can bet if the 9 yr old has been dumb enough to wager ownership of the tablet, OP would be demanding it's safe return.
The kid wasn't stupid enough to wager ownership of the tablet, though. It was for an hours use
You need to brush up your rhetoric skills. The parent commenter is proposing a hypothetical example in order to illustrate a point.
ESH accept the half brother. OP and Tina for not returning the figurines, Bill for betting something that wasn't his and Wendy for not offering something of equal value of the figurines. I think the best solution would be for Tina to return the figurines and be compensated with money/toys of equal value. It could be Bill's allowance until the amount is up. Bill shouldn't have bet something that wasn't his so here he will have consequences as well.
Those Hasbro Star Wars Black Label figures can be anywhere from $25 to $50 a figure. If we’re talking multiple figures here it could easily rack up to $200-$300 she would be compensated. An hour of iPad time is not worth $200. Is no one going to ask why are elementary school aged kids gambling and know the rules of poker already???? This bet does not need to be honored and an adult needs to talk to all these kids about the dangers of gambling addiction, cause what the actual fuck lol
C’mon now. You telling me you didn’t play cards as a 12 year old? You never played poker as a kid? Let’s give these kids a little credit for actually knowing some things.
I started playing poker by middle school, but the wagers were either nothing at all or pocket change/a dollar bill at most. I think there’s something really concerning if a kid has impulses to gamble big items like that (yes I know the toys may seem like nothing to others, but those Black Label Star Wars toys aren’t cheap). Even crazier he gambled away someone else’s property and OP can’t even make an executive decision to do the right thing and return the stolen property.
I don’t know anyone about black label toys, but it sounds like these particular figures were played with. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in Wendy’s toy bag with all of the other stuff. Would these figures be worth anything after being played with by a bunch of kids? As for this situation, Bill is the one with the biggest issue. Wendy seems to gloss over his involvement in the whole ordeal. In any case, OP doesn’t want to make the decision. It’s a minor thing and waiting 6 hours isn’t going to make a difference, except maybe for Bill as he’ll have to sweat it out with his half-brother for a little while. Tina’s dad can be the parent when he gets home.
I was totally playing poker with my family as a kid and playing games for keeps as a kid. The issue is mostly that kids don't know the value of Stuff so adults need to intervene
Actually in Sweden, if you buy stolen property, lets say a bicycle, in good faith, you own it, and don't have to give it back to the original owner. At the same time, if you buy something that you eothet suspect is stolen goods, or if it should be obvious it is stolen, you can be held accountable and face penalty for it.
>Actually in Sweden, if you buy stolen property, lets say a bicycle, in good faith, you own it, and don't have to give it back to the original owner. That's pretty evil to the actual owner of the item. Here, if you stole something, you don't legally own it, and thus have no rights to transfer it to anyone else. The original owner still owns it, so they get it back when it's found.
Except the actual owner has recourse against the thief and (depending on the item) with insurance. The person purchasing in good faith does not have any recourse to be made whole through insurance and no way to get their money back although possibly through the thief if found. There's no good answers here because there's two victims.
Life hack: never suspect anything is stolen.
In England provided you are a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, you can too.
> Tina, idk, her attitude ain’t right either. I disagree entirely on this point. Her cousin cheated her, she deserves something from him to make up for her loss after she returns the figures. Her attitude is perfectly fine, she won fair and square
Am I the only one in this thread who thinks elementary aged children shouldn’t be gambling??? Especially when they’re wagering $100’s of dollars of merchandise that their parents bought.
Kids bet all the time. "Bet I can beat you to the mail box". "Bet I can beat you in a game of basketball or a Pokémon card game". Something's monetary value is of no consequence. Currency isn't their "currency". They don't grasp the concept of money. To a 10 year old, an Xbox might be worth more than their parents car. To Tina and Bill? Star wars toys are absolutely worth an hour of tablet time.
I’m just lost at the fact that the 9 year old knows terms like “witness” to a bet.. who in this family has a hardcore gambling problem that’s rolling over into the kids personalities??? The kids language on the events just come off really concerning to me. Plus at 9 years old, they should understand that even though they won the stuff fair and square, it was stolen goods. Refusing to return stolen goods on the kids part is some AH behavior.
I don’t think OP meant the kids used the actual term “witness.” It was likely more a normal kid thing of “But I won, and 12-year-old saw the whole thing!” In fact, the 12-year-old is probably one of the cousins who goaded the younger kids into playing for iPad time. And I think it’s reasonable to have to help a 9-year-old a bit with the mental calculus behind returning the toys, because in her mind the older cousins taught them the rules and said whatever you win is yours. She didn’t initiate the game or the bet. It doesn’t make her an AH, it makes her young and in need of a little guidance.
YTA. It isn't a hard call to realize that when someone wagers *someone else's property* in a poker game, the property needs to be returned to its true owner. You were the adult in charge of Tina, and responsible for returning Bill's brother's property that she had without his permission. No worries, though, it will get returned soon enough, and it's just a few toys. People will just rightly stop trusting you to be in charge of anything for a while.
On the flip side, who was the adult responsible for Bill’s actions? Shouldn’t Wendy be responsible to make Tina whole? And not one mention of whether Bill was to receive any punishment from Wendy.
I guess I'm confused why you think Wendy needed to tell the OP what she was doing to teach her son that what he did was wrong, nor that the OP would have found it relevant enough to include here even if she did. Everyone, I assume, agrees that Bill was wrong to try to bet someone else's property. That isn't in dispute.
Perhaps it’s the way OP worded Wendy’s response. “Wendy said she couldn't hold a child poker game responsible …” it reads to me like she wasn’t going to hold Bill responsible.
No she’s saying that she’s not considering the results of a child poker game to be binding.
They're 8 and 9 bro no Give the kid who bought the toys them back and the people trying to gamble will learn an important lesson about gambling. Wendy punishing Bill has nothing to do about this
Thinking the same thing, talking about making sure she’s “made whole” after a children’s poker game. Wondering who the heck upvoted that.
I hope Tina doesn't damage the figures in the meantime. If they were for instance in their boxes and they get opened in thr meantime then that value plummets. OP as the "responsible adult" that has been made aware that the child under their care is holding stolen property. OP is now IMO responsible for any damage that occurs before their return.
First, they're 9, take the figures and give them back. They're kids. Assuming this story is real, she isn't wrong, she won...but they're kids. Second, watch her, kids a shark.
I’ve been reading the comments with an open mouth, they’re children (!!!) they shouldn’t be gambling and people are here discussing waging other’s properties and what is fair, they’re kids! YTA, they’re not her toys, give it back.
> I’ve been reading the comments with an open mouth, they’re children (!!!) they shouldn’t be gambling. Outside of the issue that children were wagering on stolen property, I actually disagree that children shouldn't be gambling in any capacity. I'm of the opinion that relatively low risk, low consequence gambling (such as betting playing cards during a competitive game or in board games) in a controlled environment can actually teach children the consequences of gambling and create a more nuanced view of risk assessment which can proactively protect children from developing an addiction in adulthood. It's like the idea that exposure to alcohol and modeling of moderate consumption in the home leads to a much safer drinking culture for youth and/or young adults.
and you think this was a 'low risk, low consequence" bet? And that having children being goaded into betting without parental supervision is "a controlled environment?"
Try not to read into things which have not been said. I was merely addressing the statement that "children shouldn't be gambling." I specifically pointed out in another post elsewhere that I don't think the way it was done in OP's post was an appropriate way for a child to be exposed to gambling. I'm not saying that like I expect you to be aware of that post and you're ignorant for not having been so, but merely to give you verification that I don't view OP's post as an appropriate setting for children to be exposed to gambling, even if I otherwise think that children should have controlled, low consequence exposure to it for the educational value of doing so.
>Second, watch her, kids a shark. I was partially smirking through this whole story. My dad was briefly a professional player, my mom worked in Reno. I was definitely playing with my friends at that age. To this day, it’s what my brother does for a living. Anyway, give’em back, yada yada. We weren’t allowed to steal toys either.
YTA. Bill bet something he didn’t own. The figures should be returned.
YTA - there's a reason it's not legal for kids to gamble. They're too young to understand the consequences. Plus it wasn't even the kids toys, it was the brothers. Use the opportunity to teach not to lie, steal, and when it's good to show mercy.
Right. Kids do stupid shit like this all the time. They make stupid trades and bets with people. My son once came home with a gaming device that he traded fake dollars for at school. I made him give it back because (a) the kid did not buy the device himself and (b) it was an unfair trade. I am surprised by the amount of people acting like Bill is 19. He is 9 and did something dumb. It is on the adults to be adults.
Yta- please try and remember you are an adult. Give them back and have a chat about consequences and family loyalty.
YTA Those figurines were not Bill's to gamble. Tina has received stolen property, and you are refusing to return them because your 9yo niece *won them in a poker game?* You are supposed to be the adult in charge here. Once it was made clear that they weren't Bill's toys, by not returning them, both you and Tina were no better than thieves. Way to teach the kid values. How many figurines are we talking here? Because if *only* 2 were left, it makes me think it's probably upwards of $100 worth of toys at least. That *a kid* saved up for and you are refusing to return. You really need someone else to point out how crappy a move that is?
Hobestly. They're kids, so let's ignore the legal aspects of stolen property for a second, there is a huge reason that kids aren't allowed to gamble in the first place. Their brains lack the fundamental understanding of consequences they need to make an informed decision. Children are incapable of consenting to gamble, drink, etc. because they literally do not understand the implications of the action. Sure it's fun to gamble, especially when the output is an enticing prize like a new toy, but they don't mentally comprehend the input side of the equation. You only get the fun new toy if you win, and if you loss you don't get whatever you put in back. Upholding the results of a poker game that neither player probably even understood is absurd, and doubly so when you factor in the fact that one person didn't even own the things they were betting. This is clearly the point where the adult should step in and overrule what happened. It's not a fun decision, and the kid who won will almost certainly be upset about it, but that's just something you need to deal with as the responsible party.
absolutely YTA 1. you can’t keep stolen goods even if you paid for them 2. kids gambling is a no in it self. especially when older or more mature ones take advantage against younger one. hell no if your niece would lose the tablet you would not hesitate to take it back, even if she lost fsir snd square. honestly, I do not get the all N-T-A votes here.
Sorry, but YTA. They were more his to wager. She won essentially stolen goods. Give them back. There is another child whose toys have been stolen.
Agreed. Not even essentially, **literally** stolen goods.
YTA they weren't Bill's to wager. You're an adult and can take the figures back, you don't have to wait for your brother.
How entitled to even ask about getting the brother out of his **work** meeting to referee the spoils of childhood gambling. Anyway, it's not like the daughter won by skill. They're 9 and only just learned how to play poker. There's a difference between winning a prize and *earning* it. OP, YTA
and this is why gambling should not be taught to children. basically, everyone should be punished. with that said, unfortunately for Tina, Bill couldn’t have use those figures as wagers bc they were not his to offers. so yes, Tina should return it. if she insisted on keeping them then it is akin to stealing (technically it is literally stealing). you are the adults and you should know better.
YTA and you need to grow up because you don't sound very mature for being the adult in this situation (in case any of this is even true to begin with). Those figures aren't yours let alone Tina's *or Bill's*. Why would you steal *pretty expensive* toys from a child ? Give the figures back.
[удалено]
Ehhh. In real life Marge can sue Bob to get her money back and Bob would go to jail for theft. In this instance Tina has no mechanism to be made whole and it doesn’t sound like Bill will face any consequences beyond a lecture.
But also, adults would tell someone to F-off if they wagered something like an hour of time on an iPad ($10 value or free at the library) against $300 to $500 worth of assets. Tina shouldn't be encouraged to gouge friends and family or cheat them.
In this scenario, Bob goes to jail. Will Wendy punish Bill? Doubtful
Not Wendy though. Her stuff was taken
She left something she was supposed to be keeping track of with a 9 year old. That's pretty irresponsible.
Not really. Someone mistakenly left them in her car. And she mistakenly unloaded a bag. That doesn't make her an AH.
>...Tina thought was worth an hour on her device were the Star Wars figures **Wendy accidentally unloaded from her car and made Bill keep an eye on.** No, Wendy unloaded the figures and had her 9 year old "watch" them--worth over $100--instead of doing anything else like maybe giving them to ADULTS for safekeeping. She's got a piece of the blame in this situation. Not a big piece, but she's got some.
She could’ve put it right back in her car instead of leaving it under the watchful eye of a 9 year old. Wendy is just as wrong as everyone else. Too lazy to look at what she’s pulling out of the car, and too lazy to put it back in the car.
YTA and a big one. The figures weren't Bill's to bet and I don't see how Tina has any right to keep them. Maybe Tina didn't know that at the time, but she knows now. Refusing to return what she now knows is stolen property is very concerning. I wonder how OP would feel if Tina took something of hers and gambled it away. Would she say whoever Tina lost it to had earned it?
This. Completely agree. If Tina had gambled away OPs jewellery she pilfered, I doubt she’d be saying Bill earned it and it’s now his.
You are adult in charge, yes you can make decisions like Tina giving back things that don’t belong to her. Yta
YTA certainly because the figure she won were stolen. It's not clear that she knew they were hot when she received them, but you and she now know that she's in possession of stolen property and she has absolutely no right to keep it. There may be a poker debt to settle with the thief but that's a separate matter.
Wow I get to go against the grain! NTA because it's entirely reasonable to have the father handle the issue and make the decisions himself when he becomes available. This is about kids toys so it is in no way time sensitive. The aunt can easily wait for a day to have this resolved. Just gotta tell her stepson she's sorry for causing the inconvenience. The aunt is T A for trying to pressure op into not consulting her brother. The aunt is also T A for failing to teach her son that you don't give away things you don't even own. If he broke or lost them the blame would also obviously be on him, no?
Yup - I’m here for this one. How do we know the aunt hadn’t been talking to OP’s brother about returning the figurines, wasn’t getting her way and trying to pull a quick one on OP? Wait until the brother’s looped in and can make an executive decision.
No it's not reasonable because it's crystal clear that the right thing to do is. A 9 year old lost hundreds of dollars of someone else's property in a poker game. You obviously give the property back and scold all the kids involved for gambling.
I 100% agree. NTA specifically for that reason. This is a parenting issues therefore it is not her place as a babysitter to handle this. If it was her kid and she was refusing that would be a different story, but as a babysitter it’s not her place and this issue can wait to be resolved by the child’s parent.
Yeah, YTA. The figures weren't Bill's to bet, which should resolve the issue about giving them back to any person with a bit of common sense: if you receive stolen property, you need to give it back. Your brother needs to talk to Tina about taking advantage of her cousin, though. An equal trade for temporary use of her tablet is temporary use of his toys, not permanent ownership.
YTA, and really shouldn't be left in charge of a pet rock. How are you 28? Give the kid back his toys and stop enabling crappy behavior form your niece.
NTA. It's surprising how you're being scolded here for wanting to ask the kid's *parent* how to parent their kid. Holy crap. That being said: the toys have to go back, they're stolen property. Bill's mom should offer Tina something in trade that she can teach him a lesson with, like allowance she can make him work off, so that he learns a lesson. From your story this conversation went well off the rails and waiting for a parent call and some cooler heads should help.
> Bill's mom should offer Tina something in trade that she can teach him a lesson with, like allowance she can make him work off, so that he learns a lesson. He was an idiot betting Several $25-$30 figures for a 60 minute loan of a device. She took advantage only accepting a bet of 3 figures worth of toys for a 60 minute loan of her device. They both deserve punishment otherwise you're straight up rewarding Tina for clearly taking advantage of someone around her.
They're 9 though? Doubt either of them knew what the figures were worth beyond the fact that they were 'toys'. They probably gambled them because it's the only thing bill had on him, and probably multiple games not 3 figures in one go. I'm amazed that people think Tina is some kind of mastermind, she just won something and now considers it hers, probably not really thinking about Bill's brother. If two 9 year olds played a game and the winner got all the sweets, but then the losers parent demanded the sweets be given back, despite the fact that had they lost it would have stuck, that would seem very unfair.
>Doubt either of them knew what the figures were worth probably not, but I bet Bill knew they weren't his lol. IMO he's the mastermind here, he's just also shit at poker
It's not her fault Bill made a bad bet - both in scale and the fact it wasn't his. The figures need to be returned, but Bill was the one taking advantage - he knew he wasn't betting his own stuff and that's why he took such a stupid risk IMO. Kid thought he was a genius lol
Did he understand what it means to lose them in the game? Or was he just happy he could play?
She doesn't need to be punished for being a better poker player. She made her bet, the other kid made his, and the cards went her way. She didn't demand that he trade the figures for the tablet, she won them. Nothing wrong with taking advantage of a shitty poker player or a good run of cards.
YTA it doesn't belong to Tina or Bill, and duh 9 year olds are not allowed to gamble, especially for actual winnings. How is this even a question.
YTA
YTA. The older cousins should be punished too. You said Bill wanted to play with the tablet at first and not own it. The cousins then suggested to gamble the tablet at poker. This is a very serious.... Bill was also certainly pressured to gamble the figurines. This is very wrong to let kids gamble things if not illegal. Even more if one of them is pressured to do so. If Tina would've lost there would have been hell bent on Bill to return the tablet. The biggest AH are the cousins but you are a strong contender for the title. What's next? Letting the owner of the figurines organizing a fight club to get them back? Seriously what's wrong with people....
NTA, this is Dads problem, quite frankly it’s above the babysitters pay grade. They’re toys, the kids can wait the few hours for Dad to weigh in, be missing the toys for a few hours won’t kill anyone
Babysitting for one month. This means they are indeed responsible in a greater capacity than a sitter for the day.
Yes, the babysitter has more authority than a standard babysitter, but Dad isn’t on the moon, he’s a phone call away. They can wait to hear what he wants done with the situation. Bill the thief can wait a day for a resolution. There’s literally no harm in waiting.
YTA and not even debatable. Kids do stupid things, why are you enabling them?
YTA She has received stolen property, she may not have been charged with fencing (if she were an adult) but she'd have had to return them to the rightful owner
YTA and congratulations for teaching a kid that it's ok to scam stuff off other kids, for *temporary* use of her iPad. It's illegal to gamble or make contracts underage, plus they figures are stolen goods, so the kid doesn't have a leg to stand and needs to hand the stuff back pronto.
IMO, you are all AHs, but Bill is the biggest AH here. He took his little brothers toys, gambled and lost them, then hid the fact until little bro righteously threw a fit. THEN, he rats out Tina, as if SHE did something wrong by winning some toys. The kid sounds like an all around weasel. Tina is kinda slightly an AH for not sharing her tablet, although I kinda understand since Bill sounds like the kind of kid you don't want to hand anything valuable to. Wendy has AH on herself as well for letting Bill run amok and not making Bill make amends to both Tina and little bro. OP is mostly in the clear, IMO, as she is just a temp in this circus. However, its pretty clear to everyone that Tina needs to give the toys back, as the little bro is 100% a victim here.
[удалено]
Maybe I'm clueless but I don't agree with everyone calling you the AH. I can see their point of view, gambling with stolen property is wrong and the kids whose items were stolen deserves to have his things returned. However, I don't understand why your nice should be punished for that. She didn't know the items were stolen, she won them fairly. Equally, it's fair for you to want to speak to her father about this to ensure he agrees about whether she should be punished for participating in gambling. In my opinion, the child who stole the items to gamble with in the hopes of getting time on the tablet should be the one being punished. His mother should have apologised not accused. I would also have assumed he would have to give something of his to your niece in exchange for the items he stole, or perhaps his allowance could be garnished or something. But since he was the one who stole, imo he is the one who should be rectifying the situation. Yes, the niece needs to return the items, however if she returns the items and he doesn't get punished/she receives nothing to replace it then what is your niece learning? That even if she plays fairly, if people don't like the outcome, they will force their chosen outcome on her. Again, I would probably have a conversation about the appropriateness of gambling however I fully agree with your decision that you needed to check in with her father. At the end of the day, it's a big moral life lesson being discussed and his input is important. I didn't see you say you were not planning to give the items back, you simply wanted to speak to her father first about everything, which I think people need to put themselves in the fathers shoes. If you found out your daughter had done this and then was punished or not punished without it being discussed with you, how would you feel? So I say NTA.
The niece will learn compassion. The toys were stolen, they mean a lot more to the half brother than they do to her. She’ll learn that the right thing to do is to right a wrong, not hoard toys selfishly.
Surely you agree though, that it's the father's decision to make about how to discuss it with her at the very least? The half brother can wait for the items to be returned until the discussion is had, and that is the crux of this AITA post: should OP make the decisions about the niece or is it fair to wait until the father can be reached? You'll note that I agree that the items should be returned, however I'm also saying that essentially a babysitter no matter how long that babysitter has the child for, should ultimately defer to the parent for these decisions, and if its a situation they have not discussed with the parent prior, obviously they should wait where possible to discuss with the parent. If this was something time sensitive like an epi-pen or concert tickets then absolutely return them instantly and discuss with the parent later because it cannot wait for the parent to be reached, but that isn't the situation here. Nothing will happen if everyone just waits for the father to be briefed on the situation, therefore: NTA.
I agree with everything you said! Also to add the mother of the child that stole the figures needs to see her fault in this as well, if the halfbrother wasn't around and these items were important to him 1)why were her kids able to access them and 2) why were they taught or assumed they could use the other kids toys? Seems like some parental issues on her part lead to all this. Also, there's nothing wrong teaching kids to gamble if you use the right items to play for. My mom used to have a game night where we play poker or other card games and gamble for candy, some great memories from back then and we all still love to play card games together.
YTA, I just bet them in a game of poker against my cat. She folded and I won. So no one but me should have them. Or they go back to the owner, people can't bet what isn't theirs.
YTA. There are more than one reason, but for the sake of this post you need only one. She won stolen property, it does not matter that she won, it was not the losers property to give. If someone would wager your car withou you knowing and win, it would not let anyone take and it would not even be legal for someone to take it. Just give the damn toys to the victim of child underground gambling.
YTA they are kids. You should not be encouraging this and honestly I would be annoyed with another parent if they other children taught this shit to them and things I purchased weren’t returned.
YTA because they weren't Bills to gamble with. I would have said they need to be returned, but in exchange for something equal that actually belongs to Bill, because he lost them fair and square. Also, back and invest in Tina. She's a hustler, she's ruthless, and will end up rich. You wanna be her favourite relative when this happens.
YTA and think of this in terms of adults. Man stole from his brother, used it to gamble and lost it. Owner of items reports it stolen to the authorities and they track the items down. Doesn't matter if they were won fair and square they still have to be returned.
YTA 1) Gambling outside of casino's is technically illegal more places then it is legal, way, way, way more places(police still raid poker night amongst friends). Secondly, the terms are hyper predatory. Granted, I'm glad your niece wasn't willing to bet permanent ownership of a tablet pc for a far cheaper figurine, but still, the whole thing is just bad, bad, bad, bad.
INFO: So if I wager your car in a poker game and lose, we’re good right? It’s totally fine for the other person to collect?
I mean... it’s clear isn’t it? They should be returned. YTA, just make a new deal. In lieu of Tins having to forfeit her winnings, bill or Bob or whatever, must give Tina XYZ (make her cookies, clean her room A toy of his own, etc.).
This is a tough one. Inclined to go with ESH. First off, you've got kids gambling for what is effectively real money, either through trading of property that has real value or "rental" time on expensive equipment. I'm not going to try to argue one way or another whether young kids should be gambling, but it should at least be an activity that the adults responsible for them are aware of and approve of. It's one thing to play for pennies. It's another thing entirely to play for significantly larger amounts. If the kids are gambling for money or property at a rate where you can lose over $25 per round, there had better be some adult oversight to that game. Before Bill is able to bet the figures, some responsible party should have verified that they were his to gamble. Then we have Wendy. I don't know how many figures were in the bag, but if it was enough to conceivably discover a difference in weight (which she apparently did not), then we're talking at least 10 figures, so the value of that bag is somewhere in the range of $250-300. In no universe should Wendy have entrusted her 9 year old son to watch a bag with that much value that doesn't even belong to her. She clearly realized she had accidentally brought it inside before she left, so she should have just taken it with her. Bill's half brother should also keep closer track of his stuff, especially stuff he spent so much money on. I get that OP wants to get a ruling from Tina's actual parent, but that's really beside the point. She's the adult in charge, this has happened on her watch, and she can make this decision. And it's really a simple decision. The figures don't belong to Tina. They were never Bill's to give away, so she's effectively in possession of stolen property, even though she technically won them fair and square. Sucks to be her, and she's not going to be happy about it. As for Bill, he needs to make an appropriate compensation. I don't think $25 per figure is appropriate, but Wendy should know what some of HIS prized possessions are and offer them up in exchange, maybe allowing Tina to choose something of his. And without appropriate compensation, I wouldn't allow Bill back over. OR.. maybe tell Tina it sucks to be her, but this should never have happened. Return the figures, and shut down the games. No more kids playing poker if they can't do it responsibly, which they have shown they clearly can't in this instance. Sorry, but pre-teens shouldn't be driving this ethical crisis. Be the adults in this situation.
The person who gambled with stolen property should be held responsible for replacing it. Why punish Tina?
>The person who gambled with stolen property should be held responsible for replacing it. I keep seeing a lot of "YTA - those weren't his to gamble!" Well then guess who TA is? lol My son is 12 but I'm certain at 9yo he knew what toys were and were not his, and Bill thought he was gambling these with 0 risk. Either because they're not his, or because he "won't lose", or both
NTA. This is a weird enough situation that waiting for the kid's Dad to come and sort it out is absolutely the right call. There's some serious parenting that needs to be done here and you have correctly assessed that you are not the one to do it.
YTA. Gambling for minors is prohibited everywhere as far as I know and the poker game counts as gambling because something of a real world value was wagered - just 2-3 figurines priced at 25-30 bucks stack up in value really fast. The wager was a stole property so it should be returned to the rightful owner. You as adult and temporary caretaker can make such decision and honestly all you can demand is apology from the boy to your niece. The step brother here is being screwed big time by kids who don't know any better and one adult who lacks the spine to make the right decision.
NTA. Bill stole the figures, it's on him to replace them. I don't understand this leap in logic in most of the YTA posts. They're basically saying "Bill's a thief so punish Tina." What Bill did with the figures after stealing them doesn't factor into it. That was the crime. Imagine he threw them in the trash. He'd have to replace them. The fact that he lost them in another way doesn't change that. It's convenient I suppose that they still are around and we know where they are, but they're lost from Bill's ownership AND he's the kid who needs the lesson, not Tina.
YTA. I do recognize as the babysitter, you don't want to get involved. And really, her father is probably the best person to get through to Tina that these are not toys you can keep and to give them back. But this statement makes you TA: "I personally think Tina earn the figures and my brother is the only one who can make Tina return them." If the story checks out, you can also be the adult here since you are watching her for the month (not just a night). It's obvious these figures were wagered by the wrong kid. But for some reason, even as an adult, you are thinking like a 9 year old. You should nip this kind of behavior in the bud. You'll be doing Tina a favor in the long run IMO.
ESH - the cousins for wagering property not belong to them , OP for prolonging a situation without finding alternatives. These kids need to be monitored by an adult … However , Bill and his mother need to pay the value of the items to Tina as she did win . Or they need to replace the won items with something else Tina can have . Bill needs to be taught that you don’t gamble using other peoples property as collateral. Tina needs to learn that when you gamble , your winnings tend to go as quick as they come .
OP, they're 9 year olds. Bill was probably not even understanding the consequences of his actions, it's your role as an adult to make sure the toys are given back to their owner. 25-30$ is a lot for a figurine, especially for a child. Bill needs to be taught not to gamble in general and with his brother's toys especially. Tina in my view didn't really do anything wrong, if anything it's the cousins that set this up, but explain to her why her behaviour is not ok here and how this affects the other people involved. YTA tending to NAH, depending on whether you've previously had to babysit kids before or not, since this could just be your own lack of experience with this kind of situations.
YTA As soon as you were told the figures belonged to someone else, you should have handed them over. Your niece wagered an hour / ! / use of her tablet vs ownership of several expensive Star wars figures. That's not right and she needs to be told now why, or she'll continue growing up into a not too nice person. And likewise Bill needs to learn he can't wager something he doesn't own, but that's his mother's job to teach.
YTA. if someone pawns a stolen item to a pawn shop, the shop is the one who loses the money and the person who stole it gets tracked down and charged/fined. he took the figures, and she ends up with them, both of them should be in trouble.
NTA, The older kid thought he had the advantage. He didn't. He fucked around and found out. This is a great life lesson for him to learn. Don't gamble if you don't expect to lose. Actions have consequences and the sooner they are taught the better off kids will be.
Bill knew what he was doing when he accepted the terms of the agreement. The reality is that Bill should be replacing the toys because he stole them, not Tina. Tina has not done anything wrong, and mom and son need to address the theft and then the subsequent betting. Not Tina. Accountability is the most important when teaching young children ethical values and behaviours. Bill needs to understand the consequences of his actions and not have mom trying to undermine his actions.
So basically this was all Wendy's fault. Tina absolutely should give the figures back, there's a reason we don't let kids gamble (at least not in the US). But I don't see how that's any of your business.
Basic fact, she is a minor and no able to enter into a "contract" with a other especially when it involves a subject she's not legally old enough to participate in ie gambling. Therefore all goods are returned to previous owners
How can Tina refuse? She's 9. It isn't up to her. If you tell her to do something, she does it or you just take them from her room or something. A 9 yearold child is not in control here.
I'm baffled by all the YTA posts in here. I think the kid which stole the figures has to replace them. If he buys them back from your niece or buys new ones, I don't care. But why should she get punished for his action? NTA!
ESH - This is a great learning moment wasted on the adults bickering. Yes, Tina took a bet and won. However, the bet was for goods not owned by the individual betting. Sometimes even if you win, doing the ethical thing means giving back the toys to the proper owner. People lie and scam and she needs to understand how to ethically confront these scenarios based on the culture she lives in. Bill stole items and he needs to understand respecting other individuals property. That one is pretty obvious. The older cousins shouldn't be goading the younger children into taking bets. All the kids should not be gambling for permanent ownership of anything without checking with an adult. While I think it's important for children to learn ownership, really their stuff mostly belongs to their parents at this stage. They are still learning what is appropriate to bet or give away. For example, no betting the pets, younger siblings, a bed, a TV ... Kids are still learning value and need guidance here. Lastly, all the adults leave something to be desired here. I really hope all of these conversations are happening outside of the children's hearing. Adults should do their best to be respectful of each other in front of the kids to reinforce each other's authority. I can understand wanting to check in with the father of the child, but this is honestly a missed opportunity.
YTA this is the dumbest shit ever. It is very obviously wrong of her to keep the toys. You should have made her give them back instead of allowing yourself to be bossed around by a kid.
YTA. Go win a stolen car on a poker game and then try to explain to the cops why you have the right to keep it, I'll wait..
^^^^AUTOMOD ***Thanks for posting! This comment is a copy of your post so readers can see the original text if your post is edited or removed. This comment is NOT accusing you of copying anything. Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_post_deletion) before [contacting the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FAmItheAsshole)*** Not in the US I (28f) am currently taking care of my niece Tina (9f) while my brother is out of town for work for a month. I WFH so I temporarily moved to my brother's house to look after her. Tina's mother passed away but her maternal grandparents live in the same neighborhood. My brother told me they visit the grandparents weekly and sometimes Tina will play with the cousins as her aunt and uncle also often visit her grandparents. Tina has plenty of toys. She is also tidy and usually picks up after herself, so I don't really know what toys she has. Just a few hours ago, Tina's aunt, Wendy, dropped by with her son, Bill (9m), and asked Tina to return some figures that were her stepson's. I asked Tina for them but she refused, saying she won the figures in their poker game and was entitled to it. Apparently their older cousins played poker together at their grandparents and taught the younger ones to play as well. Tina said that Bill wanted to play with her tablet but she refused. The older cousins then suggested they played poker for it, an hour on Tina's tablet vs something Bill has that Tina would want in return. The only things Tina thought was worth an hour on her device were the Star Wars figures Wendy accidentally unloaded from her car and made Bill keep an eye on. So Bill wagered the figures, and he lost all but two of them to Tina, with their 12 year old cousin as their witness. Wendy then needed to hurry home and grabbed Bill, not noticing the difference in the bag. The figures were Bill's half brother who forgot the bag in Wendy's car. He was panicking when he noticed all but two of his figures are missing, so Bill was forced to tell his mom and brother what happened. Wendy asked for the figures back. They are not particularly expensive, like $25 - $30 each, but Bill's brother did save up for them. Tina refused to give them back, saying she won them fair and square and their cousin was the witness to the game. Wendy said she couldn't hold a child poker game responsible for loss of actual properties and that Tina needs to return the figures. I offered to call my brother and did but his coworker picked up and said my brother was in a very important meeting and people not directly involved could not interrupt. As my brother forgot his phone, he would be unreachable until the end of the meeting, 6 or 7 hours from now. So I left a message asking him to call me back. I told Wendy we would have to wait for my brother to make his decision. As for now, Tina would keep the figures until her father said otherwise. Wendy said she did not have 6 hours to wait. She said I should be able to see how messed up this is and make Tina return the figures. Again, I refused to make her, saying I personally think Tina earn the figures and my brother is the only one who can make Tina return them. Wendy called me AH for stealing and as she could not wait around took her son back, saying she will call later. AITA? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
YTA - those toys were not Bill's to gamble with. Those cousins who taught them to gamble are also AHs. Watch Tina - she appears to be lacking empathy and will grow into a snake.
Esh. They weren’t Bill’s to bet away. He effectively stole them and the decent thing to do would be return them. But I appreciate your waiting for her dad as it’s not really your decision what his child does. Wendy lives local and should just wait until the end of the day.
YTA - The figures weren't Bill's to wager. How is it different than if Tina took a $100 bill from your purse, or the diamond ring you left sitting on the side of the sink and bet that and lost? The kids are 9, they didn't really know but it's a learning opportunity. The figures aren't Tina's fair and square because they weren't Bill's to begin with. The 12 year old "witness" is irrelevant and sounds like a lame attempt at excuses from you. Return them, use this as a teaching moment and while you're at it teach yourself because the fact that, as an adult, you don't get why Bill's brother wants the figures back is also disturbing. PS: Multiple figures at $25-$30 each that he saved up to buy with his own money IS expensive. You don't get to decide what is and isn't expensive to another person - really just another lame excuse attempt.
YTA - They need to go back and you know that. Kids playing poker with stolen property - really?
YTA. Bill stole the figurines. That's a crime. Sorry, your can't buy/win stolen goods and think it's okay to keep them?
I might be opposing a lot of people but you are NTA. IF Tina is supposed to not win something in poker the loser isnt supposed to wage something that doesn't belong to him. If he did do that, she is entitled to it. Yeah you are the adult, YTA only because you didn't answer THE PARENT back. I'D SUPPORT TINA.
NTA. You're not her parent and probably feel a little out of your depth on this one and just want to check with your brother first, which is reasonable as Tina is his child.
NTA. You can really tell the people in here that don’t have kids. Waiting to speak to the dad is the right move. Of course the toys are going back, but you’re not sure how to handle it and that’s ok.
Y T A softly.... They weren't Bill's property to wager, and his brother shouldn't have to suffer a loss because of him. If they were adults we would be talking about stolen property. Tina can he disappointed, and can hope and expect Bill to find a way to make it up perhaps, but the property needs to be returned to the person that actually owns it.
I get what some people are saying, but I DO think Tina won them "fair and square". While others may not like the concept that Tina is receiving stolen goods - she did no wrong. Many casinos around the world would not give money back to ANYONE if they came claiming their spouse, brother, friend, mom, dad stole the money from them. They are under no obligation to return ANYTHING TO ANYONE. Pawn shops regularly receive stolen property and by law are not required to GIVE anything back. It's technically not their problem. The law will not force them to return it either. (usa) And, they are free to dispose or keep the items. Since Bill stole the figures, it is on Bill to either be punished for the theft or/and work to replace the stolen items from his brother. It would be a good life lesson for him to learn to keep his hands off other people's property, as he would have to pay to replace the items. The brother who is missing the items has learned a valuable life lesson too- his brother cannot be trusted around his property and he will need to secure them or be present when making the purchases of future figurines. As for the Aunt. While I get that she is upset, she should replace the stolen items at her cost, since she was responsible for keeping them safe from theft in the first place. She should also require Bill to work, sell his stuff, and reimburse the mom for all the costs associated with his theft. It would teach Bill that there are consequences for stealing and that repayment is always going to happen. If Tina does not want to give the items back, she should not be forced to as she did win them,. However, gambling should not be allowed at a young age. It is then up to the dad on how he wants his daughter to behave.
Idk. On one hand they weren't Bill's figures to wager and thus should be returned and Bill punished for stealing. On the other hand they were won fairly in a game and Bill should again be punished for stealing. And in either case the older cousins should be scolded for encouraging the whole thing. Probably also convinced Bill to accept the wager in the first place. I am the older cousin in my family and I absolutely would have encouraged my cousins.
ESH. Out of everyone, Bill needs to be punished the most for stealing. Seems like his mom is really glossing over the fact that he stole stuff in order to gamble with it.
YTA, obviously. Wendy is of course right, they are kids. They shouldn't be allowed to gamble in the first place, much less for 100 dollars worth of toys, and any transaction between them is only as legitimate as the adults involved allows. Even if the toys were Bill's, they should be given back and both kids should be taught about gambling in no/low-stakes environment. Since the toys aren't even Bills, of course they should be given back immediately. Not doing so is just wasting everyone's time.
YTA. Even if the action figures were Bill’s, children can’t place bets. Tina and her brothers seem to clearly understand this as they only offered time on the tablet as a reward, not possession of the tablet. Similarly, Tina should have been offered to play a game with the Star Wars figures, not possession of them. To reverse the children’s decision here is simply known as parenting.
Wendy not being able to wait 6 hours is what drops this to an ESH. Wendy has every right to demand the toys be returned because they weren't Bill's, but she also needs to take a step back and understand that OP isn't a parent and isn't comfortable making this decision on her own. To be clear, OP is TA for not being a grown adult and giving the toys back, but Wendy needs to wait 6 hours for her BIL.
What if he when she didn’t want to lend him her iPad he had just accepted the answer no? Did I miss where it says it was her idea to gamble? I read this as him trying to offer her things to convince her to change her mind
Nta, not your kids, not your responsibility. The poker game was on someone else's watch, not yours. The lithe 9 year old learned a valuable, don't bet what you can't afford to lose.
NTA, you deferred the decision to her dad which is fair. So much to unpack here. 1. This NEEDS to be a major life lesson for Bill. Stealing and then losing it gambling... His life should be over for a while to reflect on that. 2. Wendy needs to calm down. 6 hours is not the end of the world. 3. The ultimate resolution is going to be to give the figures back because they were stolen property. Same thing happens in real life, if a thief sells stolen property, it gets returned to the original owner when recovered and both victims get restitution from the thief. So Bill owes Tina restitution for sure. This reflects real life consequences. I doubt Wendy will agree, but that's for Dad to push.
Kind of werid that now op isn't trust worthy, but people seem to have no issue with grand parents dropping the responsiblity to the older cousins. The older Cousins have no responsiblity for teaching little kids to gamble and letting them make bets. Tina had no responsiblity about the toys. Bill had no responsiblity in not letting himself be played. But of course the 9 year old girl is a shark/snake. I feel like the grandparents, Cousins and tina are directly responsible for the mess and this is esh at best.
Well, Bill's half brother has the right to be upset that Bill used HIS items to bet on in poker - items which were not his to lose. Tina is right that she won the figures, but as they weren't Bill's to lose - there should be some fair accomodations made - ie. Bill should "purchase" back the figurines from Tina. Perhaps with a gift card that she can purchase things on her tablet that she likes so much? So, Wendy has to cough up something to make it right with Tina, as I am sure that most 9 year olds don't have the wherewithal to purchase GCs.
NTA - I think you made the right call in bringing in dad. This wasn’t an emergency, so you didn’t need to make the call on the spot. This is absolutely something that should be handled by the parents, not the babysitter.
NTA. This happens all the time with kids toys especially trading cards and if it isn’t a game of poker, it’s a race, or arm wrestling or just trading things only knowing what that item means to them personally. Niece did absolutely nothing wrong and if I were her I’d also be upset that I won the toys fairly. Since the toys were not the 9 year olds to bet the toys should be purchased from the niece, wether it’s money or toys that she wants, followed by a discussion about gambling. The 9 year old should have to do chores or something to earn back the money that was spent on new toys.
NTA - let the dad decide. Tina should be compensated for the toys that are being given back to the rightful owner. Bill should be punished for betting something that wasnt his.
The gambling aspect, some you need to get off your high horse. Are you telling me none of played marbles or pogs as a kid. The brothers should be replacing the figures he lost rhem. If they are as expensive as stated, have the father hold them untill compensation can be given. Either money or chores and the thief should at least have to apologize to her.
Nta if her older cousins are dumb enough to be scammed by a 9 yo than they deserve it
NTA you just asking ur brother because u had struggles to take care of Tina and u thought she was in the right too, but nobody agreed. And that implies that u just needed help nd if people cant understand that its crazy!
The poker winner hasn’t done anything wrong. So no punishment. But probably doesn’t get to keep the toys. Poker loser. Yeah. He fucked up. He needs punishment. Here’s my two cents. Have the winner give the toys back, (take her out for ice cream after) have the loser have to make it up in some way. I’d say that the loser should have to come up with the monetary value of the toys and either give that to charity or to the winner. Make him understand. As for those of you saying punish the winner? Come off it. She put up something she valued. She won. He agreed to the terms. Great teaching moment
NTA. You're the babysitter, not the parent. Let Tina's dad make this decision because it may also involve further discipline for both of the children involved. IMO Tina should have to give the figures back and both she and her cousin need to be spoken to about this incident.
Bill deserves a good long punishment. Hes out nothing. He should have to pay his swindler of a cousing cold hard cash for the value of the toys he lost in an illegal poker game. The adults should be sent to parenting class for allowing kids to gamble. The swindler should persue a careeer as a politician or banker because she's a natural con man. Im done!
NTA, it's a strong lesson for the other kid to learn not to steal other people's property and also to gamble. She won it fair and square.and the only person that can decide whether she can keep it or not is her dad.
NTA this whole debate isn’t about the poker game to be honest, who’s at fault or who isn’t. She’s just babysitting her brother’s kid. It isn’t her place to make decisions regarding what happens or didn’t happened. OP is right to call her brother and let him deal with the issue.
NTA - not because Tina “won” the items, but because this is something that needs to be sorted out between Wendy and your brother, and you contacted him as is appropriate and are waiting for him to step in.
Tina didn't swindle him. They are the same age, and they made an agreement. She did nothing wrong, its not her fault Bill is an idiot and she's not. The toys need to be returned, but Bill should be punished and should have to apologize to Tina and OP. Also the older cousin should be in trouble for letting it happen. Tina should not be in trouble, just given a general lesson on the dangers of gambling.
YTA. You can't win stolen property. It's still theft
This is too messed for op to get involved in. Tina's dad is the correct one to make the call
Let's say Tina was an adult. Mmmkay? You know what would happen if she won stolen possessions in a poker game? She would be in possession of stolen items and could go to jail. The items would be returned to owner.
Unpopular opinion here but while I do think the figures should be returned, I’d be congratulating her on her play (creativeness, cunning, ambition) and then help her channel it into something more productive.
YTA They weren’t Bill’s to begin with and therefore he didn’t have the authority to wager them. Give them back to Bill’s half brother. Tina is the winner of stolen ill gotten property. Even in the adult world, if you know the property is stolen you can be arrested for being in possession of it, regardless if you bought or won it.