General Etiquette > Family and Children

Is it Rude to Ask a Favour that Inconveniences a Third Party

(1/7) > >>

LadyR:
Michael and Keith are siblings with an elderly father, Gus. Gus is sick and can no longer drive, but has a car. They have two other siblings,

Michael and his wife have one car, when they need a second or their car needs matinence, they take Gus' car. Keith's car is dying and requires expensive repairs. One of the other siblings has suggested to Keith that he ask their dad for his car (Gus will never be driving again). Kevin knows Gus will say yes.

One of the reasons Keith requires a car is that he lives far away and he uses it to visit Gus regularly. He also has a much more limited income than Michael. My question is, is Keith rude to make the request (or really make his father aware of his car troubles, as Gus would likely offer) because it would inconvenience Michael? Or is he free to ask, since Michael doesn't have any greater claim to the car?

mrkitty:
I don't see why not. Michael and his wife use Gus' car when their car needs maintenance. Now Keith's car needs maintenance. What's good for Michael should be good for Keith, unless I'm missing something.

Can Keith not sell his car (like, to Carmax, who will pay even a couple hundred dollars for even a broken down car?) and give that to his father, buying his car? And can the brothers not help each other out, if one of them needs a ride if their car is in the shop?

Maybe I'm terribly obtuse, but I don't see a major issue. Perhaps something can be worked out that benefits everyone? No?

LadyR:

--- Quote from: mrkitty on February 21, 2014, 12:18:46 AM ---I don't see why not. Michael and his wife use Gus' car when their car needs maintenance. Now Keith's car needs maintenance. What's good for Michael should be good for Keith, unless I'm missing something.

Can Keith not sell his car (like, to Carmax, who will pay even a couple hundred dollars for even a broken down car?) and give that to his father, buying his car? And can the brothers not help each other out, if one of them needs a ride if their car is in the shop?

Maybe I'm terribly obtuse, but I don't see a major issue. Perhaps something can be worked out that benefits everyone? No?

--- End quote ---

Gus will not take money from Keith. In fact, he often tries to get Keith to take money from him.

Michael uses the car, but it is still Gus'. What Keith is thinking of, would mean the car is legally is.

Keith lives 2 hours from his family. He cannot occasionally borrow the car and he could not lend his car to Michael easily.

mrkitty:

--- Quote from: LadyR on February 21, 2014, 12:39:23 AM ---
--- Quote from: mrkitty on February 21, 2014, 12:18:46 AM ---I don't see why not. Michael and his wife use Gus' car when their car needs maintenance. Now Keith's car needs maintenance. What's good for Michael should be good for Keith, unless I'm missing something.

Can Keith not sell his car (like, to Carmax, who will pay even a couple hundred dollars for even a broken down car?) and give that to his father, buying his car? And can the brothers not help each other out, if one of them needs a ride if their car is in the shop?

Maybe I'm terribly obtuse, but I don't see a major issue. Perhaps something can be worked out that benefits everyone? No?

--- End quote ---

Gus will not take money from Keith. In fact, he often tries to get Keith to take money from him.

Michael uses the car, but it is still Gus'. What Keith is thinking of, would mean the car is legally is.

Keith lives 2 hours from his family. He cannot occasionally borrow the car and he could not lend his car to Michael easily.

--- End quote ---

I don't understand the bolded sentence.

I was suggesting that if Keith cannot afford the repairs on his car, and it wouldn't make sense to invest a lot of money in repairing it if it's dying, perhaps Gus would agree to "sell" (i.e. transfer ownership) to Keith for a nominal amount? I don't know, that could be a legal area and I don't think I could really speak to that.

But what I am coming to is whether the brothers and the father could reach some kind of amicable agreement that could benefit each party. If Keith lives too far away to loan the car to his brother (should they come to an arrangement where Keith would have the use of the car), perhaps there is another way Keith could do something to benefit his brother in kind...I don't know Keith or his skills/abilities/resources, but maybe he could offer to help Michael paint his house or do some kind of repair or chore for him one weekend to give him "value" for an asset that he will now exclusively use in order to keep things "equitable" between the brothers. I don't know.

But in answer to your original question, unless the brothers are on bad terms, I don't see why Michael would have a problem with the Gus helping out one of his sons who has hit hard times. Unless there is bad blood. Then things could get complicated.

Basically, what I'm suggesting is that if the brothers have a good relationship, perhaps they can work out a "deal" amongst themselves where Keith would in some way "compensate" Michael (either in cash, or if he doesn't have that, in kind) for the resource they agree for Keith to use exclusively...and then once they agree to the deal with each other, go to Gus and seek his approval. Then, basically, Gus will "transfer" the title to Keith, but since he would refuse payment from his son, Micheal would essentially be "paid" for the car by Keith. Everyone wins. In my imagination, of course.

Things like this, in my experience, rarely work out smoothly IRL. But ideally, that's what I would imagine could be a solution.

MariaE:
Not rude at all. In my family Michael would be the one to suggest Keith got the car, if he was aware of the situation.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version