A Woman Wants Her Bro To Pay $30K For Her Lost Ring & A 'Canadian Sorry' Doesn’t Cut It

Family can be a source of love, support, and comfort, but they can also be a source of conflict and disagreement, especially when money is involved.

A recent Reddit post has sparked a heated debate about family and whether a woman is justified in asking her brother to pay $30,000 for an engagement ring that his child flushed down the toilet.

The woman took to the popular Reddit community r/Am I The A**hole to try and get some answers.

She began her post by explaining that she hosted a family dinner, during which her brother brought his two young children.

While the adults were still outside, and the woman was cleaning up the dinner table, her brother's kids went into the master bedroom and started playing with everything, including the woman's engagement ring.

"When we came to look for them, they panicked because they know they aren't supposed to be upstairs, ran into the master bathroom and flushed my ring," read the woman’s post.

Despite efforts to retrieve the ring, including calling a plumber, it was gone for good.

The woman called her brother and asked him to reimburse her for the cost of the ring, which she had the original receipt for and that’s when things took a turn.

"Immediately he started calling me an a**hole because we were family and he was just a child. He has refused to repay the cost of my ring," the woman shared.

"I told him I will be taking him to court for this and now my entire family is blowing up my phone saying family shouldn't sue each other and just let it go."

In an edit made to the post, the woman clarified some questions that commenters had. She shared that the ring was not insured and that he brother is still refusing to pay her back.

The woman claims her sibling won’t even accept a $100 per month repayment plan and that he is using her lavish life as a reason to not pay her back.

"He said I live in a nice enough house and if I want a replacement, I should just sell my car," she wrote.

To make things even worse, her brother hasn’t even given her a proper apology.

"It was a Canadian sorry. Sorry, not sorry," the woman explained in her post. "He said kids will do what is normal for kids, and they shouldn't be held responsible for a ring."

The woman also argued that her brother has the means to pay for it, given that he and his wife have a combined income of $250,000 and live in a house valued at $3.5 million that was gifted to them by their parents.

The debate over who is right in the situation has been intense, with people making valid arguments for both sides.

The top comment under the post with over 22,400 likes said, "His circus, his monkeys. He wasn't watching them, that's on him. 100% he should replace your ring."

"Also, 8/4 are more than old enough to know better. My 3-year-old knows not to touch someone else's things in their home without asking. Choices have consequences, and sometimes those consequences are expensive," continued the comment.

Another commenter added to the above comment and wrote, "They did know better, that's why they ran & flushed it."

On the other hand, some argued that the woman is being unreasonable and that she should have insured her ring.

One commenter with over 8,300 likes asked, "You didn’t insure a $30,000 dollar ring?"

"For those of you who say the insurance isn’t the point- OF COURSE IT'S THE POINT. The point of this whole thing is the sheer amount of money involved," the commenter exclaimed.

"Shit happens all the time. Kids get into things, dogs eat things, partners lose things. Anything that you value is on you to insure or protect," another comment reads.

"YTA (you’re the a**hole) for walking around with a 30K liability the size of a marble and then pointing fingers at whoever touched it last before it disappeared."

Ultimately, the answer to this dilemma is not clear-cut and it looks like people are very split over the situation.

This article's cover image was used for illustrative purposes only.