Comments on: Lost Item Replacement Policy, And When To Ignore It

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 17:08:53 +0000

Something else to consider is the loss of items because of increased value in the secondary market.

As an example, one library I worked with had a DVD set of the 1960′s Avengers television show. When it was purchased, the set was in the range of $40. Now the set is out of print and it’s selling on Amazon for more than $100, used.

By: LIS blogs galore! « Sarah's Posts

LIS blogs galore! « Sarah's Posts — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 01:24:27 +0000

[...] cover some of the ins and outs of work in public libraries, like building eye catching displays or changes in policy and how it is implemented. I like this blog for the practicality and its insider view into the library. He also writes in [...]

By: Mary

Mary — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 14:57:19 +0000

Our policy is almost identical and we’ve had it for years. Lost CDs and DVDs can be replaced with exact brand new copies still in plastic, but full replacement charges must be paid for lost books. We also charge a $5 processing fee on top of the replacement cost. This $5 can also be charged if the insert or case is lost or damaged, etc. Also, lost or damaged magazines or uncatalogued paperback are only charged a $5 flat replacement fee rather than the actual cost.

By: Anne

Anne — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 23:31:27 +0000

I run a library at a charter school. When I bill for a lost or damaged book, the wording of the bill is that the book “must be paid for or returned in good condition,” and the price listed is the replacement price, rounded up to the nearest dollar. But if there is a hardship situation, I will often accept a used copy in good condition, or sometimes an alternate title from the student’s own books, if it’s one we can use. I try to work with the kids – I want to encourage responsibility, but I also do not want to discourage them from using the library.

By: Jen

Jen — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:28:02 +0000

Your policy sounds reasonable. We had problems with patrons trying to get the exact same copy and ran into the same problems you all did.

By: Brian Herzog

Brian Herzog — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:20:34 +0000

@Ken: I think you actually answered your question for me – our goal is avoid making our patrons use library materials that are in poor condition, which is why we decided not to accept used replacements any more. That way, buying new copies means we’re starting off fresh, instead of lowering the quality bar right off the bat and making subsequent borrowers suffer.

Also, quality is definitely a subjective thing – saying we don’t accept them at all prevents the situation of a patron going and buying a used copy, then us saying it’s not in good enough condition and making them pay the full replacement cost anyway. In that case, the patron is out more money than they needed to be, and there will probably be bad feelings that we made them waste money. We wanted a policy that makes it clear up front what is acceptable.

Also too, about buying exact replacements: this is especially true with non-fiction, but we don’t always want that exact edition of the book. If it’s an old medical book, outdated financial information, or whatever, we’d rather buy the newest edition. Or not at all if we have lots of other materials in that subject already, and use the money to grow a different part of the collection.

We try to get this stuff off the shelves in the first place (along with items in poor condition), but unfortunately we don’t have the budget to replace our entire collection. There’s a big difference to something being “good enough to keep” as opposed to “worth spending money to replace.” Update, yes, replace, not usually. It’s often a fine line, but decisions like this (managing tax-funded resources to the best advantage the community) are part of a librarian’s job.

Oh, and something else important to point out is that this policy isn’t the final word on everything. Like with the girl who brought in a new copy of Esperanza Rising, we accepted it instead of making her give us money – policies are living documents, but we still are able to use common sense and be flexible depending on the circumstances.

By: Ken V

Ken V — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:49:52 +0000

This is a terrible change to the policy. You should accept used copies if they are in good condition, and the same edition. Some of the media that I borrow are in deplorable condition to begin with.

By: Jami

Jami — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:18:15 +0000

We used to accept any book as a replacement, even if it wasn’t the same book or even in the same category. Like say you lost a fiction book, you could replace it with a non-fiction.

Now it’s per the branch manager and only if they can find a good, clean copy with the exact same ISBN. No giving us highlighter filled copies from garage sales or anything like that – which people have tried with the kids’ paperbacks.

And you should see some of them flip their lid when they hear about the $5 processing fee. Especially for paperbacks that only cost about $3.

By: Amelia

Amelia — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:26:52 +0000

We accept replacements but they have to be an exact copy in excellent condition. The Branch Manager can reject the replacement which means they have to pay. It isn’t too often that a patron wants to try to find an exact copy in excellent condition so they end up paying.