We don't have anyone in that exact situation, however IMHO if they are paying for replacement of the damaged item(s) they are good and should be allowed to continue to use the library and check out books. You might want to add a processing fee to each of your book replacement costs so that you are more fully covering your costs. Not sure why anyone would want to continually "purchase" used and processed books from the library rather than going straight to a local bookstore and getting a clean, crisp new copy. I mean, that's just me, but I do think it's a curious strategy for reading materials, lol. Good luck! Deb Hemmye Library Director Huntington Woods Public Library 26415 Scotia Road Huntington Woods, MI 48070 248-543-9720, ext. 686 Currently listening to Raising Hare: A Memoir, by Chloe Dalton. From: "Michlib" <michlib-l@liblists.org> To: "Michlib" <michlib-l@liblists.org> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 3:28:16 PM Subject: [Michlib-l] Check out Limitations for Consistent Damage Hello Everyone, I was hoping to get some perspectives/policy advice. At your library, is there a limitation clause or pause on use for a patron that brings back materials consistently damaged/odorous (i.e. smoke damage, cat pee, etc)? My thoughts were if the patron pays for it each time we have to replace an item, then they can check out again but I have also been presented with the viewpoint that if it's consistent, then their check outs should be limited regardless of if they pay for the damaged items. I am interested to see what other libraries may do in these instances. Thanks, Sarah Rick Library Director _______________________________________________ Michlib-l mailing list -- michlib-l@liblists.org To unsubscribe send an email to michlib-l-leave@liblists.org
