I Will Not Let You Take Advantage Of Me Anymore!
Lisa is suing Steven for $955.55. They dated for several months after meeting online. For some reason, Lisa kept laying out money for Steven, even though he did not pay her back. After they broke up, she tried to get her money back. When she had no luck, she filed this lawsuit. Lisa says the first time she laid out money was for Broadway tickets to Jersey Boys. Steven wanted to get tickets for his sisters. Lisa's mother works in the industry, so she was able to get the tickets. Why would Lisa put the purchase on her credit card? Steven admits he was going to pay her back for the tickets. Why didn't he pay her back right away? He does not have a good answer. He says he kept asking to see a receipt. This is ridiculous. The prices are on the ticket. Also, since Lisa wanted her money back, I am sure she would have provided a receipt for him. Lisa got plane tickets for the two of them with her earned miles. Lisa says she got the tickets because Steven could not afford them. He was running in a half marathon in Virginia Beach. How was he going to get there if Lisa was not around? Steven changed his mind about the marathon and Lisa had to cancel the tickets. It cost $100.00 to restore the used miles. She asked Steven for this money and he told her he was not going to pay her. Is it time for Lisa to dump him? I would think so. The Judge even thinks so. Does Lisa set him free? No, she continues with the relationship. Now, she invites him to a spring training trip along with other friends. Lisa explains that their relationship consisted of meeting at his house and going to bars. Did they go out to dinner? No. Did they go to the movies? No. What kind of relationship was this? Lisa says she broke up with him when she found out he was cheating on her. Good for her. Now she wanted her money back. Steven explains that he would have paid her for the Broadway tickets if he saw a receipt. Good news, Lisa has the proof in court. Steven says he does not owe her the $100.00 for the cancellation of the plane tickets to Virginia Beach. His reason for this, it was her idea. Really! He sent her numerous text messages about paying her back. He never said he did not owe her the money. He said he saved that to say on the phone. What else does he owe Lisa? Lisa says a movie and a wii game. Steven has brought the movie to court with him and returns it to Lisa. He denies having the wii game. He says he has his own, why would he need to take her game? The Judge rules in favor of Lisa for $930.55. She gets almost all of what she was suing for. The Judge takes the opportunity to address Lisa about learning a lesson. The Judge hopes Lisa has learned something from this experience. The real way to learn would be to lose the money she lent to Steven. The law is on her side, so she does get her money back. In the hallway, Lisa does say that she has learned her lesson and will not lend money anymore. I hope she means this. She seems like a really nice person and should not let men take advantage of her. Why are women so quick to lend money to the men in their lives? If their boyfriends cannot afford something, they can wait until they have their own money. Remember ladies, if he cannot afford it, he cannot afford to pay you back!
We Are Here Over $30.00!
Kent is suing Carl and Cynthia for $221.67. Carl brought his laptop to Kent for repair. Kent owns a computer repair shop. Kent agreed to remove the data, wipe the hard drive clean and restore the data. When Carl got home after picking up the computer, he found there was no information on it. This was especially troubling, since he wanted to print pictures of his mom for her memorial service. He called Kent to let him know there was a problem. Kent told him to come bace to the store, he probably forgot to put the data back on. Carl drove the 10-15 minutes back to the store and waited about an hour while Kent restored the information. Carl explains that when he got home, he decided that was not right and stopped payment on the check. He felt that Kent wasted his time. He sent Kent an e-mail explaining that he stopped payment on the check. Carl offered to pay for 30 minutes of labor. The Judge expresses her astonishment regarding the way Carl handled the situation. Carl should have let the check clear and then negotiate with Kent. Carl created a major problem over this situation. When all the charges have been figured out, this case is really over $30.00. Kent is not so reasonable either. He is trying to explain that Carl should never have stopped payment on the check because he provided a service. Kent feels that when Carl returned to the store it was for a warranty issue. Kent mishandled the job, this is not a warranty issue. Kent was supposed to restore the data and he did not. It is not like there was an additional problem or something he fixed had to be corrected. Kent does not seem to understand that he is also wrong. Both men are at fault in this situation. The Judge rules to give Carl a rebate on the service charge. He will pay $100.00 for the repair of the laptop, instead of $125.00, the original amount. Carl also has to pay the $35.00 stop payment charge. After the decision, the Judge tells both men that they were foolish. I totally agree with this. In the hallway, Carl says that he was not foolish, since he did not initiate the court case. Did he already forget that he stopped payment on the check for a service he received? Kent says that he had to fight him because anyone can write a check and stop payment on it. Did he forget that he wasted this man's time by not doing the job correctly in the first place? It seems to me that both men left the courtroom less informed then when they entered. Neither of them listened to the Judge. Neither of them seemed to learn anything from this experience. What do you think?
I Want My Daughter's Belongings!
This next case is very sad. Sylvia is suing her daughter's friend for $5000.00. Valcharal, her daughter's friend, is countersuing Sylvia for $5000.00. What occurred to bring these two women to court today? Sylvia's daughter passed away. Sylvia wants her daughter's belongings back. The belongings consists of jewelry, laptops, debit cards and a phone. Valcharal has the belongings and claims that Sylvia's daughter, wanted her to keep the belongings from her mother. What occurred to have these two women at odds with each other? Instead of supporting each other after the death of someone close to both of them, they are suing each other. Sylvia explained that she took money to her daughter, so she could have Valcharal deposit it, to pay bills. Her daughter was in a rehab facility and told her mom she was not feeling well. Sylvia told her she should go to the hospital. Her daughter told her she would go the next day. Sylvia explains that she tried to get in touch with her daughter the next day and could not. It seemed that Valcharal took her to the hospital. She was admitted, there were complications and she passed away. Sylvia explains that she was contacted by someone at the hospital. Sylvia is distraught over the loss of her daughter. Valcharal claims that Sylvia's daughter had told her to keep her mother from getting anything that belonged to her. Valcharal has brought a witness to court and an affadavit from a family member. No one has anything nice to say or write about Sylvia. Valcharal even accuses her of doing drugs at her own daughter's funeral. Things can get nasty very quickly. Of course, Valcharal does not have any proof. Just to say such things, is very hurtful. Sylvia's daughter did not leave a will. The Judge dismisses the case without prejudice and explains that they need to go to probate court. Someone has to be appointed administrator of the estate, in order to determine how to distribute the belongings. The Judge directs Valcharal not to touch or throw away any of the belongings. This matter needs to be decided in probate court. The Judge directs Sylvia to call a lawyer to handle the case. Why is Valcharal countersuing for $5000.00?She explains that Sylvia has been calling her and leaving numerous messages. Sylvia even called Valcharal's mother! The Judge rules against Valcharal, explaining to her, this does not make a $5000.00 harassment suit. After the case is over, Sylvia says to Valcharal that her mother smokes crack. Valcharal responds to this by saying, my mother does not smoke crack, only you do. This is so sad. Two of the people who loved someone very much, are attacking each other. During their time of grief, it would be so nice if they could lean on each other. I would hope they could get past this and be a comfort to each other during this time of great loss. What do you think?
Please share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you for joining me.
Kindness, I've discovered is everything in life.
-Isaac Bashevis Singer
No comments:
Post a Comment