Showing posts with label September 30. Show all posts
Showing posts with label September 30. Show all posts

Sunday, September 30, 2012

People's Court Blog - 9 28 2012 - Friday

Frank And The Water Leak
Frank is suing Kevin for $5000.00. Frank is the superintendent of Kevin's building. His apartment is underneath Kevin's. Frank explains that he posted notices that the water in the building was going to be turned off due to plumbing repairs. Kevin and his girlfriend did not get the dates correct and when she went to take a shower, there was no water. Kevin called Frank and was reminded that this was the day the repairs were being done. When the repairs were finished and the water was turned back on, Frank noticed a leak in his apartment. He checked the apartments above him and found the water running in Kevin's apartment. Kevin and his girlfriend do not remember closing the drain to the tub and did not think they left the water running. 

Kevin asked Frank on two occasions to see the damage. Frank would not show him unless he was willing to take responsibility for the damages and pay $5000.00. Kevin wanted to see proof. He felt that Frank might be inflating the cost of the damages. In court, Frank does not have any proof for everything he is asking for. He claims the hardwood floor has to be replaced instead of repaired. He wants to be reimbursed for bedding that could be washed. He wants payment for a laptop, a playstation and DVDs and CDs, he claims were damaged. He has no proof, he did not even bring them to court. 

The Judge agrees there was clearly water damage due to the leak. There is no question the water came from Kevin's apartment. Since Frank has no proof of the damage to specific items, the Judge awards him $750.00. This is a major difference from the $5000.00 he was asking for. It is very important to have evidence of damages and the value of the items. Frank realizes this and admits he should have been better prepared for court. Maybe next time...

Delphena And Road Rage 
Delphena is suing Andrew for $2781.91. This is the cost of the damages to her car due to a traffic accident. The only problem with her lawsuit is that the accident was her fault. She tried to pass Andrew's van on the left side, squeezing between him and a parked car. Andrew has pictures for the court showing the position of the cars. Delphena tries to say that Andrew caused the accident, but the pictures tell a different story. Delphena admits that Andrew was driving slowly and she honked at him and passed him. Andrew shows there was one lane and there was not enough room for Delphena to fit. Delphena was very angry and after the accident told Andrew and his passenger to stay away from her or she was going to smack them. Really! This is no way to talk to someone. She also says the accident was not necessary. Well, this is absolutely true since she caused it! Andrew's van suffered minor damage that he was able to fix himself for $15.00. Since Delphena caused the accident, she is not entitled to any money. She continues to accuse Andrew of deliberately hitting her car even as she exits the courtroom. Delphena needs to realize that she caused this accident so she does not do this again in the future. Anger management might be beneficial for Delphena to curtail her road rage! What do you think?

Jamal And The Security Deposit
Jamal is suing Althea, his landlord, for $2500.00. This is for a security deposit and increased electric bills. Jamal has rented an apartment from Althea since 2006. He moved in after his mother moved out. The rent was partially covered by Section 8, a government assistance program. Althea explains that she constantly had to take Jamal to housing court for nonpayment of rent. Jamal says he has had many problems with the apartment and constantly reported them to the city. Althea and Jamal had a court settlement that instructed him to vacate the apartment by January 31, 2012. Jamal admits he did not move out until March 2, 2012. He blames this on Section 8. He claims he could not move out without their approval. He received their approval on February 15th, but did not move out until March 2. Since he did not pay the rent for March, the security deposit would cover that payment. Jamal also wants to be compensated for an increase in the electric bills since the landlord put in a dehumidifier. He is not entitled to this money. He does not get any money back. The landlord describes his behavior as arrogant and intimidating. She went through the proper channels to evict him and he took advantage by ignoring the court settlement. Hopefully he will pay his rent and get along with his new landlord. What do you think?

Please share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you for joining me.

Stay Updated - Subscribe

If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.
~Albert Einstein

People's Court Blog - 9 27 2012 - Thursday

Devon And The Third Floor Store
Devon is suing Gizelle for $800.00. Gizelle is countersuing for $3900.00. Devon rented a room in the building of Gizelle's beauty salon. He thought he would have customers to sell DVDs to. Unfortunately he was on the third floor of the building. The customers that came to the salon did not go past his store. Since he was not able to make enough income to justify the amount of the rent, he moved out. The $800.00 Devon is suing for is the security deposit. The money that Gizelle wants is from unpaid rent for months after Devon moved out and damage done to the room. Yes, you read that correctly. Devon had already moved out. There was no written agreement for this rental. Devon shows the receipts for the monies paid for rent and the security deposit. Gizelle shows pictures of shelves that were installed and glass display cases that were broken. Devon admits to installing the shelves and leaving them there. He claims the glass display cases were broken when he rented the room. He cannot prove they were broken. Also, since there was no written lease, Devon is not responsible to pay rent for months after he had moved out. A verbal agreement does not work in this type of situation. especially when both parties tell different stories. 

The Judge finds that Gizelle is entitled to the damages. Since Gizelle has no proof of value, the Judge assigns a value to these items. Also, after the Judge reviews the payments made to Gizelle, she finds there was $900.00 provided for the security deposit. Gizelle needs to pay Devon $450.00 back. This will satisfy her countersuit. Gizelle says she will never rent to anyone ever again. If she had a written agreement this would not have been so difficult. Also, it is very important to keep track of all payments for security deposit and rent. I do not understand why people make agreements without putting them in writing. Also, why give someone money without documenting the payment. People claim it is because they are too trusting, but is this really the reason? What do you think?

Tatiana And The Car Fire
Tatiana is suing Paul, owner of an auto center, for $4850.00. This is for the cost of a used car she bought from her fiancee and parts and labor for fixing it. After Tatiana purchased the 2000 Audi A6  from her fiancee, she took it to Paul to have work done. After having work done to the tune of $1850.00, she drove it for several days and then parked it in a garage for 2 weeks. The day she took the car out of the garage and drove it, the car caught on fire. Thank goodness, Tatiana pulled over as soon as she noticed the smoke. She got out of the car quickly. The car went up in flames. Tatiana is very lucky to have gotten out of the car quickly. She shows a video of the car on fire. It is really scary to watch. There were good Samaritans who tried to put the fire out. They were lucky not to have gotten hurt, The police and fire departments responded. The fire department put out the fire. Tatiana was told the cause of the fire was electrical. The reason she is suing Paul is because he was the last one to do work on the car. Paul explains that he did not do any electrical work on the car. Since Tatiana has no proof that the work done by Paul could have caused the fire, the Judge finds in favor of Paul.

It is very important to be have evidence to prove someone is responsible for a situation. Tatiana is very fortunate to have gotten out of the car and that no one was hurt by this major fire. Tatiana did suffer nightmares after this happened. She says that she would dream that she died in the car fire. This was such a traumatic event to go through. Sometimes people do need professional help to deal with the aftermath of a near death experience!

Lynn And The Disney Vacation
Lynn is suing Thomas for $491.60. Thomas is Lynn's daughter's, Chrissy,  ex-boyfriend. Lynn and her family were planning a vacation to Disney. Thomas was invited. He agreed to pay his share of the trip, the airline ticket and the hotel room. Lynn fronted the money with the agreement that Thomas would pay her back before the trip. Thomas and Chrissy broke up before the trip. For some reason, Thomas did not feel he needed to pay his share. The airline ticket could still be used by him, but the hotel room had a cancellation fee. Thomas said he was willing to pay for the airline ticket, but did not think he should have to pay the entire cancellation fee for the hotel room since he  was going to be sharing the room with Chrissy. Did Thomas pay for the airline ticket? No, he did not. Did he pay half of the hotel room cancellation? No, he did not. Now in court, he is found responsible to pay for the airline ticket and the entire cancellation fee for the hotel room. The reason he is responsible for paying the entire amount for the hotel room cancellation, is because he chose to cancel. The room was not needed since he was not going on the trip.

It seemed that Thomas was still welcome to go on the trip, even though they had split up. It is possible Chrissy and Thomas might have gotten back together. At this point they both say the breakup was mutual and have both moved on. Good luck in your future relationships!

Please share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you for joining me.

Stay Updated - Subscribe

Inspiration and genius -- one and the same.
~Victor Hugo

People's Court Blog-9 26 2012-Wednesday

Naomi And The Caterer
Naomi is suing Paul the caterer for $2778.00. Naomi hired Paul to cater her daughter's Sweet Sixteen party. She signed a contract with him and estimated 160 people to attend. Naomi did let Paul know she might have 200 guests at the event. She describes a party where the food ran out early. There was no soda by 10:30 pm and her daughter's friends went out to get fast food. Paul admits he stopped serving food at 9:45 pm. He claims he had backup food. Where was it? Was it in the kitchen at the party? No, it was at his place of business. This does not help anyone. He also admits he cooked food for 145 people. This makes no sense at all. The paperwork he submits to the Judge shows in his writing 203 people. He keeps saying that Naomi only wanted to pay for 120 people not 200. This makes no sense at all. There is not too much that Paul says that makes sense. I find it hard to believe he is a successful caterer. 

Thank goodness the family made the best of it and Naomi's daughter had a fun night. A Sweet Sixteen party is a major event. The Judge finds in favor of Naomi for $1778.00. She is satisfied with the verdict and is glad it is over. Paul admits it was a bad idea to stop serving food to the guests. Hopefully he will learn from this and keep the backup food at the venue! What do you think?

Dennis And The Storage Fees
Dennis is suing Dominick for $5000.00. Dominick is countersuing for $3800. Dennis claims he is out over $15,000.00. He was desperate for storage for 14 cars. He made an agreement with Dominick to keep his cars on his property. They have conflicting stories regarding the fee and the time limit. This is why it is very important to have things in writing. After hearing from both parties the Judge sets a fee. Based on how much Dennis can prove in payments, the verdict is for Dominick for $2500.00. There is a time limit set for the removal of the cars. Dennis needs to remove the cars in this time period. In the hallway, Dennis claims he is going to report the cars stolen. I do not know how this will help him. Why don't people get agreements in writing? It is so easy to document an agreement. Send an e-mail or a text to confirm what has been discussed. This will help to prove what has been talked about. Also, always get a receipt when money changes hands!

Kevin And The Credit Card Charges
Kevin is suing Angela for $1400.00. Angela is his ex-girlfriend and the mother of their daughter. When Kevin was in the process of buying a house he found out about charges on his Macy's credit card. Kevin explains that he removed Angela from the account in 2008. She was an authorized user in 2006. The information that Kevin provides to the court is that Angela used the credit card to purchase $1400.00 in gift cards. Angela says that her mother and her have the same name so it must have been her mother. She completely denies that she used the credit card. This is so interesting since the cards were delivered and signed for by her. Also, Kevin had initiated a custody battle for his daughter before Angela ordered the gift cards. The timing is very suspect! The Judge also informs Angela that there is a warrant out for her arrest and she should consult a lawyer. She does not seem phased by this at all. The Judge finds in favor of Kevin and Angela needs to pay back the entire amount. I hope Angela finds a lawyer right away and takes care of this very important issue of the warrant for her arrest.

Please share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you for joining me.

Stay Updated - Subscribe

To my readers, I am sorry for the lapse. Once again, life has thrown me a curveball! I am trying to meet the challenges of everyday life and stay on top of my daily blog. Hopefully, next week will be much easier and you will hear from me on a daily basis. Wish me luck!

Try not to become a man of success, but a man of value.
~Albert Einstein