People's Court Blog - 8 23 2012 - Thursday

The Reception Was Ruined!

Jacqueline and James (J & J) are suing the venue that held their wedding reception. Juan represents the business. J & J want $5000.00 back from the $7000.00 spent on the reception. What were the problems they experienced?

 

1. The candy table was set up improperly.

2. Cotton candy was removed from the bag and was unsanitary.

2. Ketchup and steak sauce were on the cake table.

3. There were dead roses on the cake table.

4. The top of the cake was wrapped in aluminum foil instead of being put in a container.

5. The servers dropped several glasses onto the dance floor.

6. Leftover food was packaged in a box from glue board traps for rats.

7. Champagne bottle favors had James's last name as his first name.

    Written on the bottles are the names -  Jackie and Lee, not Jackie and James.

8. There was an ice sculpture that was in the corner of the room, not in a featured spot.

 

Are these problems really worth $5000.00?  I do not think so. Can these problems really have ruined the entire experience? According to J & J, these problems ruined the reception for them and they want to be compensated. Jacqueline explains that she was going to set up the candy table. Since she was 1/2 hour late to the reception, Juan thought he would be nice and set it up for her.  He was trying to do something kind for the bride. Juan also explains that the boxes used for the leftovers are brought in by the clients. These could be boxes used for favors and by the florist. Juan said they do not use rat glue board traps, so they would not have a box like that. J & J have brought the box to court with them. They left the food in the box and saved it for over two months. It was not even refrigerated or frozen, so when they took it out of the plastic bag, it smelled awful. This is evident by the reactions of the people in the front row of the gallery. They looked like they were going to throw up. Why would they bring it to court this way? That was terrible and totally unnecessary. Regarding the favors, Juan explains that James's name was written incorrectly on the contract. No one noticed this mistake. Jacqueline explains that someone called her and asked her to spell James's name. The favors were provided free by the venue because the reception hosted over one hundred people. Even though they were free, they should have been done correctly. It is a shame that these favors were printed with the wrong name. Unfortunately, mistakes happen. The Judge explains that there are little disappointments in everyday life. These disappointments are not grounds for a lawsuit. The Judge does not award J & J any money. Are any of these problems a reason for the entire experience to be ruined? I do not think so. I know this is a very special day and I hope these issues did not truly ruin the day for Jacqueline.

 

The Photo Shoot Was Unprofessional!

Keianna is suing Alicia for $500.00. This is for the cost of a photo shoot and additional money for bad faith. Keianna hired Alicia to take pictures of her for her resume and other uses. Keianna paid Alicia $205.00 for the photos. The photo shoot was held in Alicia's home. Keianna says this was unprofessional and made her feel uncomfortable when Alicia's friend came over. Keianna received the contact sheet within 1-2 days. She was very happy to get this. Even though the pictures were small, she had faith in Alicia to do a good job on them. When she did not receive the finished photos, she contacted Alicia. She noticed on Alicia's Facebook page, other photos being uploaded. Why were her pictures not there? Why wasn't she receiving her photos? Alicia said she was very busy and she did e-mail the photos to Keianna. Why won't she resend the photos? Finally after several phone calls, Facebook messages and e-mails, Alicia does resend the photos. Since Keianna received what she paid for, she does not win her case. Just because she was unhappy with Alicia's attitude and she did not get the photos right away, it does not mean she gets her service for free. Keianna is not happy with this outcome and storms out of the courtroom and does not stop for her hallway interview. Why do these issues have to escalate to the point of coming to court? Why can't people resolve these issues on their own?

 

I Want My Broker's Fee!

Terri is suing Karen for $962.00. This is for her broker's fee and the cost of a bounced check. Karen answered an ad to rent an apartment. Terri showed Karen the apartment. Karen loved it and signed a lease. Terri explained her broker fee and Karen wrote her a check. The apartment was to be available for the first of the month. Karen wanted to move in earlier and the landlord accommodated her. Terri thought it would be a good idea to cash the check right away, since Karen was moving in earlier. The bank could not cash the check because information on it was not legible. Terri called Karen and let her know what happened. Karen wrote another check. She told Terri she was charged $40.00 for a stop payment fee. The second check was for $910.00, instead of $950.00. Terri deposited this check and it bounced. Karen was charged a $12.00 fee from her bank for a bounced check. Why is Karen refusing to pay Terri the broker fee? Karen explains that the apartment was filthy when she looked at it. Did she move in? Yes, she did. Why stop payment on Terri's fee? Karen said that it is an illegal apartment. Does she have proof? No, she does not. Karen said she called the city and it will take a month to get proof. Since she does not have any proof, she cannot justify withholding the broker's fee. Terri wins the case and Karen has to pay the $962.00. I still do not understand why Karen wrote a second check if she had no intention of paying the fee. If she was honest about the reason, things would make more sense. What do you think?

 

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

Please Subscribe!

You must learn from the mistakes of others.

You can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself.

-Sam Levenson

People's Court: 7-12-12 ** Delivery Date ** Only 4 ** Handyman

Jay and Amy order a dining room set. The written contract states the delivery date is estimated and cannot be guaranteed. They are told it will be 8-10 weeks for delivery, this does not hold more weight than the written contract. Do people ever read the contracts they sign? The information in the contracts is very important. It is essential that we read everything we are going to sign. At some point in the future, this could become very important. The dining room set is not delivered on time. There are problems with getting the furniture from the manufacturer. Spencer, who works for the furniture company, even called Jay to tell him the furniture was in and set up a delivery date when the furniture was not available. Spencer made a mistake. Jay was not happy with continued false promises of delivery and cancelled the order. Unfortunately, there is no proof of the cancellation. Zach, the store owner, does not recall the cancellation. Jay calls the credit card company and has the charges reversed. He is not going to have to pay for furniture he did not receive. Why are we in court? Jay and Amy purchased an identical dining room set from another store. They paid more for it and want Zach to pay the difference. This does not make any sense at all. Zach is protected by his contract and does not have to pay Jay and Amy. Now, let's talk about Spencer. He is Zach's employee, new to this store, yet has the audacity to be rude to his boss and the Judge. For some reason, Zach is not offended and even says that Spencer has done a good job. It does not look like it from my perspective. Spencer has a bad attitude and does not seem to care about customer service.

Jordan is only 4 years old. Michael is a neighbor suing Jordan and his mother, Maryellen. He believes Jordan threw rocks that broke his windshield. He did not see Jordan break the windshield. The next day Michael's grandson tells him that Jordan threw rocks at the windshield. Michael also claims that Jordan confessed to him. Jordan is only 4 years old. It sounds like there are many problems in the neighborhood between the neighbors. Maryellen feels her family is being harassed. The Judge tells her it is time to move out of there. There is so much tension the children do not play together anymore. Is a 4 year old responsible for his actions? Keep in mind there is no actual evidence that Jordan is responsible. There have been a rash of vandalism in the neighborhood. The windshields of several cars were broken during this same time period. Did Jordan break those windshields also? The Judge explains that even if Jordan did break the windshield, he is not legally responsible, he is 4! Also, his mother would not be legally responsible, she was not negligent. I can not believe that Michael sued Jordan, he is 4! The cutest thing, he wants to be a police officer when he grows up!

Frederick is a handyman suing Ann for unpaid work. He would do odd jobs for her and get paid the same day. He says he was always paid $100.00 a day. Ann says she paid him per job. He claims she owes him $160.00. When he goes to her house at 7:30 in the morning to collect his money, Ann will not pay him. Ann says she does not owe him anything. She has paid Frederick per job and is all caught up. Her explanation for the early morning visit does not make any sense. She says Frederick was supposed to work that day and showed up too early. She wanted him to leave and come back at 9:00 am. This does not make any sense at all. When a contractor shows up for work, that is a good thing. Since most of what Ann says does not make any sense, she is found responsible to pay Frederick the money. In cases, where it is he said - she said, it is very important that the testimony is truthful. To determine if someone is telling the truth, the Judge pays very close attention to what makes sense. Ann does not sound credible at all and Frederick deserves to get paid for the work he has done.

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

A friend walks in when everyone else walks out.

-Unknown

Submit your favorite quotes and sayings to be used in future blogs.