People's Court Blog - 9 20 2012 - Thursday

Matthew And 7 Long Years

Matthew is suing Aneta for $5000.00. This is for the cost of an engagement ring. Matthew and Aneta dated for 2 1/2 years and broke up 7 years ago. Wow! That is a really long time. Matthew does not have a good reason why he waited so long to sue Aneta. He says that for the first year he tried to get the ring back and then...what happened? He never tells the Judge why he waited so long. Aneta tells a different story. She says that she supported Matthew, financially and emotionally. Aneta always worked and there were periods of time when Matthew was unemployed.   Aneta says that when Matthew was addicted to prescription drugs, she was there for him.  They did not have an amicable break-up. Aneta describes an incident when Matthew kicked her out of the car on a deserted road in February. She said it took her 15 - 20 minutes to walk home. You do not do this to someone you love. When they broke up she told him he could pay her back the $6000.00 he owed her or she would keep the ring. He did not have any money, so she kept the ring. She thought that was the end of it. 

Aneta said she could not believe he was suing her for the ring so many years later. Even though  an engagement ring is typically returned when a couple breaks up, the Judge finds in favor of Aneta in this case. It might have been a different story if Matthew had not waited so long to sue. What do you think?

Giusto And The Craigslist Ad

Giusto is suing Amanda for $760.00. This is for the deposit given to Amanda to hold an apartment for rent. There is not too much of this case that makes sense. Amanda advertised on Craigslist for a female roommate with no pets, except maybe a goldfish. Giusto answered the ad, he is not female and he has a Pitbull. Why would Amanda even consider him for a roommate? She does because he is from her school and she knew his girlfriend from one of her classes. She shows him the apartment, explains the rent and living arrangements and takes a deposit. He was supposed to sign the lease when he moved in. Giusto contacts Amanda and says he needs to take some measurements. Then he contacts her and wants the complete spelling of her name and the exact address so he can send her a gift. She tells him to bring it with him when he moves in, he says no he wants to mail it. Amanda thinks this is very strange. Then he contacts her and wants to renegotiate the rent.  Instead of the utilities being included, he wants to split them. He wants to lower the rent. Amanda tells him it is not negotiable. He also makes comments about being more than roommates. He is looking for a friend and a partnership. Amanda just wants a roommate. When Amanda would not change the terms of the rental agreement, Giusto asked for his deposit back. Amanda said that she would not return it. The day before he was due to move in, Amanda texted him to verify he was not coming. He did not respond. Amanda did not hear from him until he sued her.

Giusto claims he should get his money back because Amanda told him the apartment was not available. Amanda told him the apartment was not available to rent to someone else because she was holding it for him. Giusto totally ignores this fact. The Judge rules in favor of Amanda. This worked out for the best for Amanda. If Giusto had moved in, I do not believe it would have lasted. Hopefully Amanda has learned that when she advertises for someone specific, she should stick to it. Amanda wanted a female roommate with a goldfish, not a male friend with a Pitbull!

Bryan And The Spilled Drink

Bryan is suing Kaycie for $755.00. This is for the cost to get his laptop repaired. Bryan and a few friends rented rooms at a hotel to celebrate New Year's Eve in a responsible way. They did not want to drive after a night of celebrating. Bryan put his laptop on top of a dresser to keep it out of the way and safe. He was playing music from it so it was open. When someone started taking pictures, Kaycie did not want to have a drink in her hand. She put the drink on top of the dresser. She says she did not see the laptop, even though it was open. This is so strange. When someone else saw the drink had spilled they tried to save the laptop. They wiped it off and even used a blow dryer to dry it quickly. Bryan said it worked for a few minutes and then stopped. 

Kaycie says she offered Bryan $500.00 after it happened. She said she could not pay him right away because she was not working. Bryan says the offers were always changing. He asked Kaycie to pay for the entire repair because she was responsible for the damage. Why doesn't Kaycie think she should have to pay for it? Kaycie says that Bryan knew the risk and it is ridiculous it went this far. Really? For someone who is responsible enough not to want a drink in her hand in a picture, she should be responsible to pay for the consequences of her actions. Yes, it was an accident. No one is claiming it wasn't. Bryan did the right thing to bring her to court. The Judge finds in favor of Bryan. Unfortunately he has lost a friend over this. Kaycie says she will never speak to him again. What a shame that friends could not have worked this out and the friendship is ruined over $755.00! What do you think?

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

Stay Updated - Please Subscribe!

A waffle is like a pancake with a syrup trap.

~Mitch Hedberg

People's Court Blog - 9 5 2012 - Wednesday

Michael And The Angry Girlfriend

Michael is suing Rosalie for $3000.00. This is for damages to his belongings after they broke up. Rosalie is counterclaiming for $600.00, the cost of a pool cue. Michael and Rosalie met at a pool tournament. They dated for 6-7 weeks and then they broke up. When Michael was out of town his furniture was damaged and DVDs and photo albums stolen. Michael says that Rosalie went in his room, when she drove his friend home. His friend Jimmy wrote a statement to confirm this information. It seems Rosalie was in Michael's room and came out with a duffel bag. Rosalie denies this. She says she drove Jimmy to Michael's and stayed outside. The pictures of the damage to the dressers show scratch marks all over the surface. The Judge describes the damage as that done by an angry woman. Rosalie claims someone else must have done this. Someone that was mad at Michael over a fight. This is not the type of damage an angry man will do. I agree with the Judge. Rosalie continually makes comments directed at Michael  throughout the court case. This is not the time or place for this. Her inability to conduct herself in court does not help her credibility. The Judge finds that Rosalie did the damage to the dressers. Unfortunately, Michael does not have any proof of the value of the furniture or items stolen. Michael does provide an estimate to have the furniture restored. He is awarded $2000.00.

Regarding the counterclaim, Rosalie says that the pool cue was loaned to Michael. She said he broke his pool cue during a tournament and she let him use hers. He said it was a gift. There really is no proof for either side. The Judge finds that the pool cue was a loan and directs Michael to return it to Rosalie. It is a shame that Rosalie damaged the furniture. One of the dressers had belonged to Michael's grandmother and mother. The sentimental value of the dresser is not a factor in the money he can receive. After the verdict, Rosalie had to get in the last word. In the hallway, she  continues to say that everyone has lied for him. Michael feels justice was served and then gives a commercial spot for People's Court. Hopefully they do not frequent the same pool halls! 

Drew/Dorothy And The Super Mint Condition Car!

Drew and Dorothy are suing Anthony for $3284.67. This is for repairs they had done to a used car Drew bought from Anthony. Dorothy is Drew's mom. Drew found the 2001 VW Jetta advertised on Craigslist. Anthony advertised it in super mint condition with a new timing belt. Drew and his mom went to look at the car. They went for a test drive and gave Anthony a deposit to hold the car. Drew was paying for the car himself with money he earned working all summer on a goat farm. What they failed to do was have the car inspected before they purchased it. Dorothy says they had a post purchase inspection done. This does not even make sense. And the best part, they did not take the car to a mechanic for a month after buying it. When they do take the car to a mechanic, they are told there is a piece of wood wedged to hold the timing belt tensioner. The mechanic was so amazed to see this, he took pictures of it with his cell phone. Dorothy shows these pictures to the Judge. It is so true a picture is worth a thousand words. 

Anthony explains that he had the timing belt replaced by a neighborhood mechanic or an alley mechanic as the Judge describes it. Anthony has no proof of the work done on the car. Since he advertised the car with a new timing belt, it is considered a warranty. The other issues that are wrong with the car are not covered by a warranty. The sale of a used car by a private individual is an as-is sale. It is always a good idea to have a used car inspected prior to buying it. Drew and Dorothy do get back some money. They get back $1195.88, the cost of the timing belt. The other problems on the car are on them. Maybe if they had it inspected before they bought it, they could have avoided all of these problems. Also, why wait one month to take it to a mechanic? They are very lucky that Anthony advertised the car with a new timing belt. This is the only reason they were able to get money back. Anthony seemed surprised at the discovery of the piece of wood. I get the feeling he will be following up on this! What do you think?

Wayne And Collecting Double The Debt!

Wayne is suing Michael for $1794.92. This is for rent and damages for an apartment Michael rented from Wayne. Michael and his girlfriend, Pam, were renting the apartment. Pam moved out first when the couple broke up. She had paid the rent up to and including September. Michael moved out at the end of October . He would be responsible to pay that October's rent. Wayne also wanted  rent for November. He claimed that Michael would not let him show the apartment, so he lost a month's rent. Michael said that Wayne would not give him any notice when he wanted to show the apartment and even showed it once when he was not home. Wayne said they damaged the floor and damaged a door. He did not have estimates for this damage because he is only suing for rent. He is suing for damages, they are on the list. Wayne has an itemized list of the money owed to him. He has actually already been paid for the damages. The couple had a $800.00 security deposit they were used to cover any damages. Pam's mom sent Wayne a check for $1054.00. In total, Wayne has received $1854.00. This is more than the amount he is suing for. Why does he think he can receive this money twice? He has no answer for this. The Judge rules in favor of Michael. Wayne cannot collect this money twice! In the hallway, Wayne says he had more to say. Michael says Wayne was unprepared and lied. He also says that the break up with his girlfriend was because they were not getting along. She is in court to testify for him and help him with this case. That was really nice of her. I wish these young people good luck in the future!

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

If you can dream it, you can do it.

-Walt Disney