Showing posts with label driveway. Show all posts
Showing posts with label driveway. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

People's Court - 8 20 2012 - Monday

How Many Times Do I Have To Return To Your Store?
Valerie is suing her dry cleaners for $400.00 ($100.00 for her dress and the rest is for harassment). Valerie left 10 garments to be cleaned, when she picked them up, one was missing. She was asked to come back. When she returned, she met the owner, Emmanuel. He explained to her that the beads on the dress exploded during the cleaning process. He wanted more time to clean it. Valerie agreed and came back to the store a third time. The dress was still ruined., Valerie wanted $100.00 for the dress. This is what she paid for it, several years ago. Emmanuel offered her $50.00 due to depreciation of the dress. This money was to be used in store credit. Valerie did not want store credit, she wanted to be paid for her ruined dress. Emmanuel said he would think about it and she should come back. Valerie left and came back to the store a fourth time. When she got to the store this time, Emmanuel was waiting on a customer. Valerie waited and finally Emmanuel helped her. He asked her to wait, while he pressed the dress. When he brought the dress out, he hung it up and then asked her to wait again while he called his lawyer. Valerie was tired of waiting, she took the dress and left the store. An employee of the store saw this and told Emmanuel that she was leaving with the dress. Emmanuel ran after her, yelling and then tried to stop her from driving away. He leaned on the back of the car. When another car pulled in, he had the driver block Valerie from leaving. Emmanuel called the police. The police said it was a civil matter and Valerie should take him to court. And here we are....what a major ordeal to make over a dress. I really think the police have better things to do. Although, the way Emmanuel acted, something far worse could have happened. It is never a good idea to try to stop a moving car. Why did Emmanuel have to make Valerie return to the store four times? The first time she returned, he needed to explain to her how the dress was ruined in the dry cleaning process. Emmanuel explains that his staff is not trained to tell customers this type of information. Why didn't Emmanuel call Valerie to explain about the dress? Why make her come back to the store so many times? There is no excuse for this! Valerie is awarded $50.00 for the cost of the dress. She does not get harassment, even though she was very convincing that she almost had a heart attack when Emmanuel chased her when she was trying to drive away! Valerie is satisfied with the outcome, she just wanted Emmanuel to learn that he has to be fair to people. I hope Emmanuel did learn this. I also hopes he trains his staff to explain problems to his customers. This way they do not have to keep coming back to his store unless it is to drop off and pick up clothing. What do you think?

I Want Tony Montana Back!
Tracy is suing Cindy for $1216.70. This is for the value of her cat, rent and damages to window blinds. Tracy rented her second bedroom to Cindy for $170.00 a week, including utiities. Tracy had a dog and a cat. Her Maine Coon cat, Tony Montana, and her dog were the loves of her life. When Tracy went away for a week, she asked Cindy to take care of her pets in exchange for one week's rent. While Tracy was away, she asked her friend, Roger, to keep an eye on everything. Tracy did this because Cindy had recently moved in and she did not know her that well. Why didn't she ask Roger to care for her pets? It would have made sense since Roger was her good friend? During this week, Cindy decided to move out. Tracy said when she found this out she came home early. Cindy says she was gone from Saturday to Saturday, a whole week. When Tracy got home, she said she found a sticky note from Cindy asking Roger to walk the dog. She saw that Cindy was in the process of moving out. Then, Tracy realized that Tony Montana was missing. Where was her cat? Tracy is convinced that Cindy stole her cat. Cindy says she really liked Tony, but she has two cats of her own. Where did the cat go? Maybe through the window that Cindy leaves open in her bedroom. Why does she leave the window open? Cindy says she does not allow Tony in her bedroom. Really, a cat does not try to go where it is not allowed? That is what cats do! Is Cindy responsible for Tony? I believe so, but Tracy is not able to prove that Tony was stolen. Where is Roger, Tracy's good friend? He is not able to be in court, even though he lives locally. Tracy has a recording on her phone from Roger to the Judge. Tracy starts to play it and then the Judge tells her to stop. The Judge is not able to cross-examine a recording. It seems that Roger is making up a story after the fact. If he was so worried about the cat and the dog during the week, he should have done something about it. Does Tracy have any other evidence? She has a series of text messages from herself to Cindy's boyfriend and there is nothing to prove that she knew any of the information that is included in Roger's recording. If anything, the text messages prove that Tracy is a good liar. In her text messages, she says she has two eyewitnesses to Tony's theft. She does not have any witnesses. She is willing to say anything to get her cat back. I understand her frustration, but lying about it, does not help at all. Remember, honesty is always the best policy! Since Tracy has no proof that Cindy stole Tony, she is not awarded the value of the cat. Tracy does get some of the rent money back, since Cindy was not up to date on rent when she moved out.  Tracy is not able to prove that Cindy damaged the blinds, so she has to return the security deposit. This case is not about money. Tracy misses her cat and just wants him back. In the hallway, Cindy's boyfriend says that Tracy did not give the cat attention and he probably left to find a better home. Really, what does this mean? A cat does not leave to find a better home. Does anyone think that Cindy and her boyfriend helped Tony to find a "better" home?

What Happened To My Driveway?
Gary is suing Frank's paving company for $1935.00. Gary hired Frank to repave his asphalt driveway and to seal it. Frank was recommended by a neighbor. When Gary hired Frank, he also got him several more jobs in the neighborhood. Frank did those jobs before he did Gary's. Why? This is never answered. Gary is not happy with the outcome of the job. He shows pictures of the driveway. It is discolored, crumbling and deteriorating. There are even weeds growing through the asphalt. Frank explains this damage is from a snowplow. Gary says he never used a snowplow on the driveway. He only used a snow blower. Why is the driveway a gray color and bumpy looking? Franks says there is only one place in the county to buy asphalt. There is no way to be guaranteed to get the same quality material. The other driveways are perfect. Gary wants his driveway to look like those driveways. Why should he get inferior material? Frank says it is not inferior, it is just different. The weather has so much to do with it. When it is over 75 degrees outside, the asphalt gets soft and and the tires from the car can damage it. This is not the type of damage that is shown in the pictures. Remember, a picture is worth a thousand words. Should Gary have to live with an inferior job? No, he does not. The Judge awards him the $1935.00. In the hallway, Gary says he should have asked for more money. After all, it is going to cost him more to have the driveway removed before it is replaced. I think Gary should have had an estimate from a company for the removal of the driveway. I think he would have won. Whay do you think?

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

The most simple things can bring the most happiness.
- Izabella Scorupco


Thursday, August 2, 2012

People's Court - 8 1 2012 - Wednesday

I Am Trying To Save The Kittens!
Debbie is suing Yolanda and Mike for $297.48. This is for the money she has spent on the equipment and veterinary care of six kittens. When Yolanda and Mike called her for assistance, she responded immediately. They had a feral mom cat and six newborn kittens. Debbie asked Yolanda if she would consider a foster situation until the kittens were old enough to be adopted. She would set up a cage in their house, provide them with food, litter and essentials. Debbie also offered to pay for the deworming and vaccinations for the kittens. When it was time to wean the kittens, the mom cat would be spayed and released. The kittens would be socialized by Yolanda's family and be adopted out when old enough. Yolanda understood this to be about 8 weeks. She agreed to this foster situation. Even though she does not like cats, she knew her 5 children would help with the kittens. Several of her children's friends wanted to adopt the kittens. Debbie explained to Yolanda there was an application that needed to be filled out. Four of the six kittens were adopted, Debbie told Yolanda should would be back to pick up the last two kittens. When Yolanda's kids physically fight over the kittens, she decides to get rid of the kittens. Does she call Debbie to come and get the kittens? No, she takes the kittens to the local train station and gives them away to strangers. She claims that she found out Debbie charges an adoption fee. Why would this be a problem? Debbie has paid for all of the expenses involved with the kittens. She is also spending the time to get good homes for the kittens. Debbie explains that the adoption fee covers all care, vet and   future spay/neuter expenses. I would imagine it costs much more than $100.00 each for all of the care provided for the kittens and mom cat. Yolanda thinks Debbie is making money from the adoption fees. She keeps mentioning this fee as if it were wrong. Debbie was doing everything she promised, Yolanda should have kept her end of the bargain. The Judge decides in favor of Debbie, but not for the full amount she is asking. The Judge divides the cost among the kittens and Debbie gets $126.84. Yolanda is counterclaiming for $1000.00. She wants money for carpet cleaning and the labor of fostering the kittens. She has no proof for the cost of the cleaning the carpet and does not get paid for taking care of the kittens. Now, let's talk about giving the kittens away. This was wrong on so many levels. Debbie was keeping her part of the bargain. I am sure she would have rushed over to get the kittens if she knew there was a problem. Debbie obviously is involved in cat rescue because she loves the animals. It is definitely not about the money. What do you think?

This Is A New Crack!!
Alan is suing David's company for $2232.00. This is the cost to repair his driveway. Alan approached David's employees to do work for him. David's employees were doing a job near Alan's house. Alan did not contact David, he wanted the guys to do some side work for him. Right away, we get the feeling this is not a good idea. When they are leaving the job, they backed up onto Alan's lawn. Alan immediately sees this as a way to get them to do additional work for him. When Justin, the supervisor, stops to see what is going on, he tells the workers that David will not be happy about the situation. He does not tell them to leave. He does not call David. This has become a comedy of errors. It continues to get worse. Alan notices a crack in his driveway. He says it was not there before the workers drove their equipment on the driveway. He admits his driveway was not in perfect condition, but this was a new crack. He pays the workers for the job they did, but tells Justin they have to fix the crack. Justin says they are not responsible for it. Alan calls David to tell him about the problem. Alan claims that David tried to offer him sod for his lawn. David denies that he made this offer. David feels that the driveway was in such poor condition, he should not be held responsible. He does admit that his workers should not have been there. He wrote them up, he did not fire them. How can he continue to employ such dishonest workers. They were using company equipment and company time to make a few extra dollars. Alan provides an estimate to the court for the repairs to the driveway. The Judge asks David what he thinks it would cost to fix the crack. He estimates $1300.00 to $1400,00. The Judge awards Alan $1300.00. In the hallway, David says he is mad at his employees and the next time they will be fired. Alan is not happy about the money, but he loves life and says it is fantastic! I believe that Alan is lucky to have won, he brought this upon himself. I feel sorry for David. He seems to be at the mercy of his employees. Hopefully, he has learned from this situation and take better control of his employees. Good luck David!

I Want My Wedding Pictures!
Shane and Amanda hired David to be their wedding photographer. David was paid in full to take pictures during the wedding, 2 pm to 10 pm, and produce three albums. It is now 2 years after the wedding and Shane does not have the pictures. He wants his money back. David tries to explain why he has not provided the pictures after 2 years. He went out of business and claims to have reached out to his clients. When he did not get a reply to his e-mail to Shane, he did not do anything else. Why? He really does not have a good answer to this question. Shane had an attorney send David a letter requesting the pictures. David replied to the attorney and sent the proofs. This does not satisfy the contract they had together. Now, Shane wants all of the pictures and the entire $2700.00 back. He cannot get both. David turns over the wedding pictures and Shane is awarded $1200.00. After all, court is about making you whole, not getting a bonanza. I love when the Judge says this! It is a shame when a business person treats their customer in this fashion. I am so glad that Shane and Amanda finally have their wedding pictures.

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

Life is not a final. It's daily pop quizzes.
-Unknown 




Wednesday, August 1, 2012

People's Court - 7 31 2012 - Tuesday

We Met On Pogo!
Barbara and Della met online playing games on Pogo. They chatted for awhile and then met in person. After a whirlwind courtship of a little over a month, they decided to get an apartment together. This is so fast. People do need to know each other better before making such a huge commitment. The two women rented an apartment together in Massachusetts. This was near Barbara's family. Della moved from Kentucky. After 5 days, Della went back home. Barbara describes a fight that seems to be about nothing. I think the bigger picture here, is that they did not know each other well enough to live together. Barbara is suing for back rent, a ring and a plane ticket. Barbara has no proof with her that any of these costs were loans. During a relationship, people spend money on each other. To expect the court to divide these into gifts or loans is asking for too much. Proof needs to be provided in order to make this decision. Barbara does not have the lease with her, she gave the ring as a gift and there was no agreement to be reimbursed for the plane ticket. Barbara seems very bitter about the relationship. When she leaves the courtroom, she is still throwing insults at Della. When Della leaves, she is so sad and is crying over the lost friendship. Why do people insist on moving so quickly with a relationship? Savor the journey! This could have been a very nice friendship that would have blossomed, if they were not in such a hurry! What do you think?

She Curses Like A Sailor!
Rae hired Larry's pool company to repair her 27 year old above ground swimming pool. Larry gives her a price of $1890.00, Rae says she rounded it up to $2000.00, because she is just that kind of person. Larry said there was tax on the original price and the few extra dollars were a tip for Charlie. Charlie elegantly describes his position with the company as, "he's the boss, I'm the horse". I like this, Charlie seems like a really sincere person. When the work was being done on the pool, Rae kept a close eye on the job. She claims she pointed out a few times when things were being done incorrectly. Charlie denies this claim. After the repairs were completed, the pool was filled. Rae said she noticed the sides were buckling and the pool was losing water. She called Larry to let him know the pool was leaking. Charlie came to look at it and realized there were holes in the liner caused by the ladder. Charlie asked if she used a ladder mat to protect the liner. Rae installed the ladder and said a ladder mat was not necessary. This is not what was causing the leak. She knows this because the leak was caused by the inept way the repairs were done. Unfortunately, Rae does not have any proof to show the Judge. She was so upset that she was being charged for a service call, she loses her temper and curses in front of Charlie. Charlie seems genuinely uncomfortable to describe the way Rae cursed after talking to Larry on the phone. His words are bleeped as he recounts the way Rae spoke. She does not deny that she lost her temper. She feels that she overpaid $110 at the beginning and should not have been charged for them to come back out. Larry says he was charging half of the $150.00 service call fee as a courtesy to her. Rae does not see this as a courtesy. Rae did give Charlie the $75.00, even though she was not happy about it. She is suing Larry's pool company for $1500.00. She said this is what another company wants to charge to fix their mistakes. She does not have the estimate with her, describing the new company as clowns. Is there any company out there who could properly fix her pool? Rae is unable to prove her case. She is not pleased as she leaves the courtroom. She says she had more evidence and did not get a chance to show it. Charlie is still shocked as he describes that Rae cursed like a sailor! Why do people resort to such bad behavior if they are not getting their own way? Where is common decency? Why are we so quick to yell and curse at others? Do you feel that respect is a thing of the past? 

Your Plow Damaged My Driveway!
Robert hired Alexander to clear the snow from his driveway. Robert did not actually speak to Alexander. He was in the room when his significant other spoke with him on the phone. This was an emergency snow plow job. Alexander did not have Robert sign a contract for the job. He came out, cleared the driveway and was paid $20.00. Alexander says this is the going rate, it was a 5 minute job. Now, there is a second snowstorm and Alexander is called again to plow the driveway. This time the job does not go smoothly. Alexander has problems and tells Robert he cannot finish the job. Robert says he heard scraping sounds. When the snow melts two days later, Robert sees the damage done by the plow. He gets an estimate for $750.60 to repair these damages. Alexander does not deny that he could have caused the damage. He tells his customers that he would not be responsible for damage and they usually sign a waiver. Robert did not sign this waiver. He said he did not agree to waive responsibility for any damage caused by Alexander. He wants Alexander to repair his driveway. I feel bad for Alexander. I believe he told Robert's significant other the restrictions about what could happen when the driveway is plowed. His only mistake was not having Robert sign a waiver. He is paying dearly for this mistake, as he is found responsible for the $750.60 to fix the driveway. This is a difficult way to start out in business. Alexander has learned a valuable lesson that will save him problems in the future. He will now keep a waiver in his truck, for emergency situations. Good luck Alexander!!!!

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

Don't wait for your ship to come in, swim out to it.
-Unknown