People's Court Blog - 1 29 2013 - Tuesday

Steven is suing Warren for $3270.00. 

Steven does advertising for local businesses. He approached Warren who owns a dry cleaning business. Usually Steven receives 50% upfront and the remainder when the job is completed. For some reason he did not conduct business as usual in this case.

He does the whole job before having Warren sign a contract and receive payment. Warren gives him a check for $400.00 and the check bounces. He lets Warren know and it turns out this account was closed three years ago. Warren does pay the $12.00 bank fee for the bounced check. He does not pay the $400.00 for the job. Warren cancels the job. Steven puts another dry cleaner ad into the advertising project.

When Warren is asked why he signed the contract, he claims he did not know it was a contract! Really! Who is he insulting? Himself or the Judge? He tells the Judge he does not think she is stupid, so that leaves...himself!!!! Warren also says there was another dry cleaner ad, yet this was done after he cancelled the job. 

Steven has added many other expenses into the lawsuit. He is entitled to the money from the advertising job, not beefing it up to have a bonanza. Court is about making a person whole. The Judge finds in favor of Steven for $400.00, court costs and pre-judgement interest. It is a good day for everyone! Warren admits he did not look good and Steven still feels he was entitled to a lot more money.

Sarah is suing Felicia for $800.00. 

This is for the remainder of her security deposit. Sarah entered into a roommate agreement with Felicia. She lived in the apartment for 6 months. Felicia was only there a few times. At the fourth month, Felicia left a note for Sarah, telling her she was not happy with the cleanliness of the apartment and to confirm her move out date. Sarah did not feel the apartment was messy. Her mother was even visiting at the time and confirmed that she was an able housekeeper. Everyone has different standards!

The pictures Felicia shows tell their own story. Once again a picture is worth a thousand words. In the pictures, you see dirt, hairballs (there was no pet!), footprints on the wall!, an unclean stove top and dirty floors. Sarah says she cleaned after this. Why didn't Sarah take pictures? That would have solved the whole dilemma. 

Felicia cannot prove the amount for the cleaning of the apartment. The Judge finds in favor of Sarah but lets Felicia keep some of the security deposit. Sarah gets back $656.00. This is not the total amount she was asking, but is still a nice amount of money. The question is: Is it worth it to humiliate yourself in public for this amount of money? What do you think?

George is suing Nick for $200.00. 

This is for the cost of a door for a Chevy Suburban. Nick owns a junkyard. He sold George several parts for the Chevy Suburban. George wants to use the vehicle as a shed. What difference does it make if the door is dented? When George installed the door on his vehicle, the door would not close. This would be crucial, a shed door would need to close! Nick is not surprised by this problem, since the Suburban had auto body damage. When George brought the door back, he was offered store credit, not a cash refund. Neither of the parties have paperwork to prove the policy of no cash refunds. The Judge calls for a recess to give Nick a chance to get proof of his policy. He shows a picture of a sign in his store, George admits he saw the sign. He is just tired of being taken advantage of. He just wants his money back. He does not want store credit. I feel his frustration, sometimes it just does not seem fair! But, this is about the legality of the situation. George does not get his money back. In the hallway, George says when he is busy shopping, he does not always read the signs.

It is important to know the policies of the store you are in. Be aware of the signage around you and also read your receipt. Many times the receipt will have return policies written on it. Knowledge is power!

Please share your thoughts in the comments.

Stay Updated - Please Subscribe!

People's Court - 9 13 2012 - Thursday

Diego And The Linked Computers

Diego  is suing Stephanie for $1830.70. This is for  rent, utility expenses, food expenses, a diamond ring, and the replacement cost of a refrigerator door. Diego and Stephanie dated for 4 1/2 years and moved in together. This lasted 8 months. Diego thinks the problems started when they linked their computers together. Diego says they did this to share movies. Whatever the reason, it is a very bad idea. Diego admits curiosity got the best of him. He read documents that were essentially Stephanie's journal. She wrote about being unhappy in her relationship with him and feeling sexual tension with someone else. Stephanie admits to reading Diego's journal. They were writing about the same topic, being unhappy in their relationship with each other. Diego said this started a huge fight. Stephanie threw a small Buddha statue at him and hit the refrigerator instead. She also threw his guitar. Both of them left the apartment in order to diffuse the fight. Diego came back that night, Stephanie did not. When Diego came back he put all of Stephanie's belongings in trash bags and changed the locks. He texted her the next day to pick up her stuff and asked for the money she owed. Diego said she owed him money for the rent, utilities, and food expenses. Now is is also suing for the cost to repair the refrigerator door. 

Stephanie came the next day to pick up her stuff. She called the police and had Diego arrested for harassing text messages. He also had done an illegal lockout. Diego had no right to lock Stephanie out of the apartment. Stephanie admits that she owes the money for the rent. She does not feel she should have to pay the utilities. She says she always paid for the food. She denies damaging the refrigerator door. The diamond ring was a gift, not an engagement ring.

The Judge finds that Stephanie is required to pay her share of the rent, the utilities and the repair to the refrigerator door. Her denial of the damage to the door is not believed. She does get to keep the diamond ring. Diego gets a total of $1192.62.

These two people really need to move on and find healthier relationships. Hopefully they will learn from the mistakes in this relationship. I would hope in future relationships they do not link personal computers together! What do you think?

Michael And The Lawyer Fee

Michael is suing Carie, a former client, for $604.64. Carie hired Michael to represent her in a very complicated case. She chose Michael because she has known him since she was in the first grade. Carie went to school with Michael's son. Carie says that Michael guaranteed he would win the case. There are no guarantees in life, Carie should know that! Michael's representation for Carie cost over $7,000.00. This seems very silly for a $5000.00 case. Carie withheld the balance of the bill because she dismissed Michael as her lawyer. After the case went to arbitration and Carie lost, she appealed the decision and won. Carie ignored the bill for the balance of her bill to Michael. Because she ignored it, Michael brought her to court. The Judge wants to know why he didn't just forget about it. He says because she ignored the bill and also had told him her father would pay the bill. This was a business transaction and Carie signed a retainer agreement. Michael did the work. Just because she was unhappy with the outcome is no reason to withhold payment. 

The Judge finds in favor of Michael and Carie has to pay him. This is only right since there was an agreement. The history they might have had should not factor in a business deal. Michael is very matter of fact in his presentation of the case - just the facts! There was nothing personal about the lawsuit, he did the work and should get paid for it. What do you think?

Tobias And The Lost Pair Of Pants

Tobias is suing Ken, his dry cleaner for $500.00. This is the cost of a pair of pants from a Hickey Freeman designer suit. Ken admits to losing the pants. The policy of the store is to reimburse a customer 10 times the cost of the dry cleaning when an item is lost. This would have come to $137.50. Ken also offered Tobias an additional $50.00 in store credit. Tobias refused this offer, he wanted $300-$350 for the pants. Ken was not going to pay this amount, he had a store policy in place. Ken is responsible to pay Ken the $137.50. Tobias is not happy with this because he still does not have pants for his suit. 

This is a very straight forward case. The store policy is very clearly stated on the back of the receipt. Since Tobias is a regular customer, he has been given the receipt on many occasions. What I do not understand is why dry clean only the pants of a suit. Wouldn't the pants and jacket wind up being different colors through time and not match? Please Tobias, if you read this, let me know why you did not take the complete suit to the cleaners? I would think you would want the suit to match! What do you think?

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

A house is just a place to keep your stuff while you go out and get more stuff.
~George Carlin