People's Court Blog - 10 12 2012 - Friday

October Challenge Check-up: Here it is the end of the second week of the challenge. I hope you are doing much better than I am. Once again I have not met my goal. I will try next week to be successful. Trying is all anyone can ask for! I wish you success in meeting your October Challenge Goal! Wish me luck!

Kira And The Beast In The Basement

Kira and her two daughters, Gail and Marissa are suing Dawn for $5000.00. Kira rented her house to Dawn and a roommate for $2300.00 a month. After 4 months, Maureen, the roommate, moved out. Dawn wanted to continue to live there but needed help in paying the rent. Kira let her try to find a housemate. According to Kira after Dawn placed an ad for a housemate, she installed a kitchen, a woman, a dog and 3 cats in the basement. She actually created a separate apartment for someone. The woman who moved in the basement apartment was Kim, later to be known as the beast in the basement. Wow! What a name for someone and guess what -  it fits! Stay posted, you are going to be shocked! Kim contacted Kira and let her know that Dawn was interviewing for a roommate for upstairs. Kira looks into this and finds a an ad on Craigslist where Dawn is posing as the landlord. Dawn is asked to leave and her security deposit is returned to her. The sad part of this entire story is that Kira got rid of the wrong tenant. Now she had to contend with Kim or as she is now commonly known as "The Beast in the Basement!"

Kim had actually stopped paying rent. She called the police on Kira and her daughters. The police told the Kira and her daughters they were not allowed in the basement. Kim had squatters rights. Kira took Kim to court to evict her. The Judge gave Kim 10 days to leave. After Kim left and Kira went in the basement she was shocked! Kim had put fish on the radiator, turned the heat up to 80 degrees, took all of the switchplates, removed all the lightbulbs, removed the doorknobs and stuffed dirty diapers in the walls This is so disgusting! The Judge is outraged that the local police said this was a civil matter and would not press criminal charges. The Judge calls the Police Chief to inquire about the investigation. Hopefully we will find out that Kim was charged with criminal mischief.

The Judge finds in favor of Dawn for this case. Even though Dawn brought this woman on board as a tenant, Kira had the opportunity to get rid of her. Dawn claims that Kira's husband is the one to renovate the basement. He is not in court to dispute this. Kira does not have any evidence to prove that Dawn is responsible for this situation. She actually was the better tenant and should have not been kicked out. Kira needs to sue "The Beast in the Basement"! What do you think?

Michaele And The Lame Horse

Michaele is suing Bethany for $750.00. This is for the deposit and travel expenses for a horse she was attempting to purchase for her daughter. Michaele was looking for a horse for her daughter who has spina bifida. She needed a very calm horse that would allow her daughter to get on the horse with the use of blocks. Michaele provided a video of her daughter and horse to make sure the owner of the horses knew what she was looking for. After Michaele saw an ad on Craigslist for Bethany's horse, she sent the video. Bethany agreed that her horse would be a good candidate for Michaele's daughter. Michaele paid a deposit of $500.00 and spent $250.00 to transport the horse. When the horse arrived, Michaele contacted a veterinarian because she thought the horse was lame. The vet examined the horse and deemed it unfit for sale. There were specific instructions for Bethany to follow for the horse after she took the horse home. Bethany admits in court that she did not follow all of the vet's instructions. She says all the horse needed was some medicine and rest. After a few days the horse was fine and she she was able to sell it to someone else after Michaele did not want to continue with the purchase. Michaele wants her deposit back and the money spent to transport the horse. 

The Judge finds that Bethany breached the contract when she did not follow the vet's instructions. Michaele will get all of the money she is suing for. What I find so amazing is that someone would buy a horse sight unseen. Why didn't she contact a vet to look at the horse before she purchased him/her? Probably for the same reason that people do not pay to have a mechanic look at a used car! What do you think?

Wendy And The Leased Car

Wendy is suing Vincent for $1427.36. Vincent is the father of her two grandchildren. She leased her car to Vincent to use to be able to go to work in order to pay child support. When her daughter and Vincent had issues she took her car back. There was a signed agreement between Wendy and Vincent for the car. Wendy tells the Judge how she watches the show and loves her and knew to have a written agreement. The Judge is very proud of her for this. The agreement details what Vincent would be responsible for. He paid Wendy $60-$65 a week for the use of the car. Wendy even photocopied the cash he gave her! What Wendy did not take into account was that routine wear and tear on the car was not covered by the agreement. Keep in mind Vincent was paying for the use of the car on a weekly basis. After Wendy took the car back she took it to a mechanic. The mechanic did not refer to any repairs that were not a direct result of Vincent's mishandling of the car. He did not violate their agreement. The Judge finds in Vincent's favor.

What makes this so sad, is that Vincent is really trying to do the best for his children. It is a shame that he and the children's mother cannot get along. Hopefully he will find an affordable vehicle so he can continue to work and pay his bills. Good luck to all!

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.

~Thomas Edison

People's Court: 7-6-12 ***** A Horse ***** A Theft ** A Rude Plaintiff

Everyday situations present us with unique challenges. We find ourselves dealing with new problems all the time.  In working to resolve these issues people need to behave with integrity. Are they trying to right a wrong or find a bonanza? When these stories wind up in the courtroom, the resolution is fair.

Marion needed to transport a horse to a competition for her granddaughter. The transport company is owned by Chip. When the trailer was opened at the competition, the horse was lying down. The horse was injured during the trip. As soon as Marion learns the horse cannot compete, she finds another horse. Her granddaughter was able to successfully compete. Why are we in court? Marion wants Chip to pay for all of the expenses for both horses, the injured horse and the replacement horse, transport fees and competition fees. She does not have a clear answer when she is asked to explain why Chip should have to pay for the expenses of both horses. Why should she get a bonanza? She is only entitled to the money she can prove she lost because of the negligence of Chip's company. Why should her granddaughter get  a free ride? She feels that Chip's company was negligent while securing the horse in the trailer.  In order to prove this, she needs to have evidence. She has her husband tell the court that a horse would never lay down in a horse trailer. He should know he has transported horses for 15 years. This is not evidence. Now, Chip's daughter explains she has been doing this for years and it can happen. It may not be common, but she has seen horses lay down in the trailer. Chip explains that the chain is left loose, so if the horse does lay down, their neck is not broken. Since Marion cannot prove her case, she does not win.  To Marion's surprise, Chip has countersued for 2 additional transports. Even though Marion was unhappy with him in August, she used his company in October and November. On these two occasions, she did not pay him. She claims she had to use his service since the horse farm only contracts with his company. They did not switch companies when the horse was injured. She was not able to pay because she fell on hard times. She did not make any attempt to make payments on the bill. The court finds that Marion is responsible to pay Chip for the services provided. It makes you wonder if Chip would have brought her to court on his own or if he just took this opportunity to countersue?  Why would Marion think she did not have to pay for any of the services she received? What do you think? For those that are wondering, the horse sustained scrapes to her leg and one of her back legs was swollen.

Christian and Nicole rented an apartment together. They both signed the lease and they shared expenses. Christian is suing Nicole for $2000.00. This amount is for a loan, rent and money that was stolen. Christian had a promissory note signed for the loan, but was unable to find it for court. The rent was from December, that was deferred to January as a birthday gift. Nicole moved out suddenly in January and did not pay the rent for December or January. There was money missing from Christian's room. She is convinced Nicole stole it. Knowing that Christian dd not see Nicole steal the money or have any evidence to prove the theft makes you think she is not going to win this portion of the case. Well, Nicole starts to lie about everything. The answers she gives the Judge contradict the written answers she provided to the court. She does deny that she stole the money. Unfortunately, since she lies about the rent and the loan, she shows her true character. Once someone lies in court, nothing they say can be believed. Christian wins the case, but is very sad to have lost her girlfriend.

Konstantine's car was damaged in an accident. He made the decision to pay for the repair himself and not go through the insurance company. He takes his car to Nakhman's repair shop. After the repairs were done he claims he returned many times since there were still problems with the car. He does not have any documentation for the return visits. According to the owner of the shop, he picked the car up in June and did not complain until October. We also learn he recommended the shop to his uncle. How unhappy was he if he sent his uncle to the shop? Konstantine has paperwork that he generated and had a mechanic sign. It listed old parts that were used for repair and repairs that were not done or done incorrectly. This paperwork was not created by the mechanic. It did not serve as true evidence. The Judge tries to get more information from Konstantine. On several occasions, he talks over her. This is so rude. When he loses, he says it was fun to give Nakhman stress and waste his time in court. It is a shame Konstantine did not take this case more seriously. If he would have paid attention, he might have learned something. 

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

Everything is okay in the end, if it's not okay, it's not the end.

- Unknown

Submit your favorite quotes and sayings to be included in future blogs!

People's Court: 6-6-12: Why?

Are people ever going to take responsibility for their own actions?

A woman lends her boyfriend money over and over again. He promises to pay her back and does not. Yet, she still keeps lending him money. Does she deserve to get the money back?

When are people going to learn from their mistakes?

Also, why would he buy a car and put her name on it? None of this makes sense. When they break up, she takes the car because she has the legal right to do it. She trades it in. He does not get anything back, he wanted the deposit he put on the car, He does have to pay back some of the money he borrowed since he admitted to it. These situations get very messy in a relationship. People have to be very careful to understand whether it is a gift or a loan. Remember to also get it in writing.

Then we have a man riding motorcycles with friends through a free range town. A horse runs into him and injures him. The police reports appear to support this theory even though the horse owner says he was speeding and he hit and injured the horse. The horse did need to be seen by a vet. The owner of the horse admits the horse broke out. He has fixed the fence and the gate since the incident. It seems fairly straightforward. For some reason, the owner of the horse keeps saying they were riding Harleys and the injured man says it was a Honda. Why would the type of bike matter? 

A young man moves out of his apartment claiming it was uninhabitable. He did not give notice and does not want to pay what is due. He can not prove that he notified the landlord about any problems. It is very important that all communication with landlords are documented. They need to be given the chance to fix a problem. Why wouldn't he just send an e-mail?

These cases seem to raise even more questions about how people behave.

Please let me know what you think. Thank you.

Remember: Life is good.