People's Court Blog - 1 3 2013 - Thursday

It is time to play catch-up! Here are the cases from January 3, 2013:

Joseph and John are suing Benjamin and his business for $2903.50. 

This includes the cost of a 1986 motorcycle, pain and suffering, mileage and tow costs. When they bought the motorcycle from Benjamin they received a 30 day warranty. Benjamin calls it a guarantee. What is the difference? Benjamin does not know what the difference is and he is the one who gave it!!! 10-12 days after buying the motorcycle, it would not start. When they called Benjamin, he said it would cost $300 to diagnose the problem. This is not the way a warranty or guarantee works. Benjamin claims they wanted to modify the bike, when they were looking to replace the chain and the sprocket. Most of what Benjamin says in response to questions does not make any sense. 

Benjamin needs to learn to sell the motorcycles as-is, if he is not going to honor a warranty or guarantee. He claims he does not run a business, he works out of his garage. He also needs to learn how to speak in court - he called Douglas, pal! That is not proper! 

The good news for Joseph and John is that they win the case. They do not get pain and suffering, it is a contract case! They do get back $1653.50. They are satisfied with the outcome. 

Buying a vehicle, car or motorcycle requires two important steps. One is a test drive, the other is having a mechanic look at the vehicle. Joseph and John did neither. They are very lucky that Benjamin gave them a warranty (guarantee) and breached the contract. Otherwise, they might have been stuck with the purchase of the 1986 motorcycle.

Iris is suing Louis and the Realty Corporation for $2000.00.

Iris wants her security deposit back. Louis, a realty broker showed her an apartment in mid April. She signed a lease and gave Louis $2000.00 out of the $3000.00 required. She could not get the additional money and let Louis know she was trying to get it. Then she called Louis and let him know she was not going to take the apartment. He had given $800.00 to the landlord and kept $1200.00 for his fee. 

Neither party has any paperwork to show the Judge. Iris claims the paperwork stated only $50.00 was non-refundable. Unfortunately, she does not have the paperwork. Louis should have proof, but no, he does not have it either!

How can people come to court so unprepared?

Why would Iris think she should get back her money? She held up the apartment from being rented to someone else. There is a cost to changing your mind! Iris does not get her money back and Louis actually received a brokers fee twice for the rental of the apartment. He does not seem very trustworthy, but he is entitled to the fee. 

People need to realize there are consequences to their actions. You cannot make a decision and not know it does not have an impact. When you put a deposit on an apartment, no one else can rent it. If you do not go through with the deal, then the landlord has lost the opportunity to rent it to someone else. I hope Iris has learned from this experience, it was a very expensive lesson!

Rachel sues Levy for $1643.54.

Rachel lives next to Levy's rental property. After a very severe windstorm, debris from Levy's roof landed on Rachel's car. She took the debris off the car and went to work. When she had a chance to look at her car, she saw it was scratched. She got in touch with Levy to let him know about the damage. Once he found out the amount of the estimate, he said it was an act of God and he was not responsible for the damages. 

How is it that someone would agree that they are responsible until they find out the cost? Scratches on cars are expensive to repair.  Levy keeps saying he never saw the damages and it could have been a different car. Well, it was not a different car, Rachel has pictures! Also, Levy needs to repair his roof. The pictures of the roof show that it is not in very good shape.

Rachel wins the case and gets the amount for the lower estimate, which is $1335.02.

I do not understand why people do not take responsible for their own property. Even losing this case does not seem to enlighten Levy. In the hallway, he is still saying his roof is in good shape. Really!

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

People's Court Blog - 10 8 2012 - Monday

Atiya And The Adult Party

Atiya is suing Tangey for $1165.00. This is for the cost of pole dancing lessons and damages to her house. Atiya is a really fun person! For her 35th birthday, she had plans for the most amazing party. Atiya calls it an OPP party. This stands for overnight, passion, pole party. Wow, I would like to be one of her friends. Atiya invited 10 friends over to celebrate her 35th birthday. The party was all women and included sex toy demonstration and pole dancing lessons. Unfortunately, Tangey the pole dancer, did not follow through. Atiya hired her and paid $435.00 for her to give pole dancing lessons at the party. This really sounds like fun! Tangey got to the party late, could not set up the poles in a secure way and disappointed the birthday girl and her friends. Besides causing disappointment she also damaged the ceiling and the floor while she was trying to set up the pole. Not to the tune of $730.00, which is the amount Atiya is asking for. Atiya will get back the cost of the pole lessons and $300.00 for the damages. In total she gets back $735.00. I think Tangey should stick to having parties at the studio. It seems like a major liability to set up the pole in people's homes. What do you think?

Thomas And The Scratched Car

Thomas is suing Rick for $1192.50. This is for the damage to his car while it was parked in Rick's parking lot. This is a parking lot for an airport. Thomas left his car in the lot over Christmas week while he flew home to visit his family. When he returned and picked up his car he noticed scratches to the back door panel. Thomas showed it to someone right away and took pictures of it. This was the right thing to do. Never ever leave the lot before checking the car. If there are damages they need to be shown to someone before leaving. Thomas did this, but Rick still does not believe him. I do not understand this. How else would the damage have occurred? It was not there when Thomas left his car, it was there when he picked it up. Very straightforward. Rick should have done the right thing and paid for the damage when it was brought to his attention. Thomas definitely proves his case and is awarded the entire amount he is suing for. Why don't people do the right thing? Why do they need to be taken to court? I would hope in the future Rick treats his customers better! What do you think?

John And The Ungrateful Girlfriend

John is suing Joella for $487.52. This is for a loan to Joella to help her pay for furniture. These two people have dated on and off for ten years. Joella describes how John has helped her through the years giving her money when she needed it. He never asked for it back. Wow, what a nice guy! Unfortunately this will not be in his favor. He has given money to Joella throughout the years and did not expect it back. Now he wants his money back. Why is this time different? Well, they broke up and Joella moved on. She started dating someone and moved in with the guy, She dated John for ten years on and off and they never lived together. John wants Joella to pay him back. It is not going to happen. The Judge finds in favor of Joella. It does appear that she has taken advantage of this very nice man's generosity. She should pay him back because it is the right thing to do. She is not going to pay him back because legally she does not have to. What a shame!

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

You can't start the next chapter of your life, if you keep re-reading the last one.

~Anonymous