People's Court Blog - 10 4 2012 - Thursday

Chris / Billiejo And The Not So Brand New Refrigerator

Chris and Billiejo are suing for $2694.94. This is for the cost of a refrigerator and various other costs associated with the purchase. Peggy Lee and Carlos were the contact for an ad on Craigslist. Peggy Lee's mother-in-law placed an ad to sell a refrigerator. The refrigerator was advertised as brand new. After Chris and Billiejo purchased the $3000.00 refrigerator for $950.00, they took it home, plugged it in and guess what? It did not work. Chris took the refrigerator to a repair shop and found out it had been repaired. The condenser had been replaced and other work had been done. The repair shop has documented the work done on the refrigerator. It is very obvious this was a scam to sell a used refrigerator as new. Peggy Lee shows that Chris damaged the refrigerator when he transported it on its side in a trailer. This does not matter since the information in the ad was false.

When Chris tries to reach Peggy Lee and Carlos, they do not return his calls. He meets with them using a fake name when he answers another Craigslist ad. The problem is he does not act responsibly and makes himself look like a loose cannon! Now he is doing the right thing to bring them to court. The Judge finds Peggy Lee and Carlos responsible to return the purchase price of the refrigerator, travel expenses and the cost of the repair shop diagnosis. In total, Chris and Billiejo get back $1177.49. Remember if something sounds too good too be true, it probably is! 

Lisa Lynn And Her Pottery Equipment

Lisa Lynn is suing Nicolle and Christopher for $3978.40. This is for pottery equipment that was stored with Nicolle and Christopher. When Lisa Lynn was pregnant in 2008, the father of her baby removed her items from storage and stored them with Nicolle and Chris. In 2010, she tried to get her property back and did not get it. In 2011, Nicolle donated the pottery equipment to a local school. She has a donation receipt to prove this. 

Why does Lisa Lynn wait so long to get her property back? The only answer she has is that she had so much going on in her life. This is not a good excuse. Years went by. She really could not expect for the items to be there forever. Lisa Lynn seems surprised to lose her case. She feels she did not get a chance to tell everything. I cannot imagine what else there could be. She had years to get back her property and she did not make the effort. It was not Nicolle and Chris's responsibility to return it to her. Maybe she is used to everyone doing for her, but not this time. The silver lining is that the pottery equipment went to a school and children are learning the art pf pottery. Lisa Lynn does not see this as a silver lining, she just wanted her belongings back!

Shannon And The Lost Friendship

Shannon is suing his friend for $1032.54. This is for the cost of parking tickets, impound fees, and various other costs. Shannon claims he put a car in his name for his friend, Richard. The reason he gives is that he wanted to help out his friend. Richard denies that Shannon helped him. This is very much a case of he said he said. It all comes down to the most credible person. The winner is Shannon. Richard continues to deny that anything was done for him, but he is so unbelievable. Shannon's story rings true. I am sure it will be a very long time before he lets someone else take advantage of him. Shannon gets back $784.21. The money he does not get back will be a lesson for him. The shame of this situation is that these two men have known each other for 29 years. This is a lifetime. It must be so difficult for Shannon to have been treated this way by a friend he has known for this long. Another question answered. What is the cost of a 29 year friendship? The answer: $1032.54. Good luck Shannon!

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe 

Being entirely honest with oneself is a good exercise.

~Sigmund Freud

People's Court Blog - 9 25 2012 - Tuesday

Tianne And The Irresponsible Landlord

Tianne is suing Frances for $2800. This is for her security deposit from an apartment she rented from Frances. Tianne lived there for 5 years and when she decided to move out gave Frances 2 months notice. At first Frances told her to live out her security deposit, which was 2 months rent. Then Frances changed her mind. Tianne did use the security deposit towards one month's rent. Why wouldn't Frances give her back the rest? Frances claims that Tianne left air conditioners and a TV set in the apartment and she could not rent it. A friend of Tianne's picked up these items within 45 days. Frances says she did not know what to do with the items and she needed to paint the apartment. Really Frances! You couldn't paint the apartment and show it working around window air conditioners units and a TV set? She also says that Tianne broke a window pane. Frances has a receipt for supplies and labor for $70.00. This is no excuse to keep all the money. The Judge is not going to permit Frances to keep it all. She has to return $1230.00 to Tianne. Frances is lucky she does not live in one of the states that has a penalty for landlords that withhold the security deposit without proper notification. She needs to learn her rights and responsibilities as a landlord. Tianne was a good tenant and did not deserve to be treated this way. What do you think?

Anabela And The Need For A Contract

Anabela is suing Mack for $2450.00. She hired Mack and his friend to do some handyman work in her office. Anabela says that Mack did electrical work and she was pleased with the job. Now she needed flooring done, paneling installed and a wall air conditioner covered. They did not have a written contract. This is never a good idea. Especially in this case, since Anabela has very specific ideas about what she wanted done. She is not happy about the work that was done. She says the floor tiles lift up when the floor is vacuumed, the floor is not level and the wind blows through the wall around the air conditioner. The checks for supplies and labor were written out to Mack. He claims he was the helper on the job. He is an electrician and not a carpenter. Mack feels that Anabela should sue his friend Johnny. 

The Judge rules in favor of Anabela since the checks were written out to Mack. He is not able to accept the money for the job and not have responsibility for the quality of the work. Anabela does not get all of the money she is suing for since she cannot prove the exact work she wanted done. Also, she wants $1000.00 to remove the tiles that are so loose they come up with the vacuum. She does get back $1200.00.

This is why it is so important to have a written contract. Showing notes about a transaction does not prove that the other person knew what you wanted done. We all need to learn from this experience. Whatever type of transaction is being conducted - get it in writing!

Andrea / Tylan And The Non-Existent Title

Andrea and Tylan are suing Adrian for $1091.86. This is for various expenses associated with the purchase of a used car. Adrian owns an auto sales business. The car they purchased was a 1990 Honda Accord. They paid $795.00. Unfortunately they never received the title for the vehicle. After several months, Andrea received a salvage title showing Progressive was the owner of the vehicle. She contacted Adrian and to this day has not received the title to the car. Adrian gives an excuse about the title being lost. When he finally received the title from the auction house he submitted it to the DMV. Why wouldn't the person who purchased the car receive the title? It does not seem like a very efficient way to do business. 

Since one of the only consistent warranties of purchasing a used car is to receive the title, Andrea wins the case. She will not get everything she is asking for because they did have the benefit of Tylan driving the car. She does get back $931.86. This is a significant portion of the money she is suing for. The Judge rules this way since Adrian is only able to come up with excuses and not results. 

It is so important to make sure all of the paperwork is in order for the sale of a used car. Adrian of all people should know this since this is his business. Hopefully he will learn from this and conduct business differently in the future! What do you think?

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

Stay Updated - Subscribe!

My success just evolved from working hard at the business at hand each day.

~Johnny Carson

People's Court Blog - 8 27 2012 - Monday

He Lives In The Basement!

Alice is suing William for $3200.00. She says this is for rent that William owes her. William is countersuing for $3260; rent, criminal mischief and harassment. These two people know each other for several years. They met when Alice was a foster mother and William was a social worker. They dated briefly. After Alice married someone else and moved to a new home, she decided to rent out the rooms of her original home. She contacted William and asked him if he was interested to rent a bedroom in her house. He said yes. They agreed on the amount of rent and William moved in. There was a problem. Alice did not have the bedroom ready, so Willliam moved into the basement, a family room. This was not a legally permitted space for Alice to rent. That did not seem to bother William, he lived there for several months and paid rent. When Alice posted a "For Sale" sign in front of the house, William stopped paying rent. He claims that when a person is selling their house, they can not collect rent. These are not the facts and the Judge sets him straight. When William moved out, it was from the basement, he never moved upstairs to the bedroom. Since William never moved to the bedroom, Alice is not able to collect rent from him for the months he did not pay. William explains his counterclaim . After he moved out, Alice came to his new home. They got into an altercation in the street. William says she broke his goldchain and the zipper on his jacket. Alice admits to breaking these items, but not because she assaulted him, she was falling in the snow and she grabbed him. As Alice demonstrates these actions, the Judge tells her that it is an insult. How can she expect the Judge to believe such a story? Assaulting someone and grabbing them for support is very different. William gets $20.00 for the damage Alice did to his belongings. Nothing more, he has no case for criminal mischief and harassment. Alice needs to stop renting out her basement, the city  will not issue her a permit for this purpose. The Judge uses the cocaine example to illustrate why the court is not able to support an illegal position. I love this example! It is also a very good idea to know your rights before pursuing a court case. This entire issue came down to $20.00, an amount most people would not sue for. There are some people who would have stayed away from court when they have no proof or are doing something illegal. What do you think?

 

My Virgin Mary Statue Is Ruined!

Martha is suing George for $200.00. This is the value of a Virgin Mary statue, Martha shipped from New Jersey to Florida. George is the agent for the shipping company. Mary explains that her late husband won the statue in a raffle in the 1980's. He paid $20.00 for the raffle ticket. Before her husband passed away, he expressed to Martha, his desire for his son to have the statue. After 5 years, Martha decides to send the statue to her son. She takes it to George's business, he wraps it for free and she insures it for $200.00. The first $100.00 insurance was free and she paid an additional $2.00 for the next $100.00. When the delivery guy left it in Florida, he threw it over a 6 foot fence. Why on earth would he do this when the package was marked fragile? Why on earth would he do this at all? That is not the way to deliver a package. If he is not able to get through the gate, leave the slip, letting the people know they have a package. (This happens to us all the time! - the slip, not the thrown package!) The head of the Virgin Mary was completely cut off. This was very upsetting to the entire family. This statue has great sentimental value, it was even blessed by a priest. George says that no one is denying anything. He agrees the statue was broken because of the method of delivery. His needs proof of the value of the statue for the insurance claim. Martha said she does not have any proof of the value, since it is so old. She did insure it for $200.00 and on the receipt it says that is the declared value. The Judge explains the importance of declared value. When you have an item that has sentimental value, you cannot get more than the value. The exception to this, is when you cannot prove the value, then the declared value becomes very important. Since Martha insured the statue and the receipt says declared value, she gets the $200.00. I am glad that she gets her money. She deserves it, especially since she took the extra step to insure the delivery. What is the purpose of the insurance, if they are not going to pay out? What do you think? The good news: Martha's son fixed the statue and she is looking forward to visiting Florida to see it!

 

The Boat Is Paid For - I Need The Title!

Thomas bought a boat from Mark. After he gave Mark the check, he expected to receive the title. Thomas tells of countless e-mails and phone calls to try to get the title from Mark. When he does not get it, Thomas goes to court to get the title. He paid $375.83 in order to obtain the title. Mark explains that he was told by someone that since he did not have possession of the boat, he could not get the title. When he found out this was not true, he went to the Motor Vehicle to obtain the title, He claims that he scanned it to his computer and promptly mailed it to Thomas. He does not have proof of delivery and Thomas never received it. Thomas sent an e-mail to Mark, giving him a June 1st deadline for the paper title. Mark said he went to the Motor Vehicle again and received a duplicate title and sent that to Thomas. He shows the scanned copy of the title and the duplicate title to the Judge. The scanned copy shows a date of March 8, 2011 and an issue date of January 29, 2009. The duplicate title has a date of June 3, 2011. The boat was sold to Thomas on March 8, 2011. Didn't Mark realize the dates on the titles would prove that he was a liar? Also, Mark is counterclaiming for $415.49 for his time spent obtaining the titles. Really! Well, he does not get it. The good news is that Thomas does get everything he is suing for. He had to do so much extra work to obtain the title to a boat that he bought. Why did Mark have to make this so difficult for Thomas? Mark could have saved everyone so much time and effort, if he would have done the right thing. What do you think?

 



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

 

Stay Updated - Please Subscribe!

 

This is a wonderful country.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

If it will offend or insult, keep it to yourself.

- Unknown

 

 

People's Court: 6-28-12: Honesty is the Best Policy

Being truthful seems to be a lost art. Remember when our word was our bond, an agreement was sealed with a handshake? Those days are over. Embellishing, exaggerating or outright lying is so common today. Honesty is the best policy, especially in court.

A couple rents a luxury condo for $6000.00 a month. Soon after they move in, the windows leak whenever it rains. They let the landlord know and when the repairs are not done, they decide to pay less rent. The landlord is aware of the problem, she experienced it when she lived there and did contact the builder to say it was happening again. Why wasn't it fixed? This is not made clear. What is made clear is that for 4 months the tenants keep back rent each month. They explain they decided on the amount by calculating how much of the apartment was not habitable. They have a floor plan of the apartment, no pictures of the actual problem. There were pictures taken by the super of the building after the fact. The Judge decides they have exaggerated the situation and decides they do not get back the full security deposit. Also, it is not a good idea to withhold rent without documentation. Clearly stating a problem and proving it has occurred is the best idea when you have to prove it in court.

Best friends for 39 years. Alysa and Lisa have been friends since kindergarten. What a shame it has fallen apart over $1500.00. When Alysa is arrested for violating an order of protection, she calls her best friend to bail her out. She lets Lisa know where to find the money. She even tells her to take some extra for herself. For some reason, when the bail is returned to Lisa, she keeps it. Lisa is not straightforward with the court or with her former friend. First she denies receiving the money, then she says he mother signed and deposited the checks without her knowledge. Another story is that she was supposed to keep it. Why would Alyssa ask for it back if she had told her to keep it? It was not her money to keep. When the checks were sent to her, she should have called her friend. She needs to pay it back. Unfortunately, the damage is done and the friendship is over. Lisa's son has been involved and they are not going to forgive Alyssa for her bad behavior. In the hallway, Lisa's parting words are, "good riddance". So, so sad.

Justin and Brian thought is would be a good idea to trade vehicles without the proper paperwork. Both men had their vehicles posted on Craigslist to sell. They met and decided to make an even trade. Justin did not have a clear title to his vehicle and Brian could not find the title. This should have raised numerous red flags. But the two men forged ahead. Speaking of forging... Justin  provides a work order from his job for repairs needed. He works at this fine establishment and explains he is providing the labor. He has paid half of the $4475.04 and is making payments to his boss to pay off the rest. Brian explains that the car he received from Justin, cannot be put on the road since the title is not clear and it needs major repairs. The Judge calls a recess and when she returns she is very angry. The work order provided by Justin is fabricated and he has not paid any money to his boss. It is a blatant lie. She orders the vehicles switched back. The deal has now been undone! You get the feeling Brian does not want the truck back. He delivers pizzas and does not want a gas-guzzling truck. Justin admits being a liar and should be totally embarrassed and humiliated. Why would someone do this in court on national TV? Your guess is as good as mine.

Please let me know what you think. Thank you for joining me today.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow.

-Unknown Source

Remember to submit your favorite quotes or sayings!