teebax

I don't think it's a matter of choosing not to have one. Most banks now charge for every type of bank account there is, unless you can maintain a minimum balance. That's just not feasible for many people living on the edge. And God forbid you end up in the Telechex system, which is ridiculously easy to do. One small accounting mistake can lead to your name being on it, which can lead to never being able to open an account anywhere, since the banks check that before you can open an account.It really is much more expensive to be poor. I remember a time when I had no bank account and used to cash my payroll checks at the bank they were drawn on. Then that bank started refusing to cash checks if you didn't have an account with them, even though it was the same damn bank the checks were drawn on! Talk about a freaking scam. My financial situation is much better now, but I still harbor a lot of resentment toward banks.

They have relegated it to the 5 a.m. time slot where I live, so I also assumed it wasn't doing so well but am pleased to see it's renewed. I know there are a lot of court shows, but there aren't a lot I can tolerate. This is one that I actually watch.

My 32-year-old girlfriend watches it with me and watches with me. She's an RN working as an ADON at a nursing home and said the show is so accurate it's scary. She does prefer Season 1 to Season 2 because she found Season 2 to be a little too madcap for her taste. Like most people, she tends to hate TV shows about her profession, but this one she'll watch.

Last night's episode felt much more like one of the comedies I watch on HBO or Showtime. I like that they went there and even found some humor in a really tough subject. I thought Allison and Anna were amazing. I'm still not a fan of the daughter's character, but at least we got some insight into why she's so bitchy all the time.

My mother, who rarely says anything bad about anyone, made a dairy farm joke about her that I wish to God I remembered. It was funny in itself, but coming from my usually-polite mother it was freaking hilarious. She also wondered why a litigant would announce their stripper name on national TV.

They can't ever have too many carny cases to suit me. I loved it. I'm sure there aren't enough out there to do it, but if JJ wanted to produce a show called "The Carny Courtroom" I'd be all in.

I like Rooks a lot, and I'm not usually a fan of contestants who editorialize during the game. She just seemed fun to me, and I love anyone who's well-read. She's obviously a fellow book-lover, so I couldn't not root for her. Plus I love her hair.

I was confused by the award as well. I can't remember ever seeing a litigant win replacement cost instead of the value at the time of the loss. Why would it cost more now? I didn't really get it. Her torturing the kid over the word 'like' made this former English teacher very happy.

I know way too many people (male and female) who are like this. I see it with women in our gay community and men in our straight one. What always amazes me is their complete lack of pride. I have dated women who've made twice as much as I earn (which is a decent salary in itself), and it would still never occur to me to let someone else support me or to ask for, much less accept, money from someone I'm casually dating. I have this nagging little thing called pride. If you have your own, then no one can leave you penniless or homeless. I put up with so much less shit in my relationships because I'm not reliant on anyone to support me. If you don't control my purse strings, you actually have to treat me well and respect me. And if you don't, it's all the easier for me to walk away. It's why I insist on living alone instead of shacking up. It's why I don't do joint bank accounts or co-sign for a lover to buy a hooptie. These folks who are out there trying to buy affection in a desperate attempt not to be alone are sad and stupid. But the people willing to prey on them are, in my world view, much worse. They're amoral, emotionally manipulative and even a bit sociopathic.

I have never seen the movie. Was that a deleted scene, or did I read that incorrectly? If it was a deleted scene I have to ask, who in the world would CUT Judge Judy from their movie?!

I have not seen it, and I've been viewing pretty regularly.

I thought this was a really strong episode. Rainbow continues to be my favorite with Diane running a close second. I would have died if Rainbow had done a Supremes song for karaoke.

I didn't hear her say the hot tub was uninsured. I heard her say the deductible on her homeowners was $1,000 so it made no sense to file a claim. Also, she said that she and her husband had both recently lost their jobs, which is why they couldn't afford to replace the cover. Should she have covered it with something else? Absolutely. But I wouldn't say she bought a hot tub she couldn't afford. She bought a hot tub when she could afford it, had recently bought a cover for it, and couldn't afford another one because her circumstances changed. Regarding the father/son case, that was hard to watch. I cringed at the son's horrific grammar in the brief part of the note they showed. When did they stop teaching grammar and spelling in school? Anyway, I felt sad for the son since he seemed much more emotionally hurt by the rift between them. The father said in the hallterview that he wasn't going to have any more contact with his son. I don't have kids, but I have common sense. I can only imagine a few extreme circumstances that would make me cut ties with my own child. I'm always surprised at how often parents and kids 'divorce' one another on these court shows. I agree with whomever it was above that said there aren't bad dogs, but bad dog owners. I would be very sad if my little beagle (who's actually not so little) were suddenly gone from my life. He's a great companion and much more forgiving than the women in my life!

In the first one, there wasn't even a reason to lie. Lying is bad enoug, but I despise when people lie about shit that doesn't even matter. It would have had no effect on the case if the mother had said she was on the lease to help her daughter get the condo. Parents do that kind of stuff all the time. The mother knew they had the walk-through form, so what was the point of lying? Idiot. I'm leaving the second case alone, as I've beaten the 'I'm tired of dog cases' horse to death. But I'm really tired of dog cases. JJ seems to have replaced all those cell phone cases she hated for dog cases. Has anyone else noticed this? I wanted to know why the defendant in the scraped Subaru case was in jail, even though it wasn't germane to the case. Do any of you internet sleuths want to find out and report? I didn't catch her name. I am in Phoenix on a business trip and they apparently air JJ earlier in the day here than they do in Tucson, where I live, so I thought I was going to be deprived of your company this week. Then I figured out how to link to my DVR from my iPad. Yay for technology! Starting off my day without you guys just didn't feel right.

The ruling in the methhead Los Pollos Hermanos customer case ticked me off. I get what JJ was saying about allowing him to stay there for months without making payments but once again she's not living in the real world. Most people would give someone they care about some time to pay back money that's owed. Most people don't immediately throw them out or go to court a month later. That toothless wonder said that the mother never presented him with a Bill. I don't believe that for a second. And it's only $800 for crying out loud. This wasn't cash the mother had laying around. She took out a freaking Care Credit account to help that fool out. She can't repossess the dental work. Give her the money. Sometimes JJ acts likes the verdicts are coming out of her substantial salary. Good grief.

I thought that, too, but upon rewatch I think that JJ took the $50 a week she'd initially agreed to as her payment. Normally JJ hollers that no one works for free but, technically, the naive babysitter wasn't working for free. She was working for next to nothing. My only issue with the defendant in the adoption case was that he waited until the summer was over to complain about the lack of A/C. If that's the reason he moved, he'd have done that within his first week of living there. My first year living in Tucson I was bamboozled into taking an apartment that only had a swamp cooler. I started school in January, so it worked perfectly fine at the time. As a Philly girl, I didn't know anything about them. Anyway, the landlord assured me it was just a cheaper way to have A/C and I'd appreciate the lower electric bills. For my first few months, everything was fine. Then May rolled around and it was hot, y'all. The swamp cooler blew nothing but hot air. They're really useless in the summer. That was the only time in my renting life that I ever broke a lease. I told the landlord there was no way in hell I was staying there for another month. (Actually, hell would have been more comfortable than my apartment was.) He was kind enough to let me out of my lease, thus stripping me of yet another opportunity to be on JJ.

I think that's fine since they're excluding the questionable driver. The problem is when someone who is NOT excluded is driving under insurance that wasn't underwritten for them. That's what the carriers are trying to avoid. The guy in the JJ case wasn't excluded from his Geico policy.

That seems fine to me, since the carrier had a chance to rate him based on his history. It's the people who don't tell the insurance company who is actually driving the car that end up having claims denied.

I'm not saying it's impossible, just saying it's really unusual. There are several reasons they don't like to do this, such as the scenario I mentioned above. JJ gave a great example of someone buying life insurance on a legal stranger. That would open up a Pandora's box of fraudulent claims. I remember watching a show on the ID Channel about a woman who took in boarders. She would buy life insurance on them, murder them, and then collect the premiums. This went on for years! Anyway, they finally caught her and arrested her. Another issue is that an auto carrier wants to charge the correct premium for the correct driver. If I can buy insurance for someone else's car, they get the benefit of my zip code, which has low premiums, my good credit history, my clean driving record, etc. So if my cousin from Philly who's had a couple of DUIs, a license that is frequently suspended, multiple at-fault accidents, and never paid a bill on time in his life could insure his car under my policy for about $500 a year when his premium should be closer to $4,000 per year, the insurance company isn't collecting the right amount of premium for the risk. The guy on the show had a Geico policy. There's nothing wrong with Geico, but I wonder if anyone there asked him if he actually owned the car. I get a copy of the title or the sales contract when one of my clients adds a vehicle or buys a new policy. I don't know if direct writers are being so diligent.

I didn't get an episode today. I hate when that happens.

My parents were visiting so they watched with me. Both of them started singing a song about Buster Brown. My dad recently had a stroke and has some difficulty with recall, but he remembered the entire song. It was a cool moment for me.

If your carrier agreed to write a policy under your name for your mom's car make sure you have that documented in writing. I know it's unsolicited advice, and you can take it with a grain of salt, but JJ is actually right about that. You need to have an insurable interest in something. Otherwise, I could buy a policy on my neighbor's house and torch it for the insurance payout. The question isn't whether or not they'll let you buy the coverage. I've learned from watching JJ that not all insurance agents are thorough. The issue usually comes up when there's a claim. They'll collect money from you all day, but getting them to pay a claim may be another story. Hence my suggestion to document that they're aware you don't own the car. I'm not saying it's not possible, just saying it's unusual. None of the carriers I represent will do it.

I think Byrd is cool. Anyone okay in JJ's eyes is okay in mine!

This is strictly anecdotal, but everyone I know who collects sneakers is habitually and chronically broke. For example, my younger sister has hundreds of pairs of Jordans and the like. But when she wanted to come to AZ to spend this Thanksgiving with the family, she got my mom to buy a plane ticket for herself, her baby daddy, and her kid. She asked me first, and I told her hell to the no. The next time she posts a picture on her Facebook wall about her latest sneaker acquisition, I'm should remind her that that behavior is why she's always freaking broke. Of course, then she'd probably take me on JJ to sue me for defamation of character. Can y'all tell how much I'm looking forward to Thanksgiving? BTW, Happy Turkey Day, everyone.

I could live the rest of my life without seeing another freaking pitbull case. Thanks for the recap, Toaster. Now I know I can skip that one when I watch tonight (which is, like 8 full hours after you get to see JJ!)