All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[BubblingKettle]

In addition to a peanut-shape mouth, she had squinty eyes and bizarre facial expressions

This description deserves 5 gavels.  I can't stop laughing at 'peanut-shape mouth.'

 

A Very Good Friendship - This is a variation of gift vs. loan: yes, this is blessing vs. gift vs. loan - why?  Because the litigants met on Christian Mingle.  The defendant was a really slick swindler, so much so that JJ had to ask: "Smith, is that your real name?"  Ouch.  That'll teach him for meeting women online with a financial interest rather than a romantic one.  Three blessed gavels.  Amen.

My days of online dating are long gone (primary reason: I have no patience for bullshit), but I have always had a strong feeling that Christian Mingle has a number of scam artists using it as a devil's playground.....some con-men and con-women probably salivate at the prospect of religiously-minded people looking to "bless others" and earn Heavenly brownie points. The too-trusting Christians (like the plaintiff) are led to believe they're doing "the Lord's work" by getting their friend/date out of a so-called jam, while Jesus is hollering, "Dammit! Have some common sense! And stop using ME as your excuse, ya loser!" {I like my Jesus to be down-to-Earth.} 

 

The jewelry case was a snoozeroo. C'mon, ladies, go put on your Quacker Factory sweaters, make more uggo earrings, and get over it.

[27bored]

OK, real talk re Lucille Ball: I pegged her as a hairdresser. I saw her 'do and her faces and I was like, "I wonder if she does hair". No shade meant to anyone, but hairdressers are some of the loopiest people around. I don't know if it's the constant inhalation of fumes, but yeah. I went out with a girl who does hair ("I does hair", "you do hair?", "I does" -- Divorce Court reference) and she was a little...off. That said, Sheila Whitehead needs her own show. Better yet, they need to cast her on Lizard Lick Towing.

 

My days of online dating are long gone (primary reason: I have no patience for bullshit), but I have always had a strong feeling that Christian Mingle has a number of scam artists using it as a devil's playground.....some con-men and con-women probably salivate at the prospect of religiously-minded people looking to "bless others" and earn Heavenly brownie points. The too-trusting Christians (like the plaintiff) are led to believe they're doing "the Lord's work" by getting their friend/date out of a so-called jam, while Jesus is hollering, "Dammit! Have some common sense! And stop using ME as your excuse, ya loser!" {I like my Jesus to be down-to-Earth.}.

 

I agree. I also think online dating is a boon for people who kind of need people to get by, if that makes any sense. It's kind of like dating in your twenties. A lot of young people move in together and start playing house in their 20s not just because they like each other, but it's also a thing of economic need. Both have a bunch in student loans and/or don't make a lot of money, so they figure it's easier to live with their girlfriend/boyfriend and pool together their incomes and share expenses because it's either that or have a roommate (they can't have sex with). So I think with online dating you get a lot of people (probably more men than women) who are job-to-job, probably have a record, a kid or two with another woman or two who they were never married to...or two, or just have fallen on hard financial times and need a woman to more or less live off of. There are a lot of women like the plaintiff out there who are stable and secure who are like prey for sorry ass men like the defendant.

Edited May 12, 2015 by 27bored

[AngelaHunter]

In addition to a peanut-shape mouth, she had squinty eyes and bizarre facial expressions

 

Gotta love her Audrey Hepburn hairstyle and little black dress, that is, if Audrey had been tacky enough to wear a see-through chiffon dress in the middle of the day. Oh, and her current boyfriend? He may have slapped her and knocked her head against a wall, but he didn't actually beat her, so what's the problem?

 

Ah, Christians! This woman gave four thousand dollars to that scammer after knowing him less than a year. 4K, of real money! I can't even comment on how pathetic, stupid and sad that is. Maybe it's just me, but I saw nothing in him worth that kind of money, or any money at all. I was very impressed at JJ knowing the names of all those dating sites, though.

 

Slumlord?

 

Does no one who appears on this show EVER take the time to watch it before having their moment in the sun here?

 

Oily slumlord gave us yet another mildly amusing hearsay convo:

 

OS: Her mother-in-law told me....

JJ : You can't tell me what her MIL told you!

OS: Okay. I was informed by someone...

 

The only interesting part of the artsy-crafty jewelry case: Plaintiff stated she expected to be renumerated for her loss.

[teebax]

This description deserves 5 gavels.  I can't stop laughing at 'peanut-shape mouth.'

 

My days of online dating are long gone (primary reason: I have no patience for bullshit), but I have always had a strong feeling that Christian Mingle has a number of scam artists using it as a devil's playground.....some con-men and con-women probably salivate at the prospect of religiously-minded people looking to "bless others" and earn Heavenly brownie points. The too-trusting Christians (like the plaintiff) are led to believe they're doing "the Lord's work" by getting their friend/date out of a so-called jam, while Jesus is hollering, "Dammit! Have some common sense! And stop using ME as your excuse, ya loser!" {I like my Jesus to be down-to-Earth.} 

 

The jewelry case was a snoozeroo. C'mon, ladies, go put on your Quacker Factory sweaters, make more uggo earrings, and get over it.

I don't know that site first-hand; I suspect if I tried to sign up on Christian Mingle being a black, lesbian, atheist, it might cause their server to explode. However, I think there are scammers on all those dating sites. There are honest people, too, but you have to be savvy, for sure.

 

A friend of mine recently separated from her hubby. She's of the mindset that the best way to get over one guy is to get under the next. I think she should take a year off and just work on herself, but what the hell do I know? So, anyway, she's been hitting all those sights pretty heavily. Her profile is a current picture and she's honest that she is just looking for something casual. It's no surprise she gets lots of responses. However, it's been an endless series of losers. She's at a point where if a guy just showed up looking remotely like his picture and had at least 3/4 of his teeth she'd be thrilled. 

[sleekandchic]

I loved the Lost Jewels case because of the litigants. Each woman was soft-spoken and well-spoken with her lovely Southern lilt. Each woman was understandable in her clear recitation of events.

I especially liked the plaintiff because even when she realized she was about to lose her case, she remained calm and pleasant, and reiterated her logical reasoning for the lawsuit. And!... she used "whom" correctly in her hallterview!

There's one overriding reason I decided to comment on Lost Jewels though. As the defendant told her story, her chest developed deeper splotches of red. It has always bothered me that JJ has often accused litigants of lying and deceit based on splotchy red chests. She authoritatively proclaims that the splotch is PROOF of lies, especially if the witness is a teen or youngish woman. Ridiculous! As an honest, hardworking Swedish girl with stereotypical Nordic blonde hair/blue eyes/fair skin, I am no stranger to the splotch.

JJ absolutely believed the defendant today, gave her the benefit of the doubt, and didn't comment once on the lady's blushing chest. I hope Madame J remembers this case as future reference. :)

Meanwhile, peanut-mouth lady with the ping-pong sex life sounded like she spent most of her time with a drink and a smoke, usually passed out.

Edited May 13, 2015 by sleekandchic

[AngelaHunter]

However, I think there are scammers on all those dating sites. There are honest people, too, but you have to be savvy, for sure.

 

I'm sure there are sincere people, but we just never hear about them. Christian or not (and I'm not) I'm pretty sure if I hooked up with someone (not just online but anywhere) who asked for four thousand dollars (sorry I just can't get over that) I'd quickly be yelling, "Next!" right after I stopped the laughing fit.

 

I have mixed emotions about these women getting their money back. On the one hand, I love seeing JJ rip scammers apart, but on the other I wonder how these ridiculous women will ever learn a lesson. "I'm a Christian. I'm a nice person" is the excuse we've heard a million times for pitiful women trying to buy the affections of total losers.

[AZChristian]

Just watched the jewelry case.

It would seem that a bailment was created. The defendant had to exercise reasonable care to ensure the security of the plaintiff's property. I thoroughly disagree with JJ's ruling.

No, I'm not an attorney, but I frequently stay at Holiday Inn Express hotels.

[Quof]

Aw, I love it when JJ litigants have distinctive names so I can find their social media.

 

Giggle Face "I borrowed her my car" Gwen Hackensmith is on Facebook talking about her appearance on Judge Judy, and can't wait to be sued again so she make a return appearance. 

[Zahdii]

Hard to believe she's a mother.

[Guest]

The hell with the Christian Minglers? Mingle Man was a total swindler and I can't believe he only "befriended" one lady on that dating site and asked for "blessings."

Blessings. Eesh.

[AZChristian]

Yeah, you know there's a reason why JJ asked if he had gotten money from anyone else during that time frame.  They don't keep her there because she's pretty; they keep her because she's smart.

[Quof]

Christian Minglers case was Number 1 on the docket.    What does that mean? Are we starting over?

[Intocats]

My days of online dating are long gone (primary reason: I have no patience for bullshit), but I have always had a strong feeling that Christian Mingle has a number of scam artists using it as a devil's playground.....some con-men and con-women probably salivate at the prospect of religiously-minded people looking to "bless others" and earn Heavenly brownie points. The too-trusting Christians (like the plaintiff) are led to believe they're doing "the Lord's work" by getting their friend/date out of a so-called jam, while Jesus is hollering, "Dammit! Have some common sense! And stop using ME as your excuse, ya loser!" {I like my Jesus to be down-to-Earth.} 

 

 

 

 

Word to this, Coolwhiplite. I'll bet Jesus is shaking his head in pure disbelief over all the crap that is done in his name. Mr. "Is That Your Real Name?" Smith was a scammer of the first order, and I don't doubt that he poses as a Christian to get over on gullible women.

 

My last foray into online dating introduced me to a guy who seemed nice in his e-mails, and he resembled his photos. But…the first thing he mentioned when we sat down at the restaurant was that he was sore from a fistfight with his roommate the night before (a fistfight and a roommate at age 54 or thereabouts!) and that his estranged wife (originally he said he was divorced) had a restraining order on him.

 

I listened to him run on and on about his evil ex for about 20 minutes, then pretended that I got an emergency text from home and had to leave.

 

At about 1:00 the next morning, I received an e-mail from him, waxing eloquent about how great it was to meet me and wanting to schedule our next "rendezvous". I sent a polite reply wishing him well with his future dates but I didn't think we were a match.

 

A couple of days later, I received an e-mail from the dating site. In legalese, it said that this man's membership had been terminated by the site and any future communication that I might have with him was "at your own risk".

 

Needless to say, I haven't been on another online date since. I'm very happy with my family, friends and cats, thank you very much. This was a scary and weird experience, but no man has ever asked me for a loan or a gift; or as Mr. Scammer Smith would say, "a blessing".

[Rick Kitchen]

Just watched the jewelry case.

It would seem that a bailment was created. The defendant had to exercise reasonable care to ensure the security of the plaintiff's property. I thoroughly disagree with JJ's ruling.

No, I'm not an attorney, but I frequently stay at Holiday Inn Express hotels.

I totally disagreed with JJ on that ruling.  The plaintiff had an expectation of her property being kept safe.

[AngelaHunter]

The plaintiff had an expectation of her property being kept safe.

 

But doesn't that only apply if someone is being paid to keep your stuff safe? If you leave belongings with someone and those belongings get stolen - and it's not as if her jewelry bin was left on the street - I can't see how it was the defendant's fault.

 

I'm not a lawyer but I'm sure I'd that if items are left with someone then they are obliged to use only ordinary care which the def. seemed to have done.  At least that's what I got from JJ's analogy that if you leave i.e. your laptop at a friend's home and a thief breaks in and steals it, it's not your friend's fault.

 

My last foray into online dating introduced me to a guy who seemed nice in his e-mails, and he resembled his photos. But…the first thing he mentioned when we sat down at the restaurant was that he was sore from a fistfight with his roommate the night before (a fistfight and a roommate at age 54 or thereabouts!)

 

O.M.G. Not surprised it's your last foray. I AM surprised we haven't seen him on JJ yet. Sounds like quite the catch.

[NowVoyager]

After spending a long time just dying for some new episodes, the ones I've watched lately have been kinda..... meh. I've enjoyed reading the recaps, comments & meta-discussions here more than the actual show.

Speaking of meta-discussions----I watched The Wendy Williams Show today & Melissa Rivers was the guest. She was promoting her book about her late mother. It turns out Joan & Judy were good friends! (Melissa actually played JJ dvds when her mom was on life support to see if it would help her come around.) Can't you just imagine those two fiesty broads hanging out?! I bet they were a hoot! JJ mentioned once that she likes her vodka, so my vision involves them cocktailing, well-coiffed & telling it like it is! Oh, to have been a fly on that wall....

Edited May 13, 2015 by NowVoyager

[Quof]

Re. the jewellery case, Judy definitely got it wrong. The defendant was a bailee for hire - she was being compensated. That means she had an obligation to care for the plaintiff's items as if they were her own.  If she were doing it for free, she would be a gratuitous bailee, and would be held to a lower standard. 

[27bored]

Yeah the jewelry case was another example of Judge Bougie not understanding how life works for people aren't rich and wealthy. It's just like when she lectures people about getting renter's insurance. I agree its a necessary evil, but for most people who don't live in NYC or LA, if they can afford to pay rent + insurance premium that they might never need and their other bills, they probably wouldn't be renting in the first place.

[AZChristian]

And if the jewelry had been stolen after being put out on display, it would have been different.  The defendant didn't know if it had been stolen or just lost during the move . . . she had a responsibility to see that it was moved safely, and did not meet that obligation.

 

She didn't look like someone who would have stolen anything, but I thought it was odd that she rebuffed the plaintiff's offers to help look for the bin.

[teebax]

Re. the jewellery case, Judy definitely got it wrong. The defendant was a bailee for hire - she was being compensated. That means she had an obligation to care for the plaintiff's items as if they were her own.  If she were doing it for free, she would be a gratuitous bailee, and would be held to a lower standard.

I agree completely. The owner of the consignment shop should have had Bailee's coverage. Had the plaintiff had homeowner's insurance, she could have claimed the jewelry under her policy, although there's usually a sublimit for jewelry. However, the onus to insure those items was on the defendant. I think JJ got it wrong.

[AZChristian]

Yeah the jewelry case was another example of Judge Bougie not understanding how life works for people aren't rich and wealthy. It's just like when she lectures people about getting renter's insurance. I agree its a necessary evil, but for most people who don't live in NYC or LA, if they can afford to pay rent + insurance premium that they might never need and their other bills, they probably wouldn't be renting in the first place.

 

 

 

We were homeowners for many years here in AZ.  We recently sold the house and moved into a rental to avoid all of the hassles of homeownership.  Yes, we have renters insurance. 

[AZChristian]

I agree completely. The owner of the consignment shop should have had Bailee's coverage. Had the plaintiff had homeowner's insurance, she could have claimed the jewelry under her policy, although there's usually a sublimit for jewelry. However, the onus to insure those items was on the defendant. I think JJ got it wrong.

I thought it was odd that JJ didn't jump all over the bailee for not having business insurance.  She told the bailor that she should have had insurance, but didn't do anything but ask the bailee, and then didn't tell her that she - as a business owner responsible for the belongings of others - should have had coverage.

 

The bailor should have gotten 70% of the value of her jewelry, since the bailor would have gotten 30% anyway for any sold jewelry.

[iwasish]

I'm sure there are sincere people, but we just never hear about them. Christian or not (and I'm not) I'm pretty sure if I hooked up with someone (not just online but anywhere) who asked for four thousand dollars (sorry I just can't get over that) I'd quickly be yelling, "Next!" right after I stopped the laughing fit.

 

I have mixed emotions about these women getting their money back. On the one hand, I love seeing JJ rip scammers apart, but on the other I wonder how these ridiculous women will ever learn a lesson. "I'm a Christian. I'm a nice person" is the excuse we've heard a million times for pitiful women trying to buy the affections of total losers.

If someone I met online or pretty much anywhere asked me for 4K.... I'd say "what a coincidence, I was just going to ask you for 5K" and see how fast they ran.

[Quof]

But someone who takes stuff to a consignment shop still owns the stuff. The plaintiff should have had insurance on her jewelry business to cover this.

Correct, the plaintiff should have had insurance, but the defendant was still being compensated for taking care of her property and therefore had a duty to safeguard it.  When I take my clothes to the drycleaner, I still own them but they have an obligation to return them to me in the condition in which they arrived.  They are in the business of handling things that belong to other people.  

 

And if she did have insurance, her insurer would have paid her, then gone after the defendant as the party responsible for the loss, anyway.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Quof

[6 MeowMeowBeenz]

Meanwhile, peanut-mouth lady with the ping-pong sex life sounded like she spent most of her time with a drink and a smoke, usually passed out.

 

Peanut mouth lady inspired me to coin a new descriptive phrase: Slow Witted Mouth Breather, henceforth to be abbreviated as SWMB

Edited May 13, 2015 by 6 MeowMeowBeenz

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

 

I especially liked the plaintiff because even when she realized she was about to lose her case, she remained calm and pleasant, and reiterated her logical reasoning for the lawsuit. And!... she used "whom" correctly in her hallterview!

I really did enjoy the two lovely Southern ladies chatting about the consignment shop - they were a breath of fresh air and I'm sure JJ allowed them to keep talking because they used proper English and looked like they had washed themselves within the past week. 

 

And I forgot to mention - earlier in the week was the case with the two lesbians with the engagement ring and karate school? Did anybody catch where the plaintiff got the ring? There's nothing that says "let's get hitched" than buying an engagement ring at Kohl's. 

[barbedwire]

"Looked like they washed themselves in the past week" - LOL!  Good observation. Needs to be a new requirement for getting on Judge Judy's show.  Like covering your bra straps and not wearing shorts or jeans with holes in them.

[AngelaHunter]

That's why I loved the red headed peanut mouth lady!......... She had terrific hair!

 

Yes, she did. I bet it bounced back into place beautifully after Lover-Boy knocked her head into that wall.

[Rick Kitchen]

There was a rerun this morning where JJ ruled that a woman could collect on the loan she had given the ex boyfriend to pay for his truck, but she couldn't collect on the interest on the truck payment because they had never discussed his paying the interest, just the main payment.  That was ludicrous.

[27bored]

We were homeowners for many years here in AZ.  We recently sold the house and moved into a rental to avoid all of the hassles of homeownership.  Yes, we have renters insurance.

 

That's different. You guys chose to forgo homeownership after seeing what a pain in the ass it is (I feel you, btw). But JJ advises renter's insurance to broke ass college students (or their age equivalent), struggling single mother's, and people with menial jobs renting sections of other people's homes.

[basiltherat]

Regarding consignments, how can a dollar amount be put on homemade jewelry that is put on consignment?  The value is whatever the final consumer(s) will pay, minus the shop's percentage, which hadn't happened yet.  How could you compute a value?  That would be like having a garage sale where someone stole an item -- what is the value of an item that had not yet been "boughten"?

[AlleC17]

If someone I met online or pretty much anywhere asked me for 4K.... I'd say "what a coincidence, I was just going to ask you for 5K" and see how fast they ran.

So funny!  One time I was going to Westchester County from NYC, and it was either a looong walk to Grand Central Station, or a short subway hop to GCS.  I didn't have enough money for the subway.  I homeless guy came up asking me for some money for coffee and breakfast and I said I didn't have enough for that but did he have the cost of a subway token.  He actually did look to see if he did, which was nice.  ;-p  But yeah, if a dude I had only known for a short while (or even a long while) wanted $4k from me, I would fall over laughing.

[Toaster Strudel]

Sorry I'm late!  Doctor's appointment this morning.  I'll be away tomorrow and Friday, I hand the gavels over to a volunteer!

 

Nineteen Year Old Clunker - LOL but this was a luxury model with all the amenities, the only thing it was missing is the court-mandated luxury breathalizer, special to allow the plaintiff to drive drunk!  Watch Judy ferret out the cute little work around against the DUIs these two hustlas had concocted.  Three gavels.

 

Roozeboom -  Did the defendant give the plaintiff many $20 bills or twice $300?  She said $20 but the answer said $300... that's fishy.  The video of her keying the plaintiff's car was a cruel disappointment... the fake witness was fun, and so was the confession at the end.  When JJ said: "I killed that sucker because I didn't like him" she sounded eerily natural, like it's not the first time she said these words.  Two gavels.

 

Trailer Custody - Aye!  Poor kid!  The mother runs around from man to man, the father lives in a trailer and is "accident-prone," and the fight for her custody seems centered around the money that comes with said custody.  Two depressed gavels.

 

Greasy Haired Son - Get caught driving without insurance or registration and the fine is only $150?  No wonder no one bothers!  It's all win!  Irresponsible junior barber took daddy's settlement money and played it in Atlantic City and lost.  Watch the hallterview or a father and son hug... well sorta... daddy had to avoid the oil slick on Junior's head.  Two slippery gavels.

 

[iwasish]

That's different. You guys chose to forgo homeownership after seeing what a pain in the ass it is (I feel you, btw). But JJ advises renter's insurance to broke ass college students (or their age equivalent), struggling single mother's, and people with menial jobs renting sections of other people's homes.

They may well be broke ass college students, but they always seem to have plenty of valuable stuff that gets lost or stolen or disappears mysteriously. Like laptops bought with their student loan money or expensive TVs etc. Truly broke ass people don't have that kind of valuable stuff.

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

When JJ said: "I killed that sucker because I didn't like him" she sounded eerily natural, like it's not the first time she said these words.

 

I know rite? That was just excellent. Why did the plaintiff have to make us listen to her dopey fake witness and watch that useless video when she had a confession from the "Tawnya Roozeboom" - sporting 1972-era raccoon eyes -  in her hot little hand?

 

Quote

Nineteen Year Old Clunker

 

The Hustlas from Minnesota - Drunk Driving Lisa and Big Stoop Brian, thank you for once again making me realize how idyllic my life is. Brian? That shiny, clingy shirt is doing you no favours. Trust me on that. JFC. Much ado about a Volkswagen that has reached the age of majority.

 

Quote

Trailer Custody

 

Oh. My. Gawd. Def. is disabled for life, due to having only nine toes.  I was pondering what the plaintiff found so irresistible about Mr. Campoe, that is until she opened her mouth. I swear my IQ dropped significantly listening to them as they tortured and murdered the English language as they described their love gone wrong. The fact that these two, who don't appear to have two firing neurons between them, have reproduced makes me very sad for the unfortunate children.

 

Quote

daddy had to avoid the oil slick on Junior's head

 

Greaseball Enrico Jr. is 29 years old, so irresponsible he can't drive without getting his license taken away and expects Daddy to bail him out. Nothing new here.

 

They may well be broke ass college students, but they always seem to have plenty of valuable stuff that gets lost or stolen or disappears mysteriously.

 

Yeah! We've seen the broke-ass contingent - some of whom claimed to be homeless - suing for up to 5K of shit they left in someone's house as they couch-surfed. As for the single mothers: single motherhood was a choice they made, so I don't want to hear them whining about how they can't afford stuff.

Edited May 13, 2015 by AngelaHunter

[Quof]

Renters' insurance can cost as little as a pack of cigarettes a month.   And it not only covers your belongings, it provides you with liability protection, for example, if you leave a candle burning and the entire building catches fire, or you let the bathtub overflow and the downstairs neighbours are flooded out.  I would go without a lot of things to afford renters' insurance, and did when I was a poor student.

[AZChristian]

Renters' insurance can cost as little as a pack of cigarettes a month.   And it not only covers your belongings, it provides you with liability protection, for example, if you leave a candle burning and the entire building catches fire, or you let the bathtub overflow and the downstairs neighbours are flooded out.  I would go without a lot of things to afford renters' insurance, and did when I was a poor student.

 

And it also covers you if your pit bull bites someone (unless pit bulls are excluded on your policy). 

 

All of this talk of poor students who can't afford renters insurance to cover their Wii, laptop, and smart flat-screen 45-inch TV reminds me of the days when I worked with a utility company.  It was amazing that folks who were filing claims for power outages had always just gotten back from Sam's Club where they stocked their freezers with t-bone steaks and lobsters.  No one's freezer was ever empty.  Oh, and they'd already thrown away the meat because it had gone bad, and darn it . . . we didn't keep the receipt.  (Nice try, but we didn't reimburse with no proof of purchase.)

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

 

They may well be broke ass college students, but they always seem to have plenty of valuable stuff that gets lost or stolen or disappears mysteriously. Like laptops bought with their student loan money or expensive TVs etc. Truly broke ass people don't have that kind of valuable stuff.

I admit I never had renter's insurance back when I was a renter and was pretty poor - but if I rented again, you bet I would. And if these folks can have a big screen TV and an Ipad and a MacBook and a cell phone that costs more than my first car, and hair-dids and long ass nails and earrings the size of pizza pans, and big old crucifixes (cos there's nothing like Jesus lying between your breasteses while you're bald face lying in front of JJ and her millions of minions) and designer clothes and designer purses (most like purchased from the Purse Lady out of the her minivan outside your office) - you can afford renter's insurance. Shoot, these are the kind of people who purchase car insurance AFTER the accident (**get mah phone and call The General! I can get same day insurance AND choose my due date!!!)

[Brattinella]

Speaking of choosing a due date, does anyone else have a problem with Sprint waiting until the 10th of the month or so to send their bill?  Everyone else seems to meet the "first of the month" custom, why can't they?

[teebax]

I can't believe I wasted more time before this post and read up on consignments. The consignment and dry cleaner comparison is apples and oranges. They are not the same and don't follow the same rules. I am not going to bore people with more talk about it but if you google it, you will see that rules and laws for consignment are different than for other businesses. They are even different than for pawn shops. And I think that even the point of the case was theft, not damage. JJ ruled that the defendant did all she could to protect the product, was not negligent. Now if the plaintiff was suing because the defendant dropped her stuff and damaged it, I think she would have had a case. 

 

My main point is that if you are in business, you should know stuff and protect yourself.

I pulled up a few consignment shops we insure in my agency (I don't write them; I'm a construction expert.) None of the policies include bailees coverage, so I was wrong about that. To paraphrase JJ, I haven't been wrong since 1978, so that came as a surprise. It is, indeed a very different exposure from what a dry cleaner has.

 

We are including some Property of Others coverage on the policies as a safeguard. PPO coverage is a property coverage and Bailees is a liability coverage. So having the property coverage is not presuming the shop owner is liable, but it would cover that property should the owner want to do that - perhaps for good faith. I asked our small business insurance expert about it, and she said the PPO coverage isn't necessary but nice to have. She said a smart consignment shop owner will have built into the contract that you turn over your items at your own risk and should be insuring them yourself.

 

So thanks for the additional information and for helping to educate me on something I didn't know. I really do love this board!

[Quof]

As you noted, there is a difference between first party (property of others) and third party coverage.  I'm not suggesting the plaintiff's items were covered under the defendant's insurance as insured property. The claim against the defendant in negligence should be covered by her liability policy, and the law of bailment says she was legally responsible.  And if her liability insurer excluded the claim, she would be on the hook personally. Did we even hear the terms of the bailment contract that said whether they were held at the plaintiff's risk?  

Edited May 13, 2015 by Quof

[27bored]

But aren't those also choices? So if you choose those options above, you in turn choose not to have renters insurance. So they are making the same kind of choices as  AZChristian made. Just because you are those three things above and don't have renter's insurance doesn't mean someone else has to be responsible. I mean, if they are responsible for a loss heck yeah, they should be made liable. But their poor choices thrust on someone else, I don't agree with it.

 

I agree. My point wasn't so much that it's pointless to have renter's insurance than it is that for JJ to advise that as a way of not sympathizing with people who sue for loss of property is a little...pointless. I can see it being a bit negligent for working professionals to not have it and then sue for all their fly stuff, but with the groups I mentioned, they didn't have it likely because they didn't it existed and/or they couldn't afford it. I've seen JJ not award people damages because the other person, while probably liable, couldn't afford it anyway.

 

They may well be broke ass college students, but they always seem to have plenty of valuable stuff that gets lost or stolen or disappears mysteriously. Like laptops bought with their student loan money or expensive TVs etc. Truly broke ass people don't have that kind of valuable stuff.

 

Oh you'd be surprised. I'm sure everybody's stuff becomes top of the line when they're filing a claim for it, but as my mother once eloquently said, "these days even broke motherfuckers have iPhones". And I think the 5k limit is usually pretty arbitrary as it pertains to the actual value of the items lost or stolen, but when you think about having to replace them, it's probably around that much (sometimes).

 

I don't have a dog in the fight since I own (no shade), but here are my two questions:

 

1) Has anybody ever seen someone on JJ actually say they have renter's insurance?

2) Has JJ ever asked a landlord if their home owner's policy covers losses to a renter's property? She might've on one or two occasions, but it's not a typical question.

[Quof]

A landlord's insurance policy does not cover a tenant's property as insured property; the landlord does not have an insurable interest and therefore can't insure it.  If the landlord is responsible for the loss of or damage to the tenant's property, then the tenant sues the landlord and the landlord's liability insurer will respond.

[Milz]

Regarding consignments, how can a dollar amount be put on homemade jewelry that is put on consignment?  The value is whatever the final consumer(s) will pay, minus the shop's percentage, which hadn't happened yet.  How could you compute a value?  That would be like having a garage sale where someone stole an item -- what is the value of an item that had not yet been "boughten"?

 

I can't speak specifically about consignments, but I can speak specifically about pricing homemade jewelry, etc. It's typically the price the maker paid for the materials, the amount of the materials used,  the work hours put into making the item , plus extra that covers taxes and something for the old profit. So whatever that amount would be is what my lowest price I'd sell it at.  For example, if I make something that used $30 of material and 6 hours of my time, I wouldn't sell it for anything less than $35 (which would cover materials + state sales tax + state & Federal income tax, but not my time).

[AngelaHunter]

But then, they would also have to actually have insurance on their cars to begin with so what am I thinking.

 

Insurance? Most of the time they don't even have licenses.

[6 MeowMeowBeenz]

There's nothing that says "let's get hitched" than buying an engagement ring at Kohl's.

 

I'd say "better than Kmart"

[teebax]

 

Greasy Haired Son - Get caught driving without insurance or registration and the fine is only $150?  No wonder no one bothers!  It's all win!  Irresponsible junior barber took daddy's settlement money and played it in Atlantic City and lost.  Watch the hallterview or a father and son hug... well sorta... daddy had to avoid the oil slick on Junior's head.  Two slippery gavels.

I'm late to this discussion since I missed all four JJ episodes yesterday, but I recently reviewed an MVR for a guy who had a violation for driving without insurance and registration, and the fine was almost $1,000. It's surprising to me how much fines can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I agree with you, with a fine that low, there's little incentive for people to get property insured and registered.

Edited May 14, 2015 by teebax

[BubblingKettle]

After watching the episodes today, I'm left with these thoughts:

• I never knew that a truck/car could be disabled remotely. That's a handy tool for the creditors, but there's something about it that gives me the creeps. "Big brother is watching" or something.

 

• I realize that I now look in the gallery for Googly Eyes, the girl that might be a Googly Eyes lookalike, and an orange-skinned platinum blonde woman who I call Orangina.

 

• STAL-KING

[Brattinella]

I have heard of the police having the capability of remotely shutting off a car (like a Bait Car), but never a rental company.  Big Brother, indeed.

[AngelaHunter]

STAL-KING

 

Areana, did you learn anything, like do not move in with a freaky stalker with a Joker-like permagrin and who appears to be high on...something...at all times? Maurice seemed to be programmed to say only: "She owe me the money for the car she wrecked", since that was his answer to every question. He did not deviate. Byrd shakes head in disgust.

 

We had brothers, Bilbo and Frodo,  with dumb facial hair. Oddly short-armed plaintiff seems to be a picture-perfect example of a government worker. Yes, he has all the evidence he needs to win his suit, but well, he didn't bring it. Duh. Def. Frodo is 24 and can't remember how many times or when he got arrested for possession of weed because, well, he's always HIGH on weed. Another one who simply cannot learn by experience.

 

Deactiveated car? I love it. That's what they use in some places on bait cars. Why do I have a feeling that Shawante(?) and Torey (who could probably afford the car he bought if he scaled back on the Happy Meals) have done this before, i.e. bought a  car they couldn't afford and had no intention of paying for, just driving it until it gets repo'd and then rinse and repeat? I bet they didn't know about the deactivation mechinism! Haha. Why the plaintiff, who wasn't working, thought lending them the money was a good idea, I cannot imagine.