The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

cheap furniture:

Personally I wouldn't expect that super-cheap hunk of junk to last much longer than a year. Defendant was so annoying though that I was glad plaintiff got something back even if she didn't deserve it. I think JM just awarded it because def was so evasive and plainly lied about the warranty being on the receipt. Good luck to plaintiff finding anyone who wants to bother fixing that thing. Non-sequitur of the month goes to plaintiff: (Paraphrasing here)JM: "When did you first complain to the store?" Plaintiff: "It's supposed to close (or lock or whatever) with this-" JM: "That's not what I asked."

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

car rental disaster: 

The anatomy of what happens when you can't buy or rent anything in your own name. Def ends up paying 1200$ to rent the old beater for a week - 500$ for the heap itself and over 700$ to fix it. Plaintiff - loved the goofy braids, btw - has no idea how lucky he is that def. didn't crash the car or kill someone  - is a big, stupid moron. Yeah, his junker has overheated before, but this time it was def's fault.  I did enjoy JM reading his illiterate texts verbatim.

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

credit card scam:

OMG. I look at the cast of characters - plaintiff, def, and def's daddy - here and begin to understand why so many women are so desperate. Listening to all of them was excruciating. I'm pretty sure dim-witted def. is no criminal mastermind and had difficulty believing he has a bank account.

[DoctorK]

12 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Good luck to plaintiff finding anyone who wants to bother fixing that thing.

I have had some furniture like that although I have graduated to better stuff since then (some I built myself). The pictures looked really odd, a bunch of the drawer rails seem to have just fallen off the sides for no apparent reason, but the repair is simple and easy requiring a screwdriver and some toothpicks for the simplest fix, go one step better add wood glue to hold the particle board together around the screw holes, that repair lasts about as long as the furniture. I still smell a rat, as I do in cases where litigants claim that with no warning all of a sudden all five (or four) lug nuts fell off one wheel, no noises, no vibration, no hint of what was about to happen.

[AngelaHunter]

Personally? If I had only 200$ to spend on a dresser (and oh I've been there) I would - and did -  go to a second-hand store and buy one, preferably one not made of the thinnest particle board that's going to collapse under normal use.

[meowmommy]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Personally? If I had only 200$ to spend on a dresser (and oh I've been there) I would - and did -  go to a second-hand store and buy one, preferably one not made of the thinnest particle board that's going to collapse under normal use.

That's how I got my current dresser.  It's solid oak, looks and works beautifully and cost me $150.

When I think back, pretty much all of the bedroom furniture I've had in the past was a piece of shit, because I bought retail and couldn't afford the higher end furniture stores.  

[readheaded]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Personally? If I had only 200$ to spend on a dresser (and oh I've been there) I would - and did -  go to a second-hand store and buy one, preferably one not made of the thinnest particle board that's going to collapse under normal use.

A few draws to buying in a furniture store instead of a thrift store is the ability to have the furniture delivered and carried to the room where you'll use it and/or the ability to finance it.  If you don't have a car or only a car and no one to help move a piece (especially up lots of steps), it can be more difficult.  

[meowmommy]

12 minutes ago, readheaded said:

A few draws to buying in a furniture store instead of a thrift store is the ability to have the furniture delivered and carried to the room where you'll use it and/or the ability to finance it.

Honestly, I've had much better luck with thrift store delivery.  I've waited two months for retail furniture stores to deliver my stuff, while I have had the thrift store bring it that afternoon.

[AngelaHunter]

36 minutes ago, meowmommy said:

That's how I got my current dresser. 

Me too! I got it many many years ago for 125$ at a used furniture joint. It's from 1926 - at that time it cost 12.50$ which was pretty expensive then -  and the top is solid bird's eye maple, the mirror real, thick glass. I still love it. Most of my stuff was second-hand in those days.

5 minutes ago, readheaded said:

A few draws to buying in a furniture store instead of a thrift store is the ability to have the furniture delivered

I made sure the place I bought my dresser and a few other items - kitchen table&chairs -  would deliver it.

3 hours ago, DoctorK said:

I still smell a rat, as I do in cases where litigants claim that with no warning all of a sudden all five (or four) lug nuts fell off one wheel, no noises, no vibration, no hint of what was about to happen.

I have a feeling maybe those grandkids had something to do with that but who knows? Screws don't hold very well in cheap particleboard.

[readheaded]

9 hours ago, meowmommy said:

Honestly, I've had much better luck with thrift store delivery.  I've waited two months for retail furniture stores to deliver my stuff, while I have had the thrift store bring it that afternoon.

That's fantastic that they offer that service.  The thrift stores where I live don't deliver or even help put the stuff in your car.

[KittyMom4]

18 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Personally I wouldn't expect that super-cheap hunk of junk to last much longer than a year. Defendant was so annoying though that I was glad plaintiff got something back even if she didn't deserve it.

I purchased one of these cheapies from Target for $120, to use for a seasonal clothing dresser in my closet, put it together myself.  Within 3 months one of the front cross boards broke when I pushed in an overstuffed drawer. I still use it since it's in a closet and I don't care how it looks but as @AngelaHunter says, they are not built to last. 

14 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I have a feeling maybe those grandkids had something to do with that but who knows? Screws don't hold very well in cheap particleboard.

My thought as well.

18 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

OMG. I look at the cast of characters - plaintiff, def, and def's daddy - here and begin to understand why so many women are so desperate. Listening to all of them was excruciating. I'm pretty sure dim-witted def. is no criminal mastermind and had difficulty believing he has a bank account.

What. A. Train. Wreck. All of them made me want to take a hot shower and scrub my skin, ick! I truly think the plaintiff knew what he was getting and hoped he wouldn't get caught. Either that or he is just as stupid as the dimbulb defendant with his gross mush mouth who looked like he crawled out of septic tank to make the taping. They all deserved each other. 

[meowmommy]

1 hour ago, BexKeps said:

Either that or he is just as stupid as the dimbulb defendant with his gross mush mouth who looked like he crawled out of septic tank to make the taping.

At first I thought he had some kind of intellectual disability, and then I came to realize he was just morally disabled.

[SRTouch]

Got up way too early for doctor appt after not getting to bed til 2 am after work - so quicky recap then taking a nap before work tonight.

1. homeowner wants full refund after hiring plumber to fix gas leak: lady may have point about plumber overcharging - sounded like he half expected the utility company to require the extra work, so why didn't the original estimate mention possibility - thing is he did work so no way would home owner be entitled to full refund. Not too sure he wasn't tacking extra on after, especially since utility company was fine with what he said needed to be repaired (my guess is he wanted to bring it to current code but utility inspector grandfathered it) anyway, Litigants wanted lots of money, but nobody got any
2. Silly silly old uber/Lyft driver: this case reminded me of case awhile back (not sure which show) where old dude had dash cam vid which clearly showed he was in the wrong but he STILL insisted otherwise.  This case the old dude reportedly told other driver he had been driving before she was born, and then told MM about his clean driving record. Then he stands in court arguing nonsense. We see a picture of clearly marked intersection with painted arrows in the lanes, old dude admits he was making turn from lane clearly marked with a straight arrow, yet claiming it was other driver's fault because she was going straight (her arrow indicate she could go straight other turn) another of those 'everybody else does it' arguments.... uh, no, not happening..... D got a little greedy and sued for her total damage (over 4 grand) even though her insurance had already paid her - she says she wanted P to pay her and she was going to give the money to her insurance to keep her rates from maybe going up.... that doesn't happened, either - though she does get her deductible paid
3. last case 'nother homeowner suing contractor: this time homeowner replacing windows goes cheap and hires real loser.... first, D apparently hires day laborers off the street corner who have never caulked a window - then gives these guys whatever caulk he had lieing around or what was in the bargain/discount/ closeout bin - and end result was ugly amateur window installation job where caulk on any single window may be any of three different colors - worse than useless as I'd remove what was applied and start fresh rather than try to patch the mess - to top it off, job wasn't completed because some of the windows are wrong size - d agrees it was sloppy job, but oh well, why should he make it right - just because he wax hired to do the job - homeowner wins

[seacliffsal]

On 11/10/2019 at 5:17 PM, Katy M said:

That's just kharmic justice.  And, maybe she should be spending more time making sure her son lives up to his academic responsibilities instead of wasting money on a middle school prom.  If my school had had such a thing, the most my mom would have done was drive me to it (and maybe take a picture of the very rare "me in a dress").  I would have had to pay for anything else I needed/wanted for it.

I probably would have done the same thing just because it literally had no bearing on the case, so just stipulate to it so it doesn't continue to be an arguing point.

However, it was JM who kept bringing up the school and their responsibility in denying the special snowflake his opportunity to attend Prom while still in middle school.

Edited November 14, 2019 by seacliffsal

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Silly silly old uber/Lyft driver: 

The mind, it boggles. This plaintiff has to be one of the dumbest, most slack-jawed, dull-eyed, pig-headed morons ever. He drives for Lyft yet has no idea what the arrows on the roads mean. He obviously feels (and still felt so in the hall) that it means, "Go straight, except if you decide you want to turn left but don't feel like waiting in line." Other people break the law, so what's the big deal? He's been driving for a million years, so don't question him. All that isn't enough so he has the gall, or the stupidity, to sue the person he hit while making an illegal turn. But the judge wasn't fair! What wasn't fair was def claiming the damage on her insurance when it was 100% the moron's fault. I think JM wished she could go over there and bonk his thick head a few times with her gavel.

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

homeowner wants full refund after hiring plumber to fix gas leak:

I'm not sure what was happening here, so I may be totally wrong in thinking that after plaintiff hired def to do the work and he did it, she found out the gas company made a mistake and it was actually up to them to do the job? So she's pissed that she paid for the work and now wants all her money back? I don't know.

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

last case 'nother homeowner suing contractor:

Wow. I swear I could do a better job caulking than this so-called "contractor" did. Yeah, why not just slap gobs of black caulking on a white house, use different colours elsewhere just because, and add insult to injury by not even finishing it? It's the old, "OTGE" (Oh, that's good enough") workmanship, probably from some gang def hired for less than minimum wage. Def was funny in the hall, stating JM did a great job and that he agrees what he did was total shit, but oh, well. Each time Doug mentioned the awful things he did, that the windows he ordered were the wrong size, he was very agreeable. "Right," he says. He really couldn't care less. Plaintiff's lack of front teeth bothered me.

[meowmommy]

2 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I'm not sure what was happening here, so I may be totally wrong in thinking that after plaintiff hired def to do the work and he did it, she found out the gas company made a mistake and it was actually up to them to do the job?

That's kinda what I thought, too.  Seems like if ConEd gave her the wrong information, her beef should be with ConEd.  

I know why it's required, but when someone has NO heat in their house, to make the contractor wait until permits are pulled just seems mean.  Where does she live that she can go 30 days without heat in the dead of winter?  

I have caps on the gas line where it runs behind my electric stove.  Put in by the gas company.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

We see a picture of clearly marked intersection with painted arrows in the lanes

What happened to the lovely brief interlude where they were using Google Earth instead of the 19th century whiteboard?  Thank goodness somebody brought a picture.

Nothing about MM's explanation registered with the doofus plaintiff.  

12 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

What wasn't fair was def claiming the damage on her insurance when it was 100% the moron's fault.

What's also not fair is that even if your insurance pays, and even if your deductible gets covered, nobody covers the loss of value to your car and the increase in your premiums, when you're not at fault.  And it sucks that he filed the suit when he did, so she asked for the premium increase but got stuck because they hadn't yet jumped up at the time of the case.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

end result was ugly amateur window installation job where caulk on any single window may be any of three different colors

What a damn mess.  Never mind the colors; the caulking job itself sucks eggs.

The custom windows are the wrong size because they were measured wrong, but they're not returnable because they're custom windows.  Whaaaa?

[patty1h]

I got mad at the case with the bad window installation because of situations I've seen with my own eyes - some workers feel they can do a half-assed job for POC because... why not.  I've had the super and other workers do work in my apartment and do it sloppy and messy - I had a bathroom mirror replaced and the plaster around the frame was left uneven/not smoothed evenly.  After painting, they've left spots and drips not cleaned up while I see perfect work done in the apartments of the hipsters who've been moving into the building in the last 2-3 years.

They see some demographics differently and think we should be satisfied just to get the minimum effort because they see POC as lesser.  The defendant in the window case gave off that vibe in waves.

[Carolina Girl]

On 11/6/2019 at 6:40 AM, CrazyInAlabama said:

And if the rain is hard enough, it will go over the gutters. 

Exactly.  My rain gutters are well installed but when you have a storm, the water flowing off the roof will often cause an immense amount of overflow.  It handles regular rain very well, but I literally have a waterfall when there is torrential rain.

[Carolina Girl]

Personally I'm looking forward to the case this week that's been previewed where she hammers the defendant about the damage she caused to the plaintiffs.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, patty1h said:

- some workers feel they can do a half-assed job for POC because... why not. 

I'm pretty sure non-POC get ripped off and have lousy jobs done as well. I know it happened to me with someone I hired. I had to psycho-call him from different numbers to get him to show up (after I had paid him a substantial down payment) and he left before the job was completed, never to return. I don't think this particular def cared if his client was white, black or purple. He just did not care, period, and I'm sure he counts on the fact that most of his unsatisfied customers don't bother suing.

1 hour ago, meowmommy said:

Thank goodness somebody brought a picture.

A picture really does speak a thousand words. In this case it was all that was needed.

[Carolina Girl]

Oh man, that Lyft driver is both deaf as a post and dumber than a box of rocks.  "I wasn't wrong."  Dude, your lane was supposed to go forward only; putting on your effing turn signal doesn't magically allow you a left turn from the lane.

And he's full of crap -- he gave her his info and left the scene NOT because he needed to get his client where they needed to go but because he didn't want police to show up and write him a ticket for making an illegal turn.  

I get that it looked like the defendant was "overreaching" in her counterclaim, but she had a reasonable explanation.  Most people don't understand the concept of subrogation of rights.  And I don't see why she would see an increase in rates because of an accident that was not her fault.  Her insurance company will go after the guy for their payments.  

I actually signed up to drive for Uber and did it for about two weeks until I realized I wasn't making any real money.  However, the FIRST thing I did was check with my insurance company to ask about coverage for doing so.  They increased my premium 25% but I had full coverage - plus they told me that failure to let them know I was driving for Uber might have been grounds for their canceling my insurance as a violation of the terms of my policy.  

[AngelaHunter]

5 minutes ago, Carolina Girl said:

Her insurance company will go after the guy for their payments.  

I certainly hope so. His company might also be interested in the fact that he's using his car for a business.

[AZChristian]

16 minutes ago, Carolina Girl said:

Oh man, that Lyft driver is both deaf as a post and dumber than a box of rocks.  "I wasn't wrong."  Dude, your lane was supposed to go forward only; putting on your effing turn signal doesn't magically allow you a left turn from the lane.

And he's full of crap -- he gave her his info and left the scene NOT because he needed to get his client where they needed to go but because he didn't want police to show up and write him a ticket for making an illegal turn.  

He was so proud of his "clean" driving record.  This may explain that.

[meowmommy]

2 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

he didn't want police to show up and write him a ticket for making an illegal turn.

A normal person would think that.  But he was absolutely convinced he was in the right, as evidenced by the fact that he filed the lawsuit in the first place, so why would he think he'd get a ticket?  

[Florinaldo]

I do hope JM was being sarcastic when she complimented the niece on her blouse in the sleazy landlord case. It looked as if she collected scraps that even a thrift store had thrown out and then she sewed them together at random.

[Carolina Girl]

5 hours ago, meowmommy said:

A normal person would think that.  But he was absolutely convinced he was in the right, as evidenced by the fact that he filed the lawsuit in the first place, so why would he think he'd get a ticket?  

Good point!

[Cobalt Stargazer]

"Why haven't you paid him back?"

"Excuse me?"

What do you mean, 'excuse me'? I understood the question, and I'm not standing six feet away from her.

[Carolina Girl]

Oh man, that moron in the I-95 collision case.  Spare me dude - you were looking for a big payday based on nothing.  I am totally convinced this dickhead with dogs TOTALLY changed lanes without looking and that defendant slammed on her brakes to avoid hitting him.  All I had to see was his so-called "damage" - a dislodged bumper, consistent with an emergency braking that often turns the car slightly to the right or to the left.  Had she slammed into him going 50 mph as he claims, he would have been able to check the contents of his hatchback trunk simply by turning his head.

His insurance said no; her insurance said no; so file pro se for $1.6 million.  And I don't believe for one minute he dropped it because it would "take too long."  I think the matter was thrown out by the judge on a motion to dismiss or demurrer by the insurance company.  And I did love his litany of ailments - including glaucoma.  

He got nothing.  Which is more than he deserves.  BTW dude, here's some free legal advice....if you can't get a slip-and-fall lawyer to take your case, you don't HAVE one.  

[Florinaldo]

32 minutes ago, Carolina Girl said:

Oh man, that moron in the I-95 collision case.

I believe he probably went to the same driving school as the Lyft driver from earlier this week. And consulted the same legal sources.

[meowmommy]

How did he sue for $19K when the small claims limit in Massachusetts is $7K?

Loved how they kept cutting to him for his whacked-out facial expressions.  And then he has to make the dramatic shuffle with the walker (and neck collar conveniently hooked around the bar) so we can see how injured he is.  "I can't treat them any more...I can't afford to," as he squeezes out a tear.

I wonder if the lane drawing is accurate--for it to be the way it was drawn, the left lane would have to be an exit only lane.  Why the F can't they go back to using the Google Earth function?  

4 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

And I did love his litany of ailments - including glaucoma.  

That was rich.  As if glaucoma is caused by trauma.  And too funny when MM talks about the $1.6M and says, but your actual damages are $19K, and he has to admit, yes.  Which of course, is still inflated and still not the defendant's fault.  And the bookend at the end is them cutting to the defendant, where she realizes she doesn't have to say a damn word because she's going to win.

[SRTouch]

1. pops suing son over loan and motorcycle: I found these two spend irritating in so many ways. Apparently they spend a lot of time working out ways to avoid following the law or even common sense, even when it would be easier and take less time to just follow the rules. Story goes back to when they were all living in Florida, but the timeline is a little murky as testimony jumps back and forth through time and timeline unclear. If I have this right, back in '16 Sonny's drivers license was about to be suspended by Florida due to nonpayment of child support. Pops loaned Son enough so Son kept his license. Pops supposedly paid for two motorcycles and they rode together even though Pops never had a MC endorsement on his license.... not sure why, getting the endorsement is simple - I've had the endorsement since 72 - when I get my DL renewed I'm asked if I want the endorsement to carry over - haven't ridden in years or owned a bike even longer, but I could legally ride this afternoon.... Pops says he's a truck driver, and I assume being ticketed for riding unlicensed would impact his commercial license, but guess he has better things to do..... Sonny has the endorsement, but we learn that he doesn't bother with insurance because, he explains, FL doesn't require it (we also hear FL doesn't require a helmet if you have at least $10,000 worth of medical insurance) - somewhen in there, while things are good between them, a couple things happen: 1) Sonny gets booted from gf's phone plan and Pops adds him to his plan with understanding Sonny is to pay his portion of bill, and 2) they trade in the bike Sonny rides but Pops owns and get a replacement bike, so most of the bike is paid for with money from Pops' trade in..... problem is, because Pops never bothered to get the MC endorsement he can't legally register either of the bikes - so 'his' bikes are registered in Sonny's name, and since the new bike is not only in his name, and Sonny paid a portion of the purchase, is paying for maintenance and is the primary rider, Sonny figures it's ''his" while Pops argues it should be "his" since paid for most of the purchase. Things may have slid by, but a couple things happen to bring things to a head - first Pops moves to a state where he can now register the bike without being licensed to legally ride, and Sonny misses a phone payment and Pops kicks him off his plan - so while Sonny doesn't fight Pops taking the bike Pops (illegally) rides, he won't let Pops take Sonny's ride...... long drawn out backstory, but really simple case - Pops is suing for 2 things - the money from his trade in that was used to purchase Sonny's ride, and the 'loan' to pay Sonny's child support which saved Sonny from having license suspended...... anybody else wondering what would have happened to the registration of the 2 bikes Pops claimed but were registered in Sonny's name - I wonder if part of reason Pops helped Sonny out with the back support was to keep the MC registrations current...... MM didn't really explain the ruling, but I'm thinking it was rough justice where she gave back the $800 even though 3 years went by without evidence Pops was demanding repayment (Sonny claims some was repaid, but that brings up something that has MM asking Sonny just how lazy could you be? - seems Sonny is back living with baby momma, but continues under court ordered child support because he is too lazy to let court know they're back together). Anyway, I would have dismissed the claim, but think MM awarded Pops $800 to return some of what both agree he was out for Sonny's ride...... sooooo part of what we learn is that in some jurisdictions you don't need a helmet or insurance (or apparently common sense) and others you can't own a bike without a license even though you ride one regularly 
2. Landlord suing tenant over rent: P inherited property from recently deceased mother, and within short time gives long time tenant the boot for missing a rent payment - I could feel some sympathy for both sides, but OTOH both were also clearly wrong in some aspects of case. For P, not only was he dealing with sudden heart attack and loss of mom, but he's suddenly a landlord with a house in disrepair and nonpaying tenant - on other hand, tenant misses rent payment in part due to paycheck being cut due to health issue (I sort of got upset with MM when MM got on D for taking off work because of bursitis, saying she, MM, had to tough it out and that her foot was killing her right today - hey, Marilyn, big, BIG difference between a job where you are sitting behind the bench  (maybe even barefoot with foot elevated for all I know) and a job as a cook where D is on her feet 8-10 hours), and she is renting a roach infested apartment with plumbing issues for herself kids..... ok, both sides get sympathy there, buuuuuttttt, OTOH, landlord doesn't deserve to be collecting rent with ceiling falling down because of upstairs leak and all those roaches crawling around on the video - on Tenant's side, part of her money problems caused by throwing big birthday bash for daughter which resulted in rubber check bouncing and not enough money for rent, and as MM points out it looks like landlord was pretty reasonable when he listed claim for cleanup and damages.... ok, split decision - P gets his reasonable claim for damages, but D does not have to pay the back rent
3. 'nother rent case - this time tenant suing: p claims she had to move when wiring inside wall smoked and charred the walls - claims landlord didn't respond with any sense of urgency and she moved for safety reasons - wants 5 grand for the move and security landlord refuses to return..... D says he responded the next morning, but P was unreasonable and moved out because he didn't come in the middle of the night - says he kept security because of the mess P left when she moved out..... hmmmm on one hand, I would expect landlord to come in the middle of the night if only to kill main circuit and cut power, and at very least offer to put tenant up at a motel for the night - but wouldn't let tenant break lease without giving landlord reasonable amount of time to get electrician in - but but, landlord needs to foot hotel bill until repairs are made if wires are smoking inside walls..... ok, testimony establishes tenant is long term, having lived in apartment for 12 years.... and yep, circuit blew and apartment was without power - management told her we'll send someone in morning (lights blew first about 3:45pm, office told her to flip the breaker, lights came back but blows again complete with smoking and sizzle sounds  15 minutes later, then an hour of phone tag til finally manager says sorry, after 5, seems ya in morning - tenant hot, she's without lights and has 6yo kid and management didn'the even offer her a motel for today night - so she tells manager she's moving..... sounds pretty extreme until I hear she's had maintenance out 2 previous time within yhe month - bad wiring in dining room, bad circuit in control panel, and now sizzle and smoke in bathroom - I'm thinking I'd be moving too 7 less management has licensed electrician instead of complex maintenance coming PDQ...... ah, but there's a problem with tenant's story - seems once she decided she was moving she refused maintenance access to check problem - which as MM points out meant she was putting every other residents in the building at risk.... yep, after commercial we hear from manager - he says electrician was sent the next day, no answer at door, posted 24 hours notice and manager went with pass key and locks had been changed - yep, tenant admits she changed locks.... both sides wrong - management for now keeping someone past 5 to at least go look, and as MM points out, D claim he couldn't send a licensed electrician is nonsense - they're in LA and 8f they tried they could have had a 24 hour electrician there..... I'm still stuck on tenant putting neighbors at risk - she feels it's unsafe for her and her 6yo, but no concern at all for risk to others in building.... as in previous case, landlord failed to provide safe place for the tenant and she is within her rights to break lease - so, MM wants her to explain how she arrived at her 5 grand damage claim - she can break lease, gets back deposit, gets moving expenses etc, but still, 5 grand is reaching - oh course, the ever popular pain and suffering - nope, not happening - so, strike out 3 grand plus - then as she's moving she finds mold behind a dresser - MM says nope, if you never reported mold until after you moved you can't blame management for not fixing it - and, and wait, MM isn't even willing to give moving costs since P refused to give Management a chance to fix problem before she decided to move - MM says she would have given something for a hotel stay until electrician came and did repairs, but P didn't ask for that and even refused to let electrician in the next day - oh, and tenant stayed in apartment the rest of month rent free (so much for pain and suffering for a panic attack because of thinking place was attack bout to burn down)....... case is dismissed

Edited November 14, 2019 by SRTouch

[Carolina Girl]

So I'm guessing the case they've been teasing all last week and this is coming tomorrow.  Because that one looks like a doozy.  Defendant really gets taken to task by Judge Millian.  Unless it was one of the rent cases today?  

[DoctorK]

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

p claims she had to move when wiring inside wall smoked and charred the walls

I started out sympathetic towards the tenant, but that shifted when it was clear that she was shooting for a bonanza. As the case went on, she lost more and more credibility with me, her description of the at issue electrical problem plus two earlier incidents was garbled, one earlier problem  was fixed by changing a fuse in the fuse box, but with the current problem (as directed by the landlord) she went to the breaker box and reset a breaker; sorry I doubt you have both a fuse box and a breaker box. She also said that when the breaker tripped, all of the lights in the apartment went out; I doubt that there is only one circuit for all of the lights and outlets in the apartment, even the house I grew up in (which was built in 1935) had two separate 15 amp 120 volt circuits and it was a tiny one bathroom house.  I don’t think she was dishonest in this, just not knowing what she was talking about. From listening and looking at the picture of the bad light fixture, all she had to do was turn off the bathroom light, reset the breaker again, and keep the bad light off, it sounded like the breaker was only tripping due to the one bad fixture. By the way, from the picture, the problem was in the light fixture outside the wall, not in the wall, and a few soot marks (if indeed they were really soot) are not "charred walls". At least the tenant was pleasant in the hallterview, unlike so many of the losing litigants we see.

[DoctorK]

1 hour ago, meowmommy said:

Why the F can't they go back to using the Google Earth function?  

I wonder if it may be a copyright issue? Maybe Google finally noticed that their material was being used in commercial for profit productions and wanted to get paid.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

pops suing son over loan and motorcycle:

We should rejoice that this daddy produced a son and heir. It a great addition to the gene pool. Sonny, a high-pitched silly dweeb, is a grown man who can't buy his own toys or get his own phone, but could, by some miracle find a woman who was desperate enough to think he was just all that and wanted to reproduce with him. SonnyBoy couldn't keep a job and didn't pay his child support but could spend money fixing up a motorcyle to play with. Maybe he thought it made him look like Marlon Brando in "The Wild Ones." Of course, neither Sr. nor Jr. could come up with a single bit of evidence about any of the nonsense they were whining about. So in Florida if you ride a bike and choose to have zero insurance you can run someone down, cripple them for life and just shrug it off? "Sorry. I don't have to have insurance." Wow. I liked JM's "Darwin" comment, although it was wasted on these two morons.

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

Landlord suing tenant over rent:

Another case of "What are my priorities"? So, SSMO? (who did have some boyfriend bunking there too) resides in a bug-infested dump with a gaping hole in the ceiling because she can't afford to move, can't go to work for two weeks because of Plantar's Fasciitis (which I also had and was in great pain but had to work anyway). Okay, all that is understandable, I guess. BUT with all this going on she can stage a "Hotel" birthday party for her 15-year-old. Good lord. Landlord can whistle for his rent. Why couldn't boyfriend kick in for it? This necessary show-off party overdrew her bank account, so tough. Boyfriend needed a massive amount of nails pounded in everywhere to display his important collection of hats, but couldn't nail a board over the ceiling hole? Whatever. Def admits that when plaintiff came to her door she never bothered mentioning the bugs or the hole. She doesn't know why she didn't. She just didn't.

Plaintiff was annoying as well. What were those pink things on his shirt, anyway? No one cares if you're an only child and blah blah. That's your problem.

I love these tenants who leave behind their broken junk because they don't want it, so someone else should have the task of getting rid of it.

53 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

I started out sympathetic towards the tenant, but that shifted when it was clear that she was shooting for a bonanza.

Same. Lottery day! Pain and suffering! She was shaking and sweating and vomiting because the light was out. All my moving expenses! Another SSMO and of course her child writes and draws all over the walls. That's normal, right? I mean, the place needed painting in any case, but still. Funny, but my brother and I never drew on the walls of our rented place. My parents would never have allowed it and we were taught to respect the property of others. Guess that's not the case anymore considering how many litigants readily admit their kids defaced someone else's place. *shrug* That was some hairdo.

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Short intermission - repair tech here to work on my alarm

Do you think maybe you can sue someone for that? I'm sure it caused you at least some pain and suffering? Mental anguish, maybe?

[meowmommy]

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

(we also hear FL doesn't require a helmet if you have at least $10,000 worth of medical insurance)

That might pay the ambulance ride after you crack your head open on the pavement.  I wonder if MM ever thinks she did well to escape Florida.

24 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Sonny, a high-pitched silly dweeb

That was quite the surprise when he opened his mouth.  I thought at first he was wearing his snazziest bowling shirt, but it actually has a Jacksonville Jaguars logo on it.  And such an attractive look, the soul patch with the matching goatee but no hair on top.

And then, of course, because it's MM, she starts the goddamn family therapy.

You live together and you're paying child support?  So you couldn't just write your GF a check that she tears up?

And that little bit at the end, where daddy is suing for more than he paid for the bike, because "I have it insured for $5K."  What's that little scam all about?

2 hours ago, SRTouch said:

on Tenant's side, part of her money problems caused by throwing big birthday bash for daughter which resulted in rubber check and not enough money for rent

Why do these people always think that their fixed obligations are optional?  Especially when you don't have a cushion when you're out of work with an injury.  If you don't have the money, don't have the party.  The kid will not grow up stunted and warped.

That video was disgusting.  It looked like piss on the floor, too, although it could have been from the leaky ceiling.  Why did she live there for two years if the bugs were there for two years?  She didn't offer a lick of proof that she ever complained about it.  She said she couldn't afford to move.  But she could pay for a party she couldn't afford while her four year old lived with the roaches.  Bet she didn't stiff the party venue.

42 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Plaintiff was annoying as well. What were those pink things on his shirt, anyway? No one cares if you're an only child and blah blah. That's your problem.

I was trying to figure out those pink things as well, but it can be hard to manage probate by yourself if there's a lot of property involved.  I think that was his only point about being an only child.

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

wants 5 grand for the move

Unless she was planning to live there for the rest of her life, eventually she would have had to pay for a move, not at her landlord's expense.  And $5K, hokay.  I moved 2000 miles last year with a full house for under $8K.  I had used the same company two years earlier for a local move and it cost me a couple hundred.

Took some special nerve for the tenant to change the locks on her apartments and lock out her landlord.  Along with refusing to let them in to fix the problem and then claiming pain and suffering.  Love the drama of "it made me sick," but she didn't just go spend a night in a hotel or her mother's house.

She lived there for 12 years, didn't notice for 3 years that mold had developed.  And somehow her six year old writing on the wall is an excuse against grime.

Oh, and she called MM "ma'am" and didn't get yelled at.  Consistency, thou art a jewel.

I'm thinking these recent California cases are people who just want a free trip to NYC.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

I wonder if it may be a copyright issue? Maybe Google finally noticed that their material was being used in commercial for profit productions and wanted to get paid.

Y'know, I had considered that, and that Levin, who's still making MM use the same shitty set all these years, was too cheap to pay for decent graphics, but I didn't think Google Earth was like that.  But you're probably right.

[SRTouch]

4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Do you think maybe you can sue someone for that? I'm sure it caused you at least some pain and suffering? Mental anguish, maybe?

You betcha - I mean, sure they notified me that my alarm control panel had stopped responding to their remote monitoring, but I had to wait a whole week before they sent a tech out...... I haven't slept well at all, had insomnia and panic attacks, nightmares about burning up in my sleep or someone breaking in and stealing my most prized posessions (my cats)...... not to mention, when tech came he said my fire alarm/smoke detector was too old and should have already been replaced - so now, even though the control panel has been replaced I'll be having PTSD about the fire that never burned........

Edited November 15, 2019 by SRTouch

[AngelaHunter]

36 minutes ago, meowmommy said:

Why do these people always think that their fixed obligations are optional? 

Seems the big show-off hotel party for a kid was an obligation. Rent is optional.

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, SRTouch said:

I haven't slept well at all, had insomnia and panic attacks, nightmares about burning up in my sleep or someone breaking in and stealing my most prized posessions (my cats)...... not to mention, when tech came he said my fire alarm/smoke detector was too old and should have already been replaced - so now, even though the control panel has been replaced I'll be having PTSD about the fire that never burned........

Can you get your mommy to write you a note detailing how distressed her little snowflake was about all this stuff? That should do the trick.

[SRTouch]

14 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Can you get your mommy to write you a note detailing how distressed her little snowflake was about all this stuff? That should do the trick.

oh! oh! and I need to add something extra because the poor cats were terrorized when the tech tested the alarm - well, except for Lucy, she's deaf and didn't hear the siren - but everyone else ran and hid. Even Silly retreated to the top of the cupboards to glare at the noisy tech

[AngelaHunter]

11 hours ago, SRTouch said:

oh! oh! and I need to add something extra because the poor cats were terrorized

Include that in your suit. Remember the plaintiff on JJ - a doctor - who was so traumatized over a tree that it caused her dog to get nervous as well? She included that in her complaint. Go for the max and get your damages up to exactly 5K.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Did anyone else see today's new one about the parents (I missed the beginning, so there was some kind of guardianship or foster situation) where plaintiffs were suing defendants for letting their 14 year old foster daughter hide in their house, so their 17 year (almost 17) son could have free access?      For six days the police, SWAT teams, helicopters were looking for the missing 14 year old.    She was hidden the entire time in the boyfriend's house, the mother was hiding her, and supposedly, grinning idiot dad didn't find out until the police showed up and found her.   

The texts from the girl and her boyfriend were chilling.    Sadly, with a child plotting against them, in the parents place I would call CPS and have her removed from my house.    It's an ID channel documentary waiting to happen. 

Since then, the defendants let the girl hang out with the son at their house.    When the police returned the girl one time, a few minutes later a mysterious CPS complaint was received.    I couldn't believe the plaintiffs couldn't get a restraining order or charges against the defendant parents.    It was infuriating to me that the defendant father kept smirking through the case too.    He actually seemed to think it was funny that when the son turns 17 the plaintiffs will file statutory rape charges.    It amazes me that the defendant mother is the only one still facing legal charges, and I hope they jail her.   

The people reminded me of the neighborhood parents where I grew up, who let kids stay in their basement apartment, until one turned out to be a fugitive, and was dealing out of their house.    Lots of kids stayed in that house, and the parents never knew where they were.   

Edited November 15, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[Florinaldo]

Another glaring mismatch between someone's profession and their personal character. The smirking father who got thrown out of court is a therapist for children or families if I heard correctly. But he seems content to let this situation fester, "as long as it is legal".

I bet the son is the little king at home and that his overindulgent parents are content with being led by the nose by their oh-so-precious offspring.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Florinaldo

[SRTouch]

4 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Did anyone else see today's new one about the parents (I missed the beginning, so there was some kind of guardianship or foster situation) where plaintiffs were suing defendants for letting their 14 year old foster daughter hide in their house, so their 17 year (almost 17) son could have free access?      For six days the police, SWAT teams, helicopters were looking for the missing 14 year old.    She was hidden the entire time in the boyfriend's house, the mother was hiding her, and supposedly, grinning idiot dad didn't find out until the police showed up and found her.   

Since then, the defendants let the girl hang out with the son at their house.    When the police returned the girl one time, a few minutes later a mysterious CPS complaint was received.    I couldn't believe the plaintiffs couldn't get a restraining order or charges against the defendant parents.    It was infuriating to me that the defendant father kept smirking through the case too.    He actually seemed to think it was funny that when the son turns 17 the plaintiffs will file statutory rape charges.    It amazes me that the defendant mother is the only one still facing legal charges, and I hope they jail her.   

The people reminded me of the neighborhood parents where I grew up, who let kids stay in their basement apartment, until one turned out to be a fugitive, and was dealing out of their house.    

1. Wow - just wow...... when MM read the daughter's texts about torturing the mom I thought D dad was finally starting to get it, but no, he quickly reverted previous stance that if was perfectly fine for 14yo to visit his 16yo son right until a 'real' judge issues a restraining order...... not that it made any difference, but sounded like at one point he was about to dismiss MM as a pretend judge...... back to the torture texts, wow, scary!  oh, and despite testimony during case, in hallterview when D wife tells Doug it was the husband who allows 14yo in the house I thought she meant when girl was 'missing' but guess she really means now that she's been found hubby let's her come back to their house
2. loaning favorite waitress some money: 'nother sad sack dude showering money on some not-that-attractive woman gets taken to the cleaners - I was tossing stuff in the crock pot making chili while this was airing, but it didn't sound interesting enough to back track to fill in the blanks.... D playing the innocent young thing, lots of fake tears and can't even talk about the horrible kinky sex stuff she says P wanted to forgive the debt.... oh, and in beginning I was thinking P was some kind-hearted 40 something year old being nice to young 21yo waitress at, oh, maybe IHOP - nah, turns out she was a cocktail waitress at the local strip club (not a stripper, though) - MM gets P to admit he talked to her about giving him a lap dance..... yeah, I can see the drunk P slurring out that he'd be willing to knock something off the debt for a little dirty dancing - not saying he wouldn't be wrong as hell, but kind of doubt strip club cockrail waitress D's tearful act when MM asks about the proposition (which according to D included bondage and lesbian stuff with P's wife)....... anyway, by time the chili going I was fed up with these two and zipped to the end - P awarded $970 odd...... by way MM hurried off bench she may be headed for the showers to wash these two out of her mind

Edited November 15, 2019 by SRTouch

[patty1h]

I'm afraid for the parents of the runaway girl.  The texts between the 16 year old BF sound like that case with Gypsy Rose Blanchard, who hooked up with a boy online and turned their teenage love into murder.  Similar setup:  two immature kids who are so "in love" and feel that the world is against them, add in a little mental illness and hormones and next thing is talk of murder.  Scary. *Though the Gypsy Rose story has some other unsettling issues, I'm using their communications as an example - their texts are very similar to the ones in this case.   

On top of that, you have two parents who coddle their teenage son for some reason and don't do anything to safeguard the girl.  I hope for the best for those parents.

I've seen at least 2-3 Dateline episodes with women who get a guy to kill her husband because she says he was abusing her and it turns out to be lies.  Not sure if the 14 year old really told the other family that, but it's a classic ploy to play on sympathy and get folks to blindly assist.   However, this ruse goes out the window when the police are in your house and you can turn the girl over to law enforcement.

Edited November 15, 2019 by patty1h

[Carolina Girl]

9 minutes ago, patty1h said:

I'm afraid for the parents of the runaway girl.  The texts between the 16 year old BF sound like that case with Gypsy Rose Blanchard, who hooked up with a boy online and turned their teenage love into murder.  Similar setup:  two immature kids who are so "in love" and feel that the world is against them, add in a little mental illness and hormones and next thing is talk of murder.  Scary. *Though the Gypsy Rose story has some other unsettling issues, I'm using their communications as an example - their texts are very similar to the ones in this case.   

On top of that, you have two parents who coddle their teenage sonr for some reason and don't do anything to safeguard the girl.  I hope for the best for those parents.

I found this reminiscent of the case of Tylar Witt, the El Dorado Hills teen (California) who, with the help of her boyfriend, MURDERED her mother because she had forbidden the relationship.  Witt was 14 years old at the time.  

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article2573311.html

I haven't seen the episode yet, but imagine this is the one that's been promoted for the last 10 days.  I hope the defendant parents start looking at some serious jail time.  And another thing I hope is that every one of their friends immediately drops them like a bad habit.  If anyone finds their social media, let me know.  

[Carolina Girl]

1 hour ago, Florinaldo said:

Another glaring mismatch between someone's profession and their personal character. The smirking father who got thrown out of court is a therapist for chlidren or families if I heard correctly.

If he's a therapist requiring a state license, I hope calls started coming in to his sanctioning agency and his license is yanked.  He may want to look for a new profession after this.  Because word is going to spread.

[SRTouch]

1 minute ago, Carolina Girl said:

hope the defendant parents start looking at some serious jail time.  And another thing I hope is that every one of their friends immediately drops them like a bad habit.  If anyone finds their social media, let me know.  

Didn't find anything on the parents from either side, but did find a few articles about the missing 14yo, Claudia Vasquez from Greece Ny

[Carolina Girl]

47 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Didn't find anything on the parents from either side, but did find a few articles about the missing 14yo, Claudia Vasquez from Greece Ny

If those defendant parents have ANY sense at all, they'll dump their social media FAST.  

And, frankly, I hope that the 17-year-old gets carted away on a statutory rape charge and has to register as a sex offender for the rest of his miserable life.  That ought to wipe the smile off that piece of shit father's face.  

[AngelaHunter]

Wow. Two amazing cases. In the first one, I really don't know what to say about the defs, a fugly, revolting little pop-eyed "youth counsellor" who has no control over his own hellspawn, and his idiotic Alice the Goon wife. He seemed to find something highly amusing about all this. All I could think of were the parents who spent all those days and nights imagining their daughter kidnapped, raped, murdered and thrown in a ditch somewhere. But the very worst part were the texts between the young lovers, discussing the torture and murder of the girl's mother.

I just read a story about parents who ordered their daughter to have no more contact with her boyfriend, who had fractured her skull because she refused sex one night. Boyfriend got a pal of his to join him, went to the parents' house while they slept and beat them both to death. These days such a thing is a real possibility. I advise the parents on this show to move far away or they could very well be the next big story. In the meantime, creepy little daddy and his dopey wife should have to pay for the helicopters, the bloodhounds and all the man hours spent searching for the girl.

The next case was equally repugnant. Another short, rotund, fugly little guy gives a waitress a credit card and a 1,000$ tip. He says his wife knew all about it, and by the end I believed it. The ugly little pervert was looking for lap dances or kinky 3-ways with him and his sickening wife who also has to be a giant loser since she married him. BTW, he came here and admitted all that  and revealed himself to be a pathetic little horndog slug for the princely sum of 900$. I'm glad JM also came down on the waitress, who appeared here with her mommy, and who cries and states she took the money and the credit card, sure, but she was on some hard times. It seems she really needed to eat at McDonalds,  get lots of gas for her car, buy cigarettes and bail out some criminal friend of hers. She also works in a strip club as a waitress so her tears of innocence and affront didn't really wash. "OOh, he wanted me to do.... THINGS! Oh, boohoo - poor sweet innocent me! I don't know anything about all this s-e-x stuff. "

It was all quite fascinating. Depressing and revolting, but interesting.

[CrazyInAlabama]

My guess is defendant daddy didn't have to call a hotline at CPS, I bet he knew someone and told them CPS should open a file.     I didn't catch the first couple of minutes, but I guess the girl is a foster of some kind?   I think considering the texts the plaintiffs should call and say they can't handle her, and have her put in foster care.    However, what do you want to bet defendant idiot parents would try to get her?     The plaintiff mother needs to be away from that girl, and her boyfriends, before she ends up in a body bag.   

There was obviously some kind of foster or guardianship situation with the girl, but I didn't tune in early enough to find out what it was.   If so, I think the parents could call CPS, and say she's out of here.    An acquaintance was having big issues with her teenage daughter, and the girl actually said she wanted to go to foster care.   The counselor said in that state, the mother would have to pay child support until she aged out at 18.   I think the parents have a ticking time bomb in their house, and that girl needs to be elsewhere.    Even is she a formal foster, it's time to stop it.  

Edited November 16, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[laprin]

10 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Did anyone else see today's new one about the parents (I missed the beginning, so there was some kind of guardianship or foster situation) where plaintiffs were suing defendants for letting their 14 year old foster daughter hide in their house, so their 17 year (almost 17) son could have free access?      For six days the police, SWAT teams, helicopters were looking for the missing 14 year old.    She was hidden the entire time in the boyfriend's house, the mother was hiding her, and supposedly, grinning idiot dad didn't find out until the police showed up and found her.   

The texts from the girl and her boyfriend were chilling.    Sadly, with a child plotting against them, in the parents place I would call CPS and have her removed from my house.    It's an ID channel documentary waiting to happen. 

Since then, the defendants let the girl hang out with the son at their house.    When the police returned the girl one time, a few minutes later a mysterious CPS complaint was received.    I couldn't believe the plaintiffs couldn't get a restraining order or charges against the defendant parents.    It was infuriating to me that the defendant father kept smirking through the case too.    He actually seemed to think it was funny that when the son turns 17 the plaintiffs will file statutory rape charges.    It amazes me that the defendant mother is the only one still facing legal charges, and I hope they jail her.   

The people reminded me of the neighborhood parents where I grew up, who let kids stay in their basement apartment, until one turned out to be a fugitive, and was dealing out of their house.    Lots of kids stayed in that house, and the parents never knew where they were.   

I’m with you. I think the plaintiffs, especially the mother, should be worried about their safety. I would not put it past those creepy defendants to help their son kill them. Did you notice the wife of the defendant blames him and he blamed her? Something weird going on in their dynamic.