I thought the plaintiff deserved more props than the defendant. Seems most plaintiffs in her situation do not have the evidence with the correct verbiage from a professional to contradict pro defendants.
I don't see anything wrong with bidding out your contracts as long as it's with "legitimate" companies, which it seems like she searched out... Seems like the bigger problem here is that she probably didn't research any consumer reviews online of the company she hired... Alot of times those will save you money and headaches.
@@Stressless2023 you're right, however, it should have been a sign when she specifically stressed they needed to bring the camera yet they still showed up without one. That would tell me the company is either careless or lacks proper communication skills. I wouldn't have given them the opportunity to make mistake number two. 🤷♀️
I get it, the actual correct pronunciation of your/you’re is “Danng boy/girl YOU BE chillin. So YOU BE is THE Correct way to say you are, get it? Got it? Good....lol just kidding. Have an Awesome day.
And pronunciation of a word is how you say it (phonetically). So I think you meant usage? Either way, I still don't understand what you said. You be is not English and you're is you are.
1 they did do work by scheduling her and allocating agents and resources to her case and 2 deposits are non refundable. If you give a deposit on an apartment and change your mind 10 hours later you don't get the money back either and you know that, so why would this be different? The deposit isn't necessarily for work done, it's for reserving them and their time.
Great point. Somethings are just worth the extra money. The $75 she thought she was saving ended up costing her the original price and court costs to file her claim.
The defendant said the camera couldn’t go in because the pipe was broke and there’s no possible way for her to have known that. It might have simply been that the operator of the camera was inapt at what he was doing.
Exactly! They misdiagnosed the problem, obviously. We had an a/c guy do that to us one time, diagnose our a/c problem incorrectly. Quoted $3,000. We got a 2nd opinion and it was a small issue, not a $3,000 issue. It was like $180 to have it fixed.
@@kamoshi.9331 Same thing happened to me, I bought a brand new 2005 Chevrolet Lumina (i don't know if it's US model too), after 3 yrs it won't drive smooth. I took it to the Chevrolet dealer service they told me I need a brand new engine cost around $5000. Then I called car services it's related to Chevrolet dealer back home called "Bumper to Bumper" they did around 4 times engine flush. The car run very smooth cost me around $500 or less.
Why do these judges have to be so mean and nasty, cutting people off, then assuming what happened but become super silent and calm when evidence is presented that actually states what the plaintiff is trying to communicate 🙄 just shut up and let them get their explanation out.
They should have worked with her. They weren't able to do the job in a timely manner, even if it wasn't Their fault. They should have accepted she was going somewhere else for the work, and offered her some of the money back, 700$ ish, given the first visit and partial camera inspection.
How is the defendant a "scammer"? They literally DID do everything possible to try to get the job done, if they were actually wrong in this case it was ONLY because the plumber doing the job made a mistake when looking through the camera, which can of course happen. They did not intentionally delay anything, and legally speaking they have a right to keep her deposit whether she cancels or not (that's what a deposit is), but in this case it turns out their guy did make a mistake and they just did not realize it until NOW. The defendant had all her ducks in a row too and the compliment isn't because she simply brought evidence, it's because of how well she presented the case verbally, which the plaintiff didn't do so that's why she didn't get the compliment. The plaintiff had her evidence, good. That is literally what she is SUPPOSED to do, so why would anyone praise her for doing the bare minimum? Lol. The plaintiff did not present her case in a manner that a lawyer would, hence no lawyer compliment. And the judge cuts EVERYONE off in every single episode. If you actually watched this show you would know that. Has nothing to do with her favoring the defendant.
They’re not scammers the first guy was just wrong about the problem. But had he been correct they did everything to do the work and were held up by another company. Plaintiff won, idk what you watched. All she did was have needed paper work. Whereas the defendant was actually arguing from a position where they had nothing.
What kind of plumbing company refuses to return the deposit if they didn’t even start the job? She’ll never hire them again, and all her acquaintances will never hire them, and they’ll get sued.
That's called "greed" and "taking advantage" of those who they don't think will challenge their work performance. No wonder the company didn't want to appear in court. Lastly, that lawyer won't be so shiny if she continues to represent cases that she loses. I applaud the plaintiffs!
I think that's why the defendant looked so defeated; the plaintiff can put this lawsuit on the record against them, (if they're bonded) or even just in online reviews!
Harvey sounds sexist. He could say: "do contractors take advantage of people that they deem unknowledgeable regarding the task at hand?" Because it is a fact, that males can be ripped off at the same rate as females can. ....and even more so once males & females become elderly(over 70+).
Jasmine I think because she has been doing this for years, so she may think she knows what is about to be said. I couldn't image doing her job at all. 🤔
The plaintiff is lucky that she had evidence from the other company that they were incompetent because the judge didn’t trust her, which is weird because she didn’t even allow her to tell the full story. I can imagine this type of ruling going on all the time against black people. I don’t think that judge Milian is racist ( or I wouldn’t watch her) but I think white judges are conditioned to believe in white people who they see as professional and rational than black people that they see as angry and unreasonable. It’s called unconscious biases and the best fall to it.
I get what your saying and I think we are subconsciously taught "white is right", but I think she is pretty consistent with that tendency. I think she even catches herself some times. More than Judge Mathis. Now he is quick to rule w/o hearing the whole story.
Conscious or unconscious it is still racism so she may not want to be racist but she definitely exhibits racist behaviors and if you know a lot of Spanish people in south Florida a lot of them are more racist then white people.
If the Plummer had to replace the line between the house and the curb trap, then they did dig up at the curb trap. Because that is where the new line would attach. This would be within the distance of the pole requiring the pole to be shored. The judge was wrong. The plumbing company that didn’t order the pole to be shored was taking a shortcut. The plaintiff is fortunate there wasn’t any problem with the pole.
I think that is absolutely what she was trying go get across and JM couldn't get past the report saying the trap was fine. If they had to fig to the trap then they were within 3 feet of the pole and it should have been shored. Just because the other company neglected to follow the code doesn't mean it wasn't required
@@JW-rv9cy when did she ever say anything about race? She said the judge was being biased. You brought race up which shows exactly what type of person you are. 😆☺️
@@Leaa20001 it's implied that the commenter is saying the judge is racist. Anyhoo, Africa is doing really well. They got some nice weather and views. And now, with modern technology, African decendants can find out EXACTLY where they decend from. They can make Africa great again. Or stay here in misery and complain. Either way is fine.
She was not lying. She literally presented evidence to back up what she was saying. At the end she was arguing something her and the company genuinely believe. It's a matter of opinion and how each plumbing company interprets the regulations on PECO as to when they should contact PECO or not. "didn't even defend well", lol sure, because you totally know more about lawyers and how they speak better than JM who is a lawyer herself. Stop causing issues where there are none. Has nothing to do with "different folks different rules", that's just absurd. That's a really sad victim mentality that will cause you to blame every negative event in life on being different or being discriminated against when really life just happens and you won't always get your way. It's very childish, and it isn't even accurate as this judge has never shown a bias like that not even once.
She shouldn’t have gave a compliment to that lady. That’s just reinforcing that taking advantage of someone is ok if ur a good talker. Smh. That’s why they say all lawyers have sold their soul lol.
The repair order said that they dug from the house past the trap. If they had to dig past the trap that meant they got closer than 3 feet from the pole.
This lady is real lucky .First , most contractors will charge just for showing up and the 2nd time is money and won't deal with a wishy washy customer who can't make up their mind .
Clearly the plumbers are either inept at their trade and/or they’re crooks. The company sent the female out because they knew she was a good liar, but evidently not good enough.
if the company gives employees commission they the service techs will take advantage. The best interest for them to upsell and gain more money in their pocket. Otherwise, no unless you piss them off.
The document said that the line was replaced "to the curb." I don't know how the judge thinks that they can replace something that is "to the curb" without digging at the curb. The other company may have been willing to take the risk with the city requirements.
YESSSSSS THE PLAINTIFF WAS ON IT MADE SURE THAT SHE DOTTED HER I'S & CROSSED HER T'S EVERYTHING IS LAYED OUT IN PAPER WK THAT'S ME NOT LEAVING ANYTHING TO CHANCE THE DEFENDANT WANTED TO PLAY WORD GAMES @ THE END NOW GIVE HER THE FULL REFUND DAMN CROOKS
Judge is wrong tho …..the thing is they did the job dangerously without the shoring …they didn’t replace all the way to the trap or they would need the shoring ….to get around that , they spiced new line into old line with a rubber coupling so they didn’t need to go near the trap ! 😩😂and the lady paid more for shoty work actually . Now she going to have to get the old pipe to the trap fixed down the road when it leaks LUL
just another instance of the intro guy lying - he said a permit from the city was needed, it was the electric co. that was holding it up, not the city permit. They do this all the time - "the defendant says XYZ" and then XYZ is never brought up in the case.
So what I'm seeing here is lack of communication with the defendant and the plantiff. Yes they were waiting on a third party, but they didn't communicate that UNTIL PLANTIFF CALLED AND CANCELLED. The damage was already done. The defendant did not complete the job, so they need to give her the money back minus the camera fee they performed.
When the judge said “you should be a lawyer” what she met was “you’re right” The letter exact words should of been “we did not require permission to do this job” but it didn’t, they danced around it The second company just went ahead and did the work without the proper permission that’s IT !😂😂😂 But regardless you don’t get paid for a job you didn’t do ! Give her, her money back !
It’s very difficult to determine exactly what’s broken underground even with a camera. The defendant was not trying to rip off the customer. She was clearly trying to obey the code laws of her area and dig up the area safely. They could dig further up and hope they’ll find the issue further away, but if they get within 3 feet of that utility pole they’d have to shut down and pull permits. That would waste more time and piss the customer off even more. They did the right thing.
It doesn't sound like the company was actually doing anything wrong. It sounds like the other plumber may be more experienced and was able to get the camera around. AND CAN HARVEY STOP THE WOMAN QUESTIONS? LOL
Does anyone else stare into the audience when they do close ups of the plaintiffs and defendants? I do all the time and see some hilarious stuff. For instance, check out the female in red behind the defendant at 10:41. Lmao 😂😂😂😂😂😂 why
Judge doesn't understand plumbing. Nobody showed how close to the pole the company did excavate and it is very likely the other just dug closer than they were allowed to the pole.
This is some free advice if you want to know if you have a leak Make sure that no water is running in your house, go to the water meter if it's turning you have a leak
Had the second Plummer not specifically said they didn’t get within 3 feet of the pole they could have been fined? So they don’t call peco and dig close anyways to fix it…
Simple case. The defendants didn't want to spend the time with a camera to CONFIRM they would need the utility company. Another company spent the time, didn't need the utility company and got the job DONE!
She should’ve given the plaintiff her props as well for all the evidence she presented!!
And continuing to prove her case even though she kept being cut off
Exactly
Yesss!!
It's like she hated ruling in favor of the Plantif
I thought the plaintiff deserved more props than the defendant. Seems most plaintiffs in her situation do not have the evidence with the correct verbiage from a professional to contradict pro defendants.
The plaintiffs did a top notch job proving their case. Well done!!!
This is exactly why you dont always go with the cheaper company.
Absolutely! I'm surprised the judge didn't say her famous line "lo barato sale caro"...pretty much the cheap way usually ends up more expensive!
I don't see anything wrong with bidding out your contracts as long as it's with "legitimate" companies, which it seems like she searched out... Seems like the bigger problem here is that she probably didn't research any consumer reviews online of the company she hired... Alot of times those will save you money and headaches.
@@Stressless2023 you're right, however, it should have been a sign when she specifically stressed they needed to bring the camera yet they still showed up without one. That would tell me the company is either careless or lacks proper communication skills. I wouldn't have given them the opportunity to make mistake number two. 🤷♀️
@@kimberlyadorno280 True. I think I personally would have only given them 1 strike in that regard too.
@@Stressless2023 I always learned pick the price in the middle of you want it done well while still minding your wallet
"My grandmother had a saying, 'La barato sale caro!’ The cheap comes out expensive!" ~ Judge Marilyn Milian
I love when she says that. lol
That's a good one. 😆 lol
Soooooooo true!
Lo barato, not la barato.
mines did too 😍☝
The plaintiff had solid evidence to support her lawsuit. Excellent job!
Sista girl came prepared made me SO DAMN PROUD 💯
I'm always proud of ANYBODY who comes to court prepared with their evidence.
Yessss I feel the same.
Didn't she
You guys have same mom?
Woman certainly knows how to advocate for herself. Strong lady!
When your wrong, admit you were wrong, This world would be in a better place.
The world would also be a better place if people could differentiate your and you're. 🤣 Not being rude, just a joke from a pet peeve of mine. 😁
I get it, the actual correct pronunciation of your/you’re is “Danng boy/girl YOU BE chillin. So YOU BE is THE Correct way to say you are, get it? Got it? Good....lol just kidding. Have an Awesome day.
@@wiredtogod I have no idea what you just said...
And pronunciation of a word is how you say it (phonetically). So I think you meant usage? Either way, I still don't understand what you said. You be is not English and you're is you are.
They didn't do the work, so they shouldn't get the money 🤑
This case is so weird, they did no work so why do they assume they deserve any money...
The reasoning would be if you contract someone and you break/breach the contract they lose out on the potential they'd have earned on the contract.
1 they did do work by scheduling her and allocating agents and resources to her case and 2 deposits are non refundable. If you give a deposit on an apartment and change your mind 10 hours later you don't get the money back either and you know that, so why would this be different? The deposit isn't necessarily for work done, it's for reserving them and their time.
The people she rejected at first, were the very same people she had to hire to do the job... Anyone noticed that?!!
Great point. Somethings are just worth the extra money. The $75 she thought she was saving ended up costing her the original price and court costs to file her claim.
This is where evidence comes in handy cause mama could have lost her case if wasn't for her evidence
The defendant said the camera couldn’t go in because the pipe was broke and there’s no possible way for her to have known that. It might have simply been that the operator of the camera was inapt at what he was doing.
Exactly! They misdiagnosed the problem, obviously. We had an a/c guy do that to us one time, diagnose our a/c problem incorrectly. Quoted $3,000. We got a 2nd opinion and it was a small issue, not a $3,000 issue. It was like $180 to have it fixed.
Boom! Her employee was not skilled enough to get the job done. Period.
@@kamoshi.9331 same here...had an incompetent a/c man who had no clue what he was doing...
@@kamoshi.9331 Same thing happened to me, I bought a brand new 2005 Chevrolet Lumina (i don't know if it's US model too), after 3 yrs it won't drive smooth. I took it to the Chevrolet dealer service they told me I need a brand new engine cost around $5000. Then I called car services it's related to Chevrolet dealer back home called "Bumper to Bumper" they did around 4 times engine flush. The car run very smooth cost me around $500 or less.
Or pretending it wouldn't go in
That Doug "The announcer" is a savage...he quick with them remarks😂
He always a savage he don’t give af lmao
I honestly dont see how nobody has backhanded him yet😂😂🌚
@@maiafloress 😂
Why do these judges have to be so mean and nasty, cutting people off, then assuming what happened but become super silent and calm when evidence is presented that actually states what the plaintiff is trying to communicate 🙄 just shut up and let them get their explanation out.
Like Judge Mathis
She has been like that for a minute. She needs to go home.
I feel like she be trying to rush the case
Yes she is always like that ask questions well yellssss questions then cuts them off I couldn’t stand before her I would b done cursed her out frfr
'Go tell your boss" 🤣🤣🤣
😜😜😜😜
I love watching this judge she keeps it so real!
They should have worked with her. They weren't able to do the job in a timely manner, even if it wasn't Their fault. They should have accepted she was going somewhere else for the work, and offered her some of the money back, 700$ ish, given the first visit and partial camera inspection.
The full refund was justified simply due to what the second company wrote which debunked what the original company said was the problem.
She really didn't need to compliment her like that .. she lost.
It was backhanded if you paid attention.
I said what I said. She didn't need to compliment her like that. The company sucked at their job. Period
And you didn't need to give your unsolicited opinion on the internet. Who cares.
@@jennzifur duh
@@MalloriaAnn you care apparently
The Defendant and the Plantiff BOTH came well prepared.
Judge Milian: " Lo barato sale caro". Perfect example! I'm surprised she didn't say it this time!😫😂
I love when she says that. Thanks for posting this!!!
@@dollfacekillaSJ ❤️
♥️ when she says that too 💯
it was the " Go tell your boss" for me lol
🗣 Read it out loud. 🙉 I cant with Judge Marilyn
I say the same dang thang ... she gets on my nerve (yet, I still watch her)
So she big up the scammer for her evidence and finagling words, but kept cutting off the plaintiff who had ALL her ducks in a row. 🤔
How is the defendant a "scammer"? They literally DID do everything possible to try to get the job done, if they were actually wrong in this case it was ONLY because the plumber doing the job made a mistake when looking through the camera, which can of course happen. They did not intentionally delay anything, and legally speaking they have a right to keep her deposit whether she cancels or not (that's what a deposit is), but in this case it turns out their guy did make a mistake and they just did not realize it until NOW. The defendant had all her ducks in a row too and the compliment isn't because she simply brought evidence, it's because of how well she presented the case verbally, which the plaintiff didn't do so that's why she didn't get the compliment. The plaintiff had her evidence, good. That is literally what she is SUPPOSED to do, so why would anyone praise her for doing the bare minimum? Lol. The plaintiff did not present her case in a manner that a lawyer would, hence no lawyer compliment. And the judge cuts EVERYONE off in every single episode. If you actually watched this show you would know that. Has nothing to do with her favoring the defendant.
They’re not scammers the first guy was just wrong about the problem. But had he been correct they did everything to do the work and were held up by another company.
Plaintiff won, idk what you watched. All she did was have needed paper work. Whereas the defendant was actually arguing from a position where they had nothing.
What kind of plumbing company refuses to return the deposit if they didn’t even start the job? She’ll never hire them again, and all her acquaintances will never hire them, and they’ll get sued.
👍🏾
That's called "greed" and "taking advantage" of those who they don't think will challenge their work performance. No wonder the company didn't want to appear in court. Lastly, that lawyer won't be so shiny if she continues to represent cases that she loses. I applaud the plaintiffs!
Deposits are often non refundable. In this case the plaintiff was right but if she was wrong the deposit would be forfeit for breaking the contract.
I think that's why the defendant looked so defeated; the plaintiff can put this lawsuit on the record against them, (if they're bonded) or even just in online reviews!
I didn’t follow a thing during this case 🥴 smiled and noded through the whole episode
I couldn't follow either.
Every show Harvey and, "do they take advantage of women??" 🙄🙄🙄
Harvey sounds sexist. He could say: "do contractors take advantage of people that they deem unknowledgeable regarding the task at hand?" Because it is a fact, that males can be ripped off at the same rate as females can. ....and even more so once males & females become elderly(over 70+).
The Judge kept cutting the Plaintiff off 🙄
Jasmine I think because she has been doing this for years, so she may think she knows what is about to be said. I couldn't image doing her job at all. 🤔
The plaintiff is lucky that she had evidence from the other company that they were incompetent because the judge didn’t trust her, which is weird because she didn’t even allow her to tell the full story. I can imagine this type of ruling going on all the time against black people. I don’t think that judge Milian is racist ( or I wouldn’t watch her) but I think white judges are conditioned to believe in white people who they see as professional and rational than black people that they see as angry and unreasonable. It’s called unconscious biases and the best fall to it.
I agree!
This!!!💥💥💥👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾
Exactly!
I get what your saying and I think we are subconsciously taught "white is right", but I think she is pretty consistent with that tendency. I think she even catches herself some times. More than Judge Mathis. Now he is quick to rule w/o hearing the whole story.
Conscious or unconscious it is still racism so she may not want to be racist but she definitely exhibits racist behaviors and if you know a lot of Spanish people in south Florida a lot of them are more racist then white people.
The defendant is a joke! You charged for something that was unnecessary!
True meaning to the saying You get what you pay for🤷🏽♀️
If the Plummer had to replace the line between the house and the curb trap, then they did dig up at the curb trap. Because that is where the new line would attach. This would be within the distance of the pole requiring the pole to be shored. The judge was wrong. The plumbing company that didn’t order the pole to be shored was taking a shortcut. The plaintiff is fortunate there wasn’t any problem with the pole.
Yep, I think that’s what the defendant was trying to get across but the judge had already decided by that point.
I think that is absolutely what she was trying go get across and JM couldn't get past the report saying the trap was fine. If they had to fig to the trap then they were within 3 feet of the pole and it should have been shored. Just because the other company neglected to follow the code doesn't mean it wasn't required
The judge is so biased. She tried like hell to help the defendant.
Why would the judge care who wins? Oh wait, are you a "everyone is racist except me" person?
@@JW-rv9cy when did she ever say anything about race? She said the judge was being biased. You brought race up which shows exactly what type of person you are. 😆☺️
@@Leaa20001 it's implied that the commenter is saying the judge is racist. Anyhoo, Africa is doing really well. They got some nice weather and views. And now, with modern technology, African decendants can find out EXACTLY where they decend from. They can make Africa great again. Or stay here in misery and complain. Either way is fine.
@@JW-rv9cy you’re clearly racist and wanted any opportunity to get that off your chest.. hell is hot
Plaintiff: Whoever is first wins
Roto rooter arrives first
So naturally the other guy wins
Great videos; could you guys include the original air date in the description?
I hate when the judge calls adult women "sweetheart"
yes i would like to see the second and frist camera footages
The bailiff looked so into the case in the beginning lol
He used to be a plumber LOL
Or the defendant was lying. She got a compliment for lying. Different rules for different folks. Lol. She didn't even defend well. 🤦🏾♀️
She was not lying. She literally presented evidence to back up what she was saying. At the end she was arguing something her and the company genuinely believe. It's a matter of opinion and how each plumbing company interprets the regulations on PECO as to when they should contact PECO or not. "didn't even defend well", lol sure, because you totally know more about lawyers and how they speak better than JM who is a lawyer herself. Stop causing issues where there are none. Has nothing to do with "different folks different rules", that's just absurd. That's a really sad victim mentality that will cause you to blame every negative event in life on being different or being discriminated against when really life just happens and you won't always get your way. It's very childish, and it isn't even accurate as this judge has never shown a bias like that not even once.
Why didn't the plaintiff get a compliment 🤔🧐 she held her own!
LOL--you hate when you dont get compliments don't you?
Exactly
I didn't like the plaintiffs attitude. Kinda sketchy to me. And she's proven that she'll say/do whatever to get her way.👎👎👎
I-I can't be the only one that didn't understand this case.
damn the plaintiff was prepared and very good looking!
So crazy, my Nana who’s no longer with us has been on my mind a lot lately. Her name was Barbara Smith.
She had a great head game
Ancestors show up in crazy ways on purpose.
Water water everywhere and not a drop to drink. 🧡
She shouldn’t have gave a compliment to that lady. That’s just reinforcing that taking advantage of someone is ok if ur a good talker. Smh. That’s why they say all lawyers have sold their soul lol.
The repair order said that they dug from the house past the trap. If they had to dig past the trap that meant they got closer than 3 feet from the pole.
REALLY good case!
Interesting case!
The discount sewer lady had props but still couldn't cover up her company's bs!!!!
Well, next time hopefully they will have the camera evidence.
The first time the plantiffs had all their ducks in a row
So so typical, these people always bring complicated lingo to court in hoping that the Judge will think they actually KNOW what they are doing
Best line:
'you can take your little declaration and put it back in your mouth'
🤣🤣🤣 LOVED IT!
A good lawyer or a good liar?
If it was a wasted delay why did it take the people almost a month to get to it
My favourite judge ❤️
Funny, because we used Best Choice and they did a good job for us.
"well, ukno.. ure right.
sorry about that! go tell ur boss!"
THAT DAMN DOUG IS SO SHADY‼🤦🏾♀️🙄
😂😂😂😂
This lady is real lucky .First , most contractors will charge just for showing up and the 2nd time is money and won't deal with a wishy washy customer who can't make up their mind .
Clearly the plumbers are either inept at their trade and/or they’re crooks. The company sent the female out because they knew she was a good liar, but evidently not good enough.
Okay but Don from accounting was hustling!
The defendants face at the end says "I'm going to law school like judge Milian recommended" and is definitely considering changing her life choices.
if the company gives employees commission they the service techs will take advantage. The best interest for them to upsell and gain more money in their pocket. Otherwise, no unless you piss them off.
The document said that the line was replaced "to the curb." I don't know how the judge thinks that they can replace something that is "to the curb" without digging at the curb. The other company may have been willing to take the risk with the city requirements.
Exactly. This case should not have been ruled on without first verifying from PECO if it really needed to abide by that law or not.
God bless you all💐💐💐
YESSSSSS THE PLAINTIFF WAS ON IT MADE SURE THAT SHE DOTTED HER I'S & CROSSED HER T'S EVERYTHING IS LAYED OUT IN PAPER WK THAT'S ME NOT LEAVING ANYTHING TO CHANCE THE DEFENDANT WANTED TO PLAY WORD GAMES @ THE END NOW GIVE HER THE FULL REFUND DAMN CROOKS
Judge is wrong tho …..the thing is they did the job dangerously without the shoring …they didn’t replace all the way to the trap or they would need the shoring ….to get around that , they spiced new line into old line with a rubber coupling so they didn’t need to go near the trap ! 😩😂and the lady paid more for shoty work actually . Now she going to have to get the old pipe to the trap fixed down the road when it leaks LUL
That guy in the back of the plaintiff is annoying. Sit still!!
plaintiff should have went with rotor rooter. better company.
They had to sever the connection to attach the new pipe?
Defendants accent becomes more audible once she becomes frustrated lol
I woke up with people's court fuzzy socks on my mind
just another instance of the intro guy lying - he said a permit from the city was needed, it was the electric co. that was holding it up, not the city permit. They do this all the time - "the defendant says XYZ" and then XYZ is never brought up in the case.
So what I'm seeing here is lack of communication with the defendant and the plantiff. Yes they were waiting on a third party, but they didn't communicate that UNTIL PLANTIFF CALLED AND CANCELLED. The damage was already done. The defendant did not complete the job, so they need to give her the money back minus the camera fee they performed.
When the judge said “you should be a lawyer” what she met was “you’re right”
The letter exact words should of been “we did not require permission to do this job” but it didn’t, they danced around it
The second company just went ahead and did the work without the proper permission that’s IT !😂😂😂
But regardless you don’t get paid for a job you didn’t do ! Give her, her money back !
I agree with the te tenant, this person is a HUGE LAR.TENNT was inderdaad very well prepared.Thubs up to this Lady tenant
“Go tell your boss” 😂😂😂
The 2:5 with 1,000 words
I feel like this might be the ONLY time the old man at the end couldn’t find anything negative to comment on.....he was thinking about it though!!
It’s very difficult to determine exactly what’s broken underground even with a camera. The defendant was not trying to rip off the customer. She was clearly trying to obey the code laws of her area and dig up the area safely. They could dig further up and hope they’ll find the issue further away, but if they get within 3 feet of that utility pole they’d have to shut down and pull permits. That would waste more time and piss the customer off even more. They did the right thing.
May our Heavenly Father bless everyone with peace, joy, happiness and good health. In the Name of our precious Savior Jesus Christ Amen.
It doesn't sound like the company was actually doing anything wrong. It sounds like the other plumber may be more experienced and was able to get the camera around. AND CAN HARVEY STOP THE WOMAN QUESTIONS? LOL
So - Roto Rooter is the place to be... I think that's the commercial jingle.
Why do the people outside always look like they are high? Is there a Hookah place next door or something?!?!?
The narration at the beginning of the vid is the most over-the-top voice dub i've ever heard LMAO
this judge hell it wasnt a complaint no it was hunny which one is it lol
Does anyone else stare into the audience when they do close ups of the plaintiffs and defendants? I do all the time and see some hilarious stuff. For instance, check out the female in red behind the defendant at 10:41. Lmao 😂😂😂😂😂😂 why
AS A PHILLY NATIVE MYSELF I KNOW WE GOT A LOT OF SHADY ASS BUSSINESSES IN THIS CITY!! SMH
Cheaper isnt always the BEST! You get what you pay for 🤷🏼♀️
Pay for what you get
Not just a plumber will cheat
Judge doesn't understand plumbing. Nobody showed how close to the pole the company did excavate and it is very likely the other just dug closer than they were allowed to the pole.
This is some free advice if you want to know if you have a leak Make sure that no water is running in your house, go to the water meter if it's turning you have a leak
Had the second Plummer not specifically said they didn’t get within 3 feet of the pole they could have been fined? So they don’t call peco and dig close anyways to fix it…
Simple case. The defendants didn't want to spend the time with a camera to CONFIRM they would need the utility company. Another company spent the time, didn't need the utility company and got the job DONE!
terrible judgement, no one understands the situation at all and the judge doesnt pay attention to details at all
I declare BANKRUPTCY!!!
Do they encourage Doug to be a jerk? Sheesh
Surly safety is a factor and they probably have to have the electric company out as it’s probably part of their insurance.
I know that lady Mrs Smith....
Keep Reading... 😂😂😂