I'm glad to see that other people think that this ruling was unfair too. I feel like the defendant didn't get a chance to prove his case. After the plaintiff's witness said that he was an expert, she just continued to question him instead of allowing the defendant to rebuttal.
Yeah, I think she messed up here, too. She should have let the defendant make his case as to why he did the job right, especially since he has so much experience wit these repairs. I think she just wanted to make a quick verdict and get it over with.
@@rain73ful The defendant said he even had a video he never got to play. I’ve watched hundreds of these cases and this is the one that sticks with me as the worst one she got dead wrong.
I better not see rulings continue like this, Like wtf???? I wanted more from the defendant 😡 I don’t give a crap about what Milian thinks! I Wanna see the evidence from the court cases like everyone else. I watch so many of these episodes but all it takes is one bad apple (this episode) and it will spoil the rest. I will continue to watch, as long as I don’t see another one like this 😒😒😒😒
Did she have diarrhea or something? She just up and left without even listening to the response regarding the communication. This was a horrible ruling.
I've been a homebuilder for over 25 years and have to say that both 'experts' were correct in explaining the mechanics of gutter installation. The problem here was that the installer did not take the proper care in the positioning of the gutter in the absence of fascia boards. Water was flowing off the pitched roof at a rate to fast for the gutter to interrupt the volume of water. Actually an easy fix in readjusting the placement and angle of metal straps!
@@kinsley7777 He only needed to check the pitch of the guttering so that it angles slightly down to the down spout, it doesn't matter what the roof pitch is.
@@kinsley7777 What the OP is suggesting and I agree is, from those photo's presented, there is no possible way she could have made a fair judgement, it's just impossible! As for the so called beads of water underneath the guttering? If it's raining the guttering can get wet underneath from rain running off the sides of the guttering.
@@Ais-eb9bk Well for one what he said made literally no sense. His job is to explain the ruling and there was no good explanation, hence his struggle to come up with anything to say.
I’m shocked by the Judge’s ruling. Where were the documents showing what needs to be corrected from the new company? She didn’t even really let the defendant defend his position as she just took the word of the consultant. Plus how can you make him pay back the entire amount? How about his time and labor? JM’s credibility has taken hit imo.
FYI, a consultant is not an expert. A consultant gives you an idea of what to do and then finds people who can make it happen. They are NOT experts Milian should have known better here.
I hate to say this, but this ain’t the first time she’s done something like this. Just saying. And yes, I totally agree with you the ruling was incorrect.
TERRIBLE ruling. And I generally agree with her decisions and understand them too. As almost EVERYONE is saying here, this one is a mystery what she was thinking! The People's Court youtube person should have her come on here and SHARE with us....really. Please do it.
I think it had to do with the Plaintiffs Witness testimony of the Defendant Not returning the plaintiffs calls or going to fix The problem the plaintiff had with the shady work 🤔
I typically agree with the judge but in this instance she never gave the defendant a chance to defend himself. He might as well have not even been there
He only got to explain the two types of gutters. It did seem like he didn't get to testify, refute, or even show any of his prepared evidence. But then again, we are not aware of what happens once it goes to edit.
Same!!! I am always rooting for whomever Judge Milian is rooting for, but this case---what?!? No. Her "expert" wasn't an expert, she didn't allow the defense to show videos.
Wow. The judge was wrong for her POOR judgment. She believed a non licensed church member friend over a 39 year licensed contractor. She should be ashamed of her ruling. And if the friend is such a expert as the old lady mentioned, why didn’t she have him fix her gutters? The proof is in that information.
When the plaintiff's expert witness mentioned specific parts being missing from the gutter, the defendant didn't object nor his facial expression change even a bit which tells me he knew he got caught doing subpar work. She made the correct ruling.
@@jamslam5641 why would he object? He’s being respectful by letting the plaintiff explain his case. If you watch Milian, you would know she doesn’t allow anyone to object or cut someone off while they’re talking. And the defendants facial expression isn’t proof of any truth to this case. That’s a poor and emotional judgment of a case.
@@jenniehughes6927 Exactly. That’s a big red flag 🚩 of their story being bs. If he knows so much about gutter repairs he should’ve done it to begin with or repaired it.
Then you missed the one about the craigslist nanny. It was obvious in the plaintiffs emails that the title had been changed by the defendant. And the defendant never would’ve written a craigslist posting that detailed until after the fact
What evidence she said herself she couldn't see what she was showing her. She didn't even show where she called or where he said I would come and didn't come. Bogus rulling
This is one of the oddest judgements I've seen on her show. Didn't ask to see the new estimates, didn't ask if she had proof of trying to reach out after the fact, and didn't give the defendant a chance to defend himself against the allegations from the witness. (I'm well aware she sees everything submitted before the case, still odd. She must have seen something in the evidence that had her mind made up before it even began) Not typical in her proceedings. Not to mention she refunded her everything. Definitely mixed feelings on this one.
she did, but what she did was estimates for a whole new gutter job based on a 'consultant (not an expert)' saying it had to be redone completely and NOT a contractor.
Why didn't the judge give the defendant the opportunity to defend his case? Isn't he allowed to address the issues that were brought up? I've seen every episode of this show and have never seen the judge act this unfairly, ever. She is normally more than fair to both sides.
I dont like when judges dont look at both sides videos or evidence. But they always will on text messages. I think she should have got some of her money back not all.
Judge Milian had to of known this woman or she was a friend of a friend or family member because she didn't let the guy defend himself at all! Something is up with this case..
@@kietero Nope, that wasn't in her ruling and the plaintiff had no evidence the defendant took pictures illegally..the judge told her she needed proof of that accusation.
Even though I think the ruling was complete BS, there is a difference between a man who is over the hill doing gutter work and just inspecting work. A working stiff would know that. I take it you don’t work for a living.
ABSURD and here is a breakdown: First of all, the roofer was recommended by her general contractor “Bill”. This isnt some guy she randomly found somewhere, he was referred by someone already working on her home that she clearly trusted, and trusted his recommendation. Im not a roofing expert but I have enough general construction knowledge to know that the roofer knew what he was doing and talking about. He knew what everything was called, handled the clips like he’s done it a million times, mentioned self tapping, self sealing, stainless screws, explained the common alternative mounting option for homes without fascia boards, or with rafters cut at such an angle that the standard mount wont work. This wasnt some jerry rigged install, you can find these roof clips at any hardware store. The plaintiffs “expert” isnt a roofer, is potentially biased as he is her friend from church, and he didnt even go on the roof, the pics they shared were taken from the ground. There was no third party estimate detailing the inefficiencies, and the excuse given for that was totally absurd. She was never required in any way to prove she had called him, most plaintiffs show their cellphones to prove calls or text messages, she was simply taken at her word. The claim that the gutter was lower at the peak of the roof than at the bottom of the roof seemed completely wrong. The supposed “roof” shown where the gutter is supposedly low doesnt look like “roof”. The downspout leading to the lower roof could have already been there, Im not sure I heard evidence that he was supposed to replace every single component of her gutter system, AND her “expert” didnt use the correct terminology (gutter/downspout). He also claimed he didnt use “the right hangers”, but again, how so? The fascia was rotted, Im sure he would have rather used the standard mounting option, but since he couldnt he used a common alternative. Finally, many defendants have claimed they werent allowed to present their evidence but in reality they were and are simply mad that they lost, but this defendant was actually right. SO much evidence/questions were asked of the plaintiff and the defendant wasnt given ANY opportunity to respond, he was literally silent for quite some time. PATHETIC.
It seemed like an unfair ruling. The only thing I can think of, is there were some arguments made that were edited out for programming that we didn’t get to see?? 🤔
Worst episode I've ever seen! Judge always gives the defendant an opportunity to defend his case, but she didn't even let him reply to the accusations or show evidence which he clearly said he had.
I can't believe the Karen won here. I don't get the ruling at all. The plaintiff basically just got free work and the defendant wasn't allowed to defend himself. This ruling made zero sense
Judge was off on this one. Defendant didnt really get a chance to present his case and plaintiff lacked any compelling proof. That being said, she may have been entitled to a partial refund. The one video did show the gutters leaking and someone else had to show up and fix the mistakes. But the defendant never got to say anything.
I disagree with the judge ruling especially if he got a video showing water is not falling over the gutter. Judge just took this woman side it sounds like a money grab and a con.
Something about this makes me uneasy. I have seen Judge M dismiss more credible evidence in the past and I would be hesitant conclude so easily that the job was as botched as they claimed it was via their testimony and video.
That's crazy the plantiff won....anybody can come in there and say they are an expert..plus the new company she hired didn't have it in writing the gutters were wrong
For the very first time, I'm angry and disappointed in her. she didn't even give the defendant a hearing. very impartial hearing, Justice was not served this time.
That “expert” wouldn’t have even been given a chance to talk in Judge Judy’s courtroom. And the defendant wouldn’t have had to pay her back for the whole job.
As someone who recently had the fascia and gutters done on my home, the judge completely botched this ruling. The plaintiff was too cheap to replace the fascia. The "consultant" is incorrect in saying the gutters were installed improperly when it comes to the upper floor. I live in a wet climate and all the homes here have the top floor draining onto the lower roof and then into the lower gutter. I also didn't see anything out of the ordinary in the videos she took. JM really blew this one.
You might lose friends if you do that . I have cutting 2 people out of my life for constantly cutting me off to tell me something they've already said 5 times.
I like Judge Milian and maybe it was bad editing, but we didn't see the defendant get a chance to rebut any of the allegations made by the plaintiff. In the end the judgement might have been correct, but it seemed rushed and unfair.
It's not just that the editing was bad or anything like that the dependent literally didn't get the chance to share any of his stuff at all and didn't even get to speak unless he interrupted which he only did like once
13:30 -- RE: Expertise: "Well, my father was a mechanic. His father was a mechanic. My mother's father was a mechanic. My three brothers are mechanics. Four uncles on my father's side are mechanics ..." ~ Ms. Mona Lisa Vito
Wow...this is a first....I've never seen Judge Milian not give the other party a chance to defend themselves or present evidence. Was she okay? Seemed like she was in a rush
@@Ampacityelectric To be honest, I feel like the guy shouldn't have accepted the job if she wasn't willing to replace the rotten wood...he should have advised her and if she still refused, to replace the wood, had her sign a waiver. Bc again, he don't sound particular about his work. Which speaks volumes about the quality of his work, or lack there of.
.... I’m not saying the defendant is innocent but he didn’t even get to defend himself. This was unjust. This is not how our legal system (Television forums or otherwise) should ever be portrayed. She obviously had a bathroom emergency 🚨
If her witness was such an expert, why didn’t he do the job? And I’m not satisfied with her ruling, I’m quite disappointing actually. So basically the guy worked for free
What in the world happened to her "rough justice?" How does the Plaintiff get back everything and the work done by the contractor is totally ignored, dismissed and discounted? What a disgrace? SMDH!! 😡
Someone’s Snorting (I think it’s the defendant) and it’s disgusting. 🤢 Dude you’re on national television, standing in front of a Mic. It’s bad enough, he came into court, looking as if he was starting a job, at that moment.
The judge was horrible on this one. This woman had no proof and her "witness" is a friend, so who's to say he isn't lying to help her win her case?! Wow... I feel awful for the defendant. I'm glad to hear that everyone else agrees with me. Judge's credibility just took a massive hit. Smh
The old lady should have hired her good friend from church to fix her cutter in the first place?? As she knew he can do the job to fix her cutter. To me its unfair justice?
Something beeped right before she abruptly decided the case (incorrectly, as many have said). What was that about? The defendant was right to say it was a joke.
When people say “we are members of the same church” like okay that’s cool…. Lol next time someone asks me “how do you know X, I’m gonna say ‘Oh we’re not member of the same church” 😆
Well it looks like if he had a jury trial it would've went completely different! Just for the record I agree, how could she grant the entire amount and without any consideration that the plantiff had done what was possible with the conditions of the house. Way too quick on the trigger there. Sometimes they want you to put a glossy coat on a turd and then yell at you later because they still have a turd! Instead of that diamond they were expecting.
Wow! She did not even give him an opportunity to dispute what she asked to play them with me. I am truly shocked at how this ended so quickly without any answer to what the plan is witness has said. She just gave her ruling. So unfair sounding. Even if the plaintiff was right and her contract that was right, there should have been some type of opportunity to answer what VR II contractor.
Wow!! I normally agree wit judge M but this was a terrible ruling. Why didn't the defendant even get to DEFEND himself. I agree with him "what a joke" I mean why did you have him waste his time coming to court if you didnt care to hear his side.
I almost always agree with the judge but in this case I don’t she didn’t even give the defendants a chance to plead their case also the stuff that her “expert” was saying is not even true I definitely would’ve sided with the defendant in this one
This comment section is the perfect example of monkey see monkey do! People just want to fit in and follow what the crowd says. The defendant did a horrible job. Also, those gutters were under the roof! The pics are the proof! The videos are the proof! Anyone who knows about installing gutters would tell u! The pics clearly show them hanging way under. Plus small claims civil matters only need to be proven more likely then not. This isn't a criminal case where u need lots of evidence and a smoking gun. I've noticed in so many comment sections on so many social media apps where people all just follow the majority. Pretty sad.
Id've taken this to Appellate Court if I were him that ruling was crap. Honestly, since he didn't have a chance to present a defense he had the right to present.
I thought it was just me, then I read the comments and I'm NOT alone in this one. The "judge" was wrong on this. Not in the sense that she heard both sides and then decided, but the fact that she didn't even really talk to the defendant!
I'm glad to see that other people think that this ruling was unfair too. I feel like the defendant didn't get a chance to prove his case. After the plaintiff's witness said that he was an expert, she just continued to question him instead of allowing the defendant to rebuttal.
I hope the defendant reads these comments and gets some sense of justice.
Yeah, I think she messed up here, too. She should have let the defendant make his case as to why he did the job right, especially since he has so much experience wit these repairs. I think she just wanted to make a quick verdict and get it over with.
@@rain73ful
The defendant said he even had a video he never got to play. I’ve watched hundreds of these cases and this is the one that sticks with me as the worst one she got dead wrong.
Judge didn't even let the defendant respond .... ridiculous.....
I better not see rulings continue like this, Like wtf???? I wanted more from the defendant 😡 I don’t give a crap about what Milian thinks! I Wanna see the evidence from the court cases like everyone else. I watch so many of these episodes but all it takes is one bad apple (this episode) and it will spoil the rest.
I will continue to watch, as long as I don’t see another one like this 😒😒😒😒
Did she have diarrhea or something? She just up and left without even listening to the response regarding the communication. This was a horrible ruling.
That's exactly what I thought! She was prairie doggin' or something 🤣
😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@SaturnaliaJones 🤣😂
I've been a homebuilder for over 25 years and have to say that both 'experts' were correct in explaining the mechanics of gutter installation. The problem here was that the installer did not take the proper care in the positioning of the gutter in the absence of fascia boards. Water was flowing off the pitched roof at a rate to fast for the gutter to interrupt the volume of water. Actually an easy fix in readjusting the placement and angle of metal straps!
Bad ruling. The defendant didn't get a chance to fix any problems and the plaintiff's videos didn't even show problems!
I'm forced to agree.
Without going up to the gutter in question you can’t check the pitch. Her “Construction Consultant” just helped her rip off a contractor.
Typical church people.
I agree 100%
Maybe this is a stupid question, but what prevented him from checking roof pitch when he WAS "up to the gutter" as he installed them (?)
@@kinsley7777 He only needed to check the pitch of the guttering so that it angles slightly down to the down spout, it doesn't matter what the roof pitch is.
@@kinsley7777 What the OP is suggesting and I agree is, from those photo's presented, there is no possible way she could have made a fair judgement, it's just impossible! As for the so called beads of water underneath the guttering? If it's raining the guttering can get wet underneath from rain running off the sides of the guttering.
She refused to let the defendant show his photos and video. The judge was not fair to him. What was that about? 🤔🤔
Agree! But "before watching the episode, I'm guessing you have to submit the pictures before the trial . Not during."
She sure was in a hurry to go somewhere. Maybe it was lunchtime?
I think the judge didn't like that the defendent was dressed like he was going to a bar rather than a courtroom.
@@williamg8269 oh please theres been worse
You could tell even Harvey didn’t agree with the ruling
EXACTLY
I feel like she ruled so quickly without hearing the defendant side was because she doesn't know anything bout gutters
@@stsukino25 She didn't like how he showed her with the actual gutters... she didn't like that he commanded her attention to that. Beotch..
How can you tell that??
@@Ais-eb9bk Well for one what he said made literally no sense. His job is to explain the ruling and there was no good explanation, hence his struggle to come up with anything to say.
I’m shocked by the Judge’s ruling. Where were the documents showing what needs to be corrected from the new company? She didn’t even really let the defendant defend his position as she just took the word of the consultant. Plus how can you make him pay back the entire amount? How about his time and labor? JM’s credibility has taken hit imo.
Also what about the gutters that he provided in the cost? He got ripped off big time!
I agree!!!! It is ridiculous that Judge Milian did not even look at their evidence!!!
I was wondering the same thing. Completely wrong ruling in this case. He did the job.
FYI, a consultant is not an expert.
A consultant gives you an idea of what to do and then finds people who can make it happen. They are NOT experts
Milian should have known better here.
I hate to say this, but this ain’t the first time she’s done something like this.
Just saying.
And yes, I totally agree with you the ruling was incorrect.
TERRIBLE ruling. And I generally agree with her decisions and understand them too. As almost EVERYONE is saying here, this one is a mystery what she was thinking! The People's Court youtube person should have her come on here and SHARE with us....really. Please do it.
I hope the defendant reads these comments and gets some sense of justice.
Couldn't agree more. This decision made zero sense. She didn't let the defendant defend himself
I think it had to do with the Plaintiffs Witness testimony of the Defendant Not returning the plaintiffs calls or going to fix The problem the plaintiff had with the shady work 🤔
Lol, and she talks about having knowledge in building and construction.
Wrong. Great ruling.
I typically agree with the judge but in this instance she never gave the defendant a chance to defend himself. He might as well have not even been there
exactly wtf this was terrible, poor from the judge
I totally agree
He only got to explain the two types of gutters. It did seem like he didn't get to testify, refute, or even show any of his prepared evidence. But then again, we are not aware of what happens once it goes to edit.
I completely agree. He barely got to defend himself
Same!!! I am always rooting for whomever Judge Milian is rooting for, but this case---what?!? No. Her "expert" wasn't an expert, she didn't allow the defense to show videos.
Wow. The judge was wrong for her POOR judgment. She believed a non licensed church member friend over a 39 year licensed contractor. She should be ashamed of her ruling. And if the friend is such a expert as the old lady mentioned, why didn’t she have him fix her gutters? The proof is in that information.
When the plaintiff's expert witness mentioned specific parts being missing from the gutter, the defendant didn't object nor his facial expression change even a bit which tells me he knew he got caught doing subpar work. She made the correct ruling.
@@jamslam5641 why would he object? He’s being respectful by letting the plaintiff explain his case. If you watch Milian, you would know she doesn’t allow anyone to object or cut someone off while they’re talking. And the defendants facial expression isn’t proof of any truth to this case. That’s a poor and emotional judgment of a case.
Exactly. Why didn't she get her church friend to do the job to begin with.
@@jenniehughes6927 Exactly. That’s a big red flag 🚩 of their story being bs. If he knows so much about gutter repairs he should’ve done it to begin with or repaired it.
Same thing I want to know. Why didn't she get him to fix it if he's such an expert? Judge could've asked him for some credentials at least?
What happened?!? She usually thoroughly explains why she is ruling against someone. That was odd behavior for her.
Very odd.
I honestly think she had to go to the bathroom
@@positivelastaction3957 she could have said "court's in recess"
@@positivelastaction3957 😅
She was eating bean that day and she was in a hurry...
She dropped the ball on this ruling.
First time I've ever thought that
Then you missed the one about the craigslist nanny. It was obvious in the plaintiffs emails that the title had been changed by the defendant. And the defendant never would’ve written a craigslist posting that detailed until after the fact
@@hadley407 oh wow, I'll have to check it out
Exactly my thoughts! I've never seen JM act unfairly in a decade of watching her... until this. Wow! I'm stunned!
@@torahtrae3412 I thought worse case scenario...he gives back half or something like that but yeah...
Crazy
I agree. This ruling was complete BS! I’ve never felt that way before. She didn’t listen to a thing the defendant had to say!
yea Milian was tripping on this 1, and usually she always say "i come from a family of Contractors, i know about construction"
Haha dont forget her saying something Spanish that translates to " when I cover the sun with my finger, what come out cheap is expensive, "
Total bad judgment she screwed the pooch on this case
@@chvishal well she’s Cuban so maybe there is a dialect difference? Just a thought, I’m no expert lol
Wow, what the heck the defendant wasn't even questioned at all!? Unfair ruling.
There was no need to question. The evidence spoke for itself.
What evidence she said herself she couldn't see what she was showing her. She didn't even show where she called or where he said I would come and didn't come. Bogus rulling
This is one of the oddest judgements I've seen on her show. Didn't ask to see the new estimates, didn't ask if she had proof of trying to reach out after the fact, and didn't give the defendant a chance to defend himself against the allegations from the witness. (I'm well aware she sees everything submitted before the case, still odd. She must have seen something in the evidence that had her mind made up before it even began) Not typical in her proceedings. Not to mention she refunded her everything. Definitely mixed feelings on this one.
No mixed feelings here . She was flat out wrong. Definitely not fair.
I don’t know i kinda feel like that wasn’t enough evidence. I think the ruling was a little unfair.
This other guy never heard a real chance to defend himself. She was off on this one lol
the plaintiff did not test. the judge asked, no answer and she let it go. she missed this one.
That ruling was pretty abrupt and it’s true she didn’t even look at his pictures. Weird ruling ...
She couldn't rule against the church people. That would make her a bad person and she might end up going to hell.
@@jenniehughes6927
I’m suspicious that she knows the plaintiff.
Wrong ruling. Shouldn’t have given everything back. Work was done. She should have brought estimates as to what it would have cost to fix.
she did, but what she did was estimates for a whole new gutter job based on a 'consultant (not an expert)' saying it had to be redone completely and NOT a contractor.
Why didn't the judge give the defendant the opportunity to defend his case? Isn't he allowed to address the issues that were brought up? I've seen every episode of this show and have never seen the judge act this unfairly, ever. She is normally more than fair to both sides.
The judge vas right
The vas a cro
The judge vas right
Well I've seen her rule unfairly more than a few times .
I dont like when judges dont look at both sides videos or evidence. But they always will on text messages. I think she should have got some of her money back not all.
I agree this was not her typical ruling.....but anyone else wondering why she didn't hire her "Expert" friend in the first place???
🤷♀️
The "Expert" was a friend from church. How is he an objective professional in the first place?
He didn’t do gutters he just was a consultant. Which means he see gutters in passing but doesn’t do them. Definitely not an expert on gutters
I've roofed quite a few houses in the past, I didn't see any evidence to support the plaintiffs claims! You dropped the ball on this one judge!
I disagree with giving all the money back. He should have been somewhat compensated for the work he did do.
Judge Milian had to of known this woman or she was a friend of a friend or family member because she didn't let the guy defend himself at all! Something is up with this case..
That was EXACTLY my thought...
Wow not even consider the other side. She not even allow them to talk
How did the judge make that call without at least looking at the defendants evidence? I don’t think that’s fair TBH.
@@kietero This makes sense. Thank you!
@@kietero Thank you! I knew someone had an explanation for this lol
@@kietero Nope, that wasn't in her ruling and the plaintiff had no evidence the defendant took pictures illegally..the judge told her she needed proof of that accusation.
@@llcoolchay It's an incorrect explanation as the plaintiff presented no evidence the defendant took illegal photos.
Awful ruling!!!! Judge never let defendant give their side at all. Shameful.
She was dead wrong for this ruling
Another unfair ruling. Judge Milan picks and chooses. The small guy usually looses.
So you think the plaintiff won because her friend was big and the defendant was smaller? Are you serious?
When did you pass the bar exam? I'm thinking next to never! Get off the stage
@@bingoman1466 don't think you need to pass the bar exam to know that both sides should present their case.
@@positivelastaction3957 😂😂😂
@@bingoman1466 Nice logical fallacy, boomer.
So if her church friend was such an expert why did she not use him instead of hiring the plaintiff for? 🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️
Even though I think the ruling was complete BS, there is a difference between a man who is over the hill doing gutter work and just inspecting work. A working stiff would know that. I take it you don’t work for a living.
@@thebalderthor4884 I take it that you just normally assume things . You know what they say about assuming things . Right ?
@@jenniehughes6927
You taking it that I normally assume things is you assuming. Let that sink in Karen.
@@thebalderthor4884 Thanks for the convoluted twist. I'm back . And just
@@jenniehughes6927
Your comeback to your hypocrisy doesn’t make an ounce of sense.
ABSURD and here is a breakdown:
First of all, the roofer was recommended by her general contractor “Bill”. This isnt some guy she randomly found somewhere, he was referred by someone already working on her home that she clearly trusted, and trusted his recommendation.
Im not a roofing expert but I have enough general construction knowledge to know that the roofer knew what he was doing and talking about. He knew what everything was called, handled the clips like he’s done it a million times, mentioned self tapping, self sealing, stainless screws, explained the common alternative mounting option for homes without fascia boards, or with rafters cut at such an angle that the standard mount wont work. This wasnt some jerry rigged install, you can find these roof clips at any hardware store.
The plaintiffs “expert” isnt a roofer, is potentially biased as he is her friend from church, and he didnt even go on the roof, the pics they shared were taken from the ground.
There was no third party estimate detailing the inefficiencies, and the excuse given for that was totally absurd.
She was never required in any way to prove she had called him, most plaintiffs show their cellphones to prove calls or text messages, she was simply taken at her word.
The claim that the gutter was lower at the peak of the roof than at the bottom of the roof seemed completely wrong. The supposed “roof” shown where the gutter is supposedly low doesnt look like “roof”. The downspout leading to the lower roof could have already been there, Im not sure I heard evidence that he was supposed to replace every single component of her gutter system, AND her “expert” didnt use the correct terminology (gutter/downspout). He also claimed he didnt use “the right hangers”, but again, how so? The fascia was rotted, Im sure he would have rather used the standard mounting option, but since he couldnt he used a common alternative.
Finally, many defendants have claimed they werent allowed to present their evidence but in reality they were and are simply mad that they lost, but this defendant was actually right. SO much evidence/questions were asked of the plaintiff and the defendant wasnt given ANY opportunity to respond, he was literally silent for quite some time.
PATHETIC.
I think the ruling is wrong. This "expert" was also a friend of plaintiff but he never said she didn't pay him.
and as they said several times... they go to the same church... maybe it is the Judge's church!?
It seemed like an unfair ruling. The only thing I can think of, is there were some arguments made that were edited out for programming that we didn’t get to see?? 🤔
Worst episode I've ever seen! Judge always gives the defendant an opportunity to defend his case, but she didn't even let him reply to the accusations or show evidence which he clearly said he had.
The pictures and videos were awful!! She said it herself. I'm so confused
Correct, you can't make a fair judgement based on those photos and video.
I can't believe the Karen won here. I don't get the ruling at all. The plaintiff basically just got free work and the defendant wasn't allowed to defend himself. This ruling made zero sense
Exactly. I would understand getting half back because the man did do work on Karen's house but, I don't know i'm just flabbergasted at the ruling.
Judge was off on this one. Defendant didnt really get a chance to present his case and plaintiff lacked any compelling proof. That being said, she may have been entitled to a partial refund. The one video did show the gutters leaking and someone else had to show up and fix the mistakes. But the defendant never got to say anything.
Not cool Judge M! Sometimes, she's just so huffy and I almost think she forgot to consider the defendant's side?! Wow
I believe she had a leak but the defendant should've been allowed to prove his case.
What a scam, the plaintiff just wants free stuff.. disgusting that humans have gone that low
I disagree with the judge ruling especially if he got a video showing water is not falling over the gutter. Judge just took this woman side it sounds like a money grab and a con.
A lot of the time, this judge is just an a-hole. This is one of those times. Ridiculous.
Something about this makes me uneasy. I have seen Judge M dismiss more credible evidence in the past and I would be hesitant conclude so easily that the job was as botched as they claimed it was via their testimony and video.
Wow. Why did she handle this case so badly. Totally unfair
That's crazy the plantiff won....anybody can come in there and say they are an expert..plus the new company she hired didn't have it in writing the gutters were wrong
Bad call on this one, judge didn't listen to the man that did the work.
For the very first time, I'm angry and disappointed in her. she didn't even give the defendant a hearing. very impartial hearing, Justice was not served this time.
That “expert” wouldn’t have even been given a chance to talk in Judge Judy’s courtroom. And the defendant wouldn’t have had to pay her back for the whole job.
Horrible Ruling!!!! The defendant did not get a chance to Defend himself AT ALL!!! Oh, she was tripping big time in this case...Badddd judgment!!!!
As someone who recently had the fascia and gutters done on my home, the judge completely botched this ruling. The plaintiff was too cheap to replace the fascia. The "consultant" is incorrect in saying the gutters were installed improperly when it comes to the upper floor. I live in a wet climate and all the homes here have the top floor draining onto the lower roof and then into the lower gutter. I also didn't see anything out of the ordinary in the videos she took. JM really blew this one.
If I was the defendant I’d go back to the house and remove all I did.
I normally agree with the judge however this judgment wasn't fair at all.
Judge failed to confirm plaintiff reached out with no response.
Imma start cuttin people off mid sentence like Judge
Yeah everybody loves that,especially when its a judge not letting you defend yourself.
You might lose friends if you do that . I have cutting 2 people out of my life for constantly cutting me off to tell me something they've already said 5 times.
I'm so disappointed! Judge Milian always looks at the evidence from both sides, so why not now? I can't believe what I just saw!
WRONG WRONG WRONG RULING!!!!!! What a ducking joke!!!!! SHE SHOULD GET FIRED FOR THIS RULING!!!
I like Judge Milian and maybe it was bad editing, but we didn't see the defendant get a chance to rebut any of the allegations made by the plaintiff. In the end the judgement might have been correct, but it seemed rushed and unfair.
It's not just that the editing was bad or anything like that the dependent literally didn't get the chance to share any of his stuff at all and didn't even get to speak unless he interrupted which he only did like once
13:30 -- RE: Expertise:
"Well, my father was a mechanic. His father was a mechanic. My mother's father was a mechanic. My three brothers are mechanics. Four uncles on my father's side are mechanics ..."
~ Ms. Mona Lisa Vito
I think everyone in the court and the two spokesmen knew the ruling was so unfair. I feel bad for the constructor
This was a bad bad decision.
The defendant wasn't allowed to defend his side of things. All she had was a friend from church, and poor video.
Def diarrhea!! It was like she cutted of in the middle of the case.
Wow...this is a first....I've never seen Judge Milian not give the other party a chance to defend themselves or present evidence. Was she okay? Seemed like she was in a rush
A consultant isn't necessarily an expert, which is clearly the case here!
It wasn't even clear what part of construction he was a consultant of.
“He’s not an expert”... eh pay the lady !
I know absolutely nothing about gutters, but attached gutters to the roof and not replacing the rotten wood boards sound PROBLEMATIC. 😳
@@Ampacityelectric To be honest, I feel like the guy shouldn't have accepted the job if she wasn't willing to replace the rotten wood...he should have advised her and if she still refused, to replace the wood, had her sign a waiver.
Bc again, he don't sound particular about his work. Which speaks volumes about the quality of his work, or lack there of.
The plantiff looks like George's mom Mrs costanza from the t.v show senfield
OMG you're right! "Georgie!"
@@positivelastaction3957 😁...I was waiting on the plantiff to say , Georgie!!!
.... I’m not saying the defendant is innocent but he didn’t even get to defend himself. This was unjust. This is not how our legal system (Television forums or otherwise) should ever be portrayed. She obviously had a bathroom emergency 🚨
Unfair ruling! Come on Judge
This is the first case that I was shocked at the judgement. The defendant was not given a chance to defend himself.
If her witness was such an expert, why didn’t he do the job? And I’m not satisfied with her ruling, I’m quite disappointing actually. So basically the guy worked for free
What in the world happened to her "rough justice?" How does the Plaintiff get back everything and the work done by the contractor is totally ignored, dismissed and discounted? What a disgrace? SMDH!! 😡
Someone’s Snorting (I think it’s the defendant) and it’s disgusting. 🤢 Dude you’re on national television, standing in front of a Mic. It’s bad enough, he came into court, looking as if he was starting a job, at that moment.
Wow! I usually agree with her, not this time
Judge usually rules in favor of the senior citizen if their opposing litigant is younger. 🙄 Pure ageism.
The judge was horrible on this one. This woman had no proof and her "witness" is a friend, so who's to say he isn't lying to help her win her case?! Wow... I feel awful for the defendant. I'm glad to hear that everyone else agrees with me. Judge's credibility just took a massive hit. Smh
Defendant didn't have a chance to defend himself! I agree with Judge Milian usually but not in this one!
The old lady should have hired her good friend from church to fix her cutter in the first place?? As she knew he can do the job to fix her cutter. To me its unfair justice?
The judge didn’t even give the defendant a chance to speak. What the heck happened here ?!?
Wow the judge was awful on this case. I'm truly surprised.
Something beeped right before she abruptly decided the case (incorrectly, as many have said). What was that about? The defendant was right to say it was a joke.
When people say “we are members of the same church” like okay that’s cool…. Lol next time someone asks me “how do you know X, I’m gonna say ‘Oh we’re not member of the same church” 😆
Well it looks like if he had a jury trial it would've went completely different! Just for the record I agree, how could she grant the entire amount and without any consideration that the plantiff had done what was possible with the conditions of the house. Way too quick on the trigger there. Sometimes they want you to put a glossy coat on a turd and then yell at you later because they still have a turd! Instead of that diamond they were expecting.
I'm surprised they missed the opportunity to call this case "Gutter, he hardly knew her"
11:14
Why didn’t she ask the defendant if that was true!? This case was batsh!t crazy!
Unfair ruling at its best.
Love these home improvement cases.
The judge comes from a family of contractors, I'm surprised she doesn't call more people out
The plaintiffs expert is a lovely guy. And even I can see the poor job done!
Wow! She did not even give him an opportunity to dispute what she asked to play them with me. I am truly shocked at how this ended so quickly without any answer to what the plan is witness has said. She just gave her ruling. So unfair sounding. Even if the plaintiff was right and her contract that was right, there should have been some type of opportunity to answer what VR II contractor.
What a joke is right!
Wow!! I normally agree wit judge M but this was a terrible ruling. Why didn't the defendant even get to DEFEND himself. I agree with him "what a joke" I mean why did you have him waste his time coming to court if you didnt care to hear his side.
I almost always agree with the judge but in this case I don’t she didn’t even give the defendants a chance to plead their case also the stuff that her “expert” was saying is not even true I definitely would’ve sided with the defendant in this one
This comment section is the perfect example of monkey see monkey do! People just want to fit in and follow what the crowd says. The defendant did a horrible job. Also, those gutters were under the roof! The pics are the proof! The videos are the proof! Anyone who knows about installing gutters would tell u! The pics clearly show them hanging way under. Plus small claims civil matters only need to be proven more likely then not. This isn't a criminal case where u need lots of evidence and a smoking gun. I've noticed in so many comment sections on so many social media apps where people all just follow the majority. Pretty sad.
I thought that because I thought that the ruling was fair
Id've taken this to Appellate Court if I were him that ruling was crap. Honestly, since he didn't have a chance to present a defense he had the right to present.
I like how the Judge just gave her verdict then get tf out of there 🏃🏽♀️
Yeah. Otherwise the litigants will argue with her verdict ...I never understood this until recently. 👩⚖️
I think she was late to an appointment, lunch or something 😂 she didn’t bother with hearing the defendants case.
I thought it was just me, then I read the comments and I'm NOT alone in this one. The "judge" was wrong on this. Not in the sense that she heard both sides and then decided, but the fact that she didn't even really talk to the defendant!
I’m shocked with JM..she hardly ever gives the total amount back.