I’m floored! This is the second case I’ve seen recently where the person walked away, not making any money. Very disappointed in her verdict.

I was shocked when she ruled completely in favour of the plaintiffs, especially after she herself asks them @ 7:25 “Is there no value to what they did for you to be asking for the $1500 back?” Unbelievable. 😧

She often does. Why would a sensible person hire an air conditioning person to do this kind of job?? It makes no sense.

Exactly!

I notice she gets that way when one of the parties is a couple.

She comes from a Construction family and the parities settled the case.

No kidding! It's so unfair that someone can put in work like that and be left with zero compensation. I don't understand it. Judge even commented on the fact that he's asking for all of it back and implying their work was worth nothing!

If you dont like the way she judges cases THEN DONT WATCH

@@judyelmer2257 Ok Judy 😒 Not a single person in this thread said they don't like the way she judges. It's called giving opinions.

She did not blow it. You think you know the law because you have Google. That’s far more pitiful.

@@ct6410 No, I don't think I know anything about the law. I just made an arbitrary post without even watching the episode. Your response is appreciated. Thanks so very much.

@@ct6410 You have nothing but insults. GTFO.

Totally agree, I usually feel she made the right call but not on this one!

@@Kohhhhhh right?!

she's not consistent.

If the job was not completed, the weeds will grow back. The whole job was wasted.

they power washed but they did not fix the problem which was to seal it so no grass will grow. outcome is because they were making a contract without knowing how to do it. the Defendant him self said it they did not know how to do it but then why make a contract for it?

horrible verdict . nobody should have to do hard labor for free . hey judge , slavery is illega in the united states . the plaintiffs came with NO EVIDENCE that they told the workers to use a special type of sand before the work was done and no promises were ever made to them and nothing in writing about weeds never growing back for many years .

@@baboytablo5735 if there was no contract and they did not have alot of experience with it then the plaintiff should have not hired them , but once the plaintiff hired them and they did work then the plaintiff should be on the hook for paying for the work and should get no money back ! there should be consequences for letting people do work on your home , nobody works for free , experienced or not .

No.

Nope the Defendant stated he did this as he is learning how to lay brick and still in school.

I think he took advantage too. He was explaining it to the judge like it was so easy to do-- if it was, why would he need anyone else to do it for him? I think he preyed on the defendant's ignorance and the fact they were trying to expand business.

Agreed!

Well if he couldn’t, he shouldn’t have taken money. Everybody knows what their abilities are . If it’s beyond you, don’t do the job. That’s the problem

888

8

8

No, she didn’t. Her evaluation of the merits is HERS. We don’t get told we got things wrong by people who NEVER FUCKING WENT TO LAW SCHOOL. When are you people going to get it? We didn’t spend 3 years learning how to Google things. SIT DOWN.

Who’s WE ...you got a mouse in your pocket?

@@ct6410 sometimes you don't have to go to law school to know a judge gets something wrong. Happens all the time

@@ct6410 Why are you behaving as though going to lose school prevents her from incorrect ruling. This ruling goes against precedent that she herself set that the work done has value.

neither of them have a contract, so it's pretty arbitrary and cringe to just take the plantiffs word for it, when you say "neither of you have a contract" you can't then pretend that the dude had evidence he asked initially.

I don't believe he asked at first one, because he didn't even know the brand or pricing to get, if he had initially requested that, you would think he would know that, but still he somehow still does not know, I believe he heard of it after the fact in passing and wanted to make a fuss out of it.

Exactly. There was no written contract, and the defendant said the plaintiff never asked for that service. JM blew it completely.

actually they did have the evidence through the text messages with the defendants brother. She even said to the defendant that according to the text messages that the plaintiff did request for the polymeric sand. I worked in construction for over 25 years and seen a lot of pavers installed. They are very common as driveways where I live. I have never seen an underlayment for the pavers. The reason is that it would trap water and cause issues. Weeds are from seeds that fall through the cracks of the pavers. Not from underground as the defendant stated. To keep weeds from growing between the pavers is exactly what the plaintiff stated. You install that special type of sand and sealant. Look it up. The only time underlayment is used is for gravel driveways. The defendant did not really know what they were doing. Just power washing is one thing but sealing something is something different and you have to know exactly what materials to use or it will be work for nothing. I agree that the plaintiff should not have gotten the full amount back since the did clean and scrub the pavers.

Exactly, they had no contract and most jobs require one if said job was over $600 dollars, I’m betting even if defendant did the poly sand they would have come back for their money,WHY because no contract. Either they pay and get it back in court or they don’t pay when job is done and person doing job has no recourse,WHY ... no contract , and the plaintiffs knew this!

@@viper278 how do the texts prove the plaintiffs claims? How does a text, that came after the plaintiff was unsatisfied, saying the defendants are learning how to do the work show that the initial agreement required the work plaintiff’s claiming? If that specific sand was not part of the initial agreement and plaintiff began demanding it after the defendant began working, the defendant could’ve sent the same exact text. In other words, how do the messages show that the parties agreed to using that sand in their initial contract? They don’t seem to indicate any timing when I heard them.

@@RumbleRish The text wasn't from the defendant but from his brother. the judge was reading the text but the defendant was talking also so it was almost hard to hear it. Re-listen to the Judge's explanation of her verdict and she even says from what was in the texts between the Plaintiff and the the defendants brother it was apparent that the plaintiff requested the polysand at the start. The brother replied with "we are learning how to seal the pavers" or something to that effect. That is why I wrote 5the comment. If there was no mention of the poly sand then the Judge would have sided with the defendant because she asked the Plaintiff for proof that you requested the poly sand for the pavers. Plus, if you look up how the install pavers and how/what materials to use it says to seal the pavers with the poly sand to keep water and weeds from penetrating the gaps. The defendant and his brother were very new to this business and didn't have proper training or knowledge to do it professionally. The reason for the poly sand is that it dries hard so when you pressure wash your paver due to oil or stains the sand doesn't wash away.

100% They took advantage of a couple of guys trying to make living and keep business going! The smirk at the end was the worst! With that said... this was a 1,500 dollar learning experience!

Smirk

@@crystalshaw8744thanks spelling police for correcting me a year later. I guess you never sent a fat fingered text and made a mistake. Good for you 😒. Here is your cookie 🍪.

if he was black youd love him

@@robertauthelet5794….you good Rob?

@@nevermindlaughs yes im sorry if you dont understand english, try google translate

Judge was not wrong on the case; this is how all partied settled the case. And the Judge comes from a Construction family, for she knows how this works.

@@trekgirl65 Wrong. She gave the defendant no credit for ANY work. In addition, the plaintiff provided absolutely no evidence that there was ever an agreement.

@@SilverSergeant yes he did....through the various text messages....it may not have been a traditional contract, but they did have stuff in writing.....the entire dispute was that from the very beginning the plaintiff asked for that polymer sand, he didn't get it....you need to have pavers to understand that the verdict was just, because everything has to be redone....I'd know because I have a lot of pavers front and back just like plaintiff

Do they have a barrier or do they have this magic sand, because I’ve never heard of this type of sealant. Don’t know if it’s better then barrier but it seems to me it’s only a temporary fix just as the barrier doesn’t last for ever either.

No, it wasn’t. Look at some of the other threads I’ve responded to, am tired of explaining.

@@ct6410 Ridiculous comment, too.

@@ct6410 do then wtf do you keep commenting.. lol 😂

@@ct6410 relax. stop taking it personally for christ's sake. it's the internet, people have differing opinions. just because you had a shitty day doesn't mean go to youtube and take it out on strangers. go have a drink

That is the best comment I’ve read and before judge cut off plaintiff he was saying $2200 dollars. $1500 from $2200 =$700 that is the portion of job not completed, defendant should have something for his labor as whoever comes back is going to have half the labor if they did all that was said ( moss and mold) was done.

How do you know?

his appearance fee is reduced by the amount

Is it because of this magic sand the case was based on!

So true!

Without a heavy liner underneath the pavers to prevent weeds from coming up, there will always be weeds. The original contractor is at fault (or the original customer, for not agreeing to the impermeable liner

@@sienna3460 I noticed that too

@@sienna3460 When you rent you usually don't have to worry about it. At least, I think that's what they were getting at, lol.

@@milesandemilyrock nah, this guy @Adrian Prince is an idiot. Also he loves pointing out that he owns a home, so what, most people do. I do, is there a 🏅 you get for owning one that I don't know about🤣🤣🤣