I originally thought the same but the more the details came out, the less I felt that way. Visas don't just expire overnight. The plaintiff should have prepared for the possibility of it not being renewed and like JJ said if his stuff was there he has to pay rent. The defendant was tired of being strung along not knowing what to do with someone else's stuff who is not paying rent and I don't blame him.
I love that Judge Judy cut the defendant off when he said that the plaintiff was being kicked out of the country, and she was very clear that the plaintiff just had to take care of his visa and it was nothing more than that.
@@k.robertrichardson6779get it right. He was not kicked out at all. He had to go back to SA to renew his visa. Being kicked out implys he did something wrong or illegal
Yea, this dudes attitude smells, defendent was tryna act cocky because he was jealous of the palintiffs friend and was probably trying to impress her by making the plaintiff look bad.
Wait a second.... If the car money counts as rent - then why can he throw the belongings away? The room was technically paid for according to Ma'am/Judge/Your Honor
11 หลายเดือนก่อน +80
Well kindve. 5 months were paid for. Sounds like month 6 was not.
2000 != 2400 The landlord was not informed of the return date despite numerous attempts to find out. He also had to do work to sell the car, he was not paid for this. Lastly, in the past he had waived months of rent. Which is a pretty nice thing to do. I think Judge Judy hit the nail on the head with this one after looking at the whole picture. You can only carry someone so far before you get frustrated and ask yourself why you're doing it still.
The plaintiff clearly didn't have a good grasp of the law and what it means to be legally present in rented space. He seems like a good guy with good intentions but ended up not getting anything out of ignorance. It's a shame but it's the world we live in
I feel bad for the 108 people who upvoted you. His items were thrown away 3 days before he moved out. The defendant waited for months. Please pay attention.
Sorry to me he looks like a guy that’s able to put on a suit, stand up straight and is selling a sob story about how it’s everyone else’s job to take care of his responsibilities.
As an American who lives overseas in the Middle East, with many former students going to uni in the USA, you all many not realize how difficult it is/was for Arab/Muslim students to get student visas/renewals. If this was during Trump's presidency - remember his short-lived ban on Muslims entering the country? My husband was refused a visa, with no explanation given. The fact that it took 6 months to get the USA to renew his visa (with all the requisite interviews, paperwork, and fees) is no big surprise to me. Many students here have to still delay their university entrance by up to a year, just waiting to get through all the steps and get approval for their visas. My husband is planning to reapply in January, to hope he can come visit my family with our son and I during summer holiday, as he hasn't been able to for years. I really felt bad for the plaintiff. And the defendant (not withstanding whether rent was owed or not), showed himself to be a racist person - insinuating he was being kicked out, and commenting that everything in his room smelled. I have lived here - most Arab Muslim men are super clean (washing 5 times a day for prayer helps, as well as full showers after s3x), plus cologne is quite a status symbol here - the "smell" the defendant may have noticed was soap and cologne - maybe the defendant should become acquainted with them himself.
Instead of looking at what the plantiff didn’t do, they need to look at what the defendant didn’t do. Didn’t ask for permission to sell his belongings for 1.5k less than asking price, did not give him warning before trashing all his personal things, did not give him a chance to find alternative solutions to storage of his things. Never asked for rent in his absence but happy pocketed the 2k. Just like everyone else is saying, if we are calling the 2k rent, than he had no right to throw out the stuff of his rentee
I agree with the everything you're saying and in all rights, the defendant is garbage, but this was a fair call. Unless the plaintiff can prove the defendant disposed of his items well in advance, let's say the very month he left the country, the plaintiff has to pay rent because he essentially used that room as a storage unit whereas someone could have been living in the space.
Everyone has their own set of responsibilities, and headaches. The plaintiff left in a hurry without telling the defendant when he’d be back, and dumped this problem on the defendant’s lap. Zero money for rent , a signed pink slip that the defendant didn’t want initially, a room full of stuff, a bucket in the driveway/on the street , and just SHOWED UP 6 months later. He’s lucky parking enforcement didn’t ticket , and tow the car away. It’s probably safe to assume that the defendant had the car in the driveway for this very reason, so the car wouldn’t just be taken away. The defendant sold the car for less than what the plaintiff was asking for , but the car may have needed new tags , needed a smog , or whatever. Judge Judy wasn’t going to get into all of those details. The bottom line was that the plaintiff abandoned his things without telling his friend/landlord when he would return for them. You don’t burden a friend like that. Those kind of friends you don’t need. Did the plaintiff wait until the last minute to handle his Visa ? The plaintiff presented himself well, and was well spoken , but his entire case reeked of procrastination, and irresponsibility.
I don't trust that the defendant just happened to throw away his stuff 3 days before the Plaintiff returned home. He could've thrown that stuff away in month 1 and just said it was there the entire time because he knew his only defense could've been rent money. Furthermore, JJ is missing the fact that the car was likely sold MONTHS before he returned which would've meant that the defendant, wasn't owed $2,000 at the time of the sale anyway. Dude is a crook and JJ was wrong to not give the plaintiff anything. He lost his car, clothes, and shoes for literally nothing. Lastly, if the defendant was in communication, he could've said, "hey your stuff stinks, i'm going to have to throw it away" if that happened the plaintiff could've decided if he wanted to continue to rent the space or not.
Unfortunately one of those case where as much as you want the defendant to lose and be humiliated because he’s a wise guy, he’s actually showing to be the winner… life’s not fair sometimes….
Agree and not a fair case at all she did not ask for proof of how much he sold it for (bill of sale, cash going into bank account etc) whose to say he didn't sell it for 3500? And I completely believe he told the plaintiff he could keep his stuff there and not pay. Unfortunately he should have had a text or something to prove. But how convenient he threw his things away 2 days before he came back 🤔 if he wanted rent he would have threw out by 3 months. Also how Convenient he was able to sell it for 2000 the exact amount he would have needed for the rent. Defendant is a big rotten liar and a bad person. Karma will come back to bite him in the ass.
@@TwistedSoulzit was a fair case. Renewing visa is a thing lots of international people have to do it happens but it sounds like he was not responsible because, you know when your visa is going to end. It's in your passport the expiration date. He was supposed to go early to get it renewed and he should have asked someone else to take care of his belongs or pay in advance for time he would be gone or something... Anyway I made a mistake before so I understand him but that doesn't mean he should have won
@@bunnyrabi It was not a fair case. Again. she did not confirm the actual purchase price of the vehicle. Just because he left out of Country (which the defendant was aware of) he did indeed come back it's not like he was gone for years this does not give the other man to pocket HIS money. Just like she said the plaintiff made no attempt to get his things moved the defendant gave no attempt to let him know I am throwing your things away next month please figure it out by then. Because then it becomes an illegal eviction if he pocketed the money form the car as "rent" per Judge your stuff was there "you live there" it's an illegal eviction then. Not a fair case.
@@TwistedSoulz First of all, Karma isnt real, its just a coping mechanism. Second, 2400 was the the rent owed, not 2000. third, conveniences are not law, if the plaintiff told the defendant when he was coming back(he didnt) and the defendant then threw his belongings away 2 days before he came back, then you might be onto something, but that wasnt the case, the defendant would have mentioned that(he didnt). Just because youre able to use a possible convenience to support an argument that doesnt mean your argument holds more weight. Just because YOU would of thrown someone out after 3 months doesnt mean the defendant would have done that, the defendant stated he DID hear from the plaintiff at first and stated the plaintiff said hed be back "at the end of the month" several times, after not hearing from the plaintiff for an extended period of time, he then discarded the plaintiffs junk, so why would he keep it there all that time if all he wanted was rent? Why would the defendant not sue for rent owed if thats all he wanted? The money for the sale of the car is not HIS money as you say, the plaintiff owed the defendant RENT, it is now, per the Judge, the defendants money. It is also NOT an illegal eviction because he did not pay rent for 6 months, he had every right to evict the plaintiff 2 months into him being gone without paying rent. The money the defendant got for selling the car also was NOT RENT MONEY until the Judge said that he will not get the money for the sale of the car, because he owed him rent. The Plaintiff returned and COULD have gotten his money for the sale of the car BUT, Judge judy decided the sale of the car will now cover RENT EXPENSES.
@@Tylerrrrrb not even going to read your comment this was several weeks ago dude. I don't even remember what this episode was however I had my opinion and didn't ask for yours.
I'm always amazed at how casual people can be with serious matters. I suspect the outcome of this case would have been different if the plaintiff had even once sent the defendant a message confirming that it was ok for him to be away without paying rent. Such an admission would have nullified any defense the defendant has to keep the money from the sale of the car, or for disposing of the belongings. And speaking of the car, the plaintiff has no evidence to show confirming how much he wanted for it, under what circumstances is the defendant allowed to sell it, etc.
The defendant got 2000 dollars after selling the car, so it covers up for 5 out of the 6 months rent the plaintiff needed to pay. So now the plaintiff owns another 400 dollars for the sixth month, if you add the value of all his belonging together, I believe the value of everything will be more or less 400, so it's pretty fair in my opinion. @@TerryMoore-z9p
@@TerryMoore-z9p Do you really not understand that once the money ran out, leaving no funds against which to charge the rent, the rent was no longer being paid?
@@k.robertrichardson6779did you write your response before reading his comment? Seems like you just wanted to write something regardless of what anyone else is saying. You know how to have a conversation Robert?
The defendant and his racist micro aggressions. The comment about him being “kicked out the country”,referring to his belongings as if they are garbage and the remarks about his belongings(aka him) stinking. Too bad the plaintiff didnt have his stuff together. What a jerk.
I really hate that the defendant won his case. He sold the car AND tossed the plaintiffs stuff. And why didnt they check the blue book value of the car and go from there???? That defendant is a whole level of trash.
Nobody really won, but the reality is the plaintiff was still renting a room so he really did owe the defendant money. Nobody won anything, and goes to show ignorance of the law doesn't get rewarded.
The defendant was unpleasant, but the plaintiff had already lived in the US for five years and still didn't know that you can't use a room in someone's home as storage for free while being away. His error.
and he had a greasy white guy living there rent free for an unknown amount of time. how a lamp and desk can be stinky is beyond me lol he has those still probibly still in the room or in one of his other rented out rooms...the defendant is a butthole and for some reason all the sudden decided he disliked his 5 year friend there is more going on behind the scenes here. my nosey self wants to know what really went down between them lol i mean he kept his stuff for all that time until a few days before he came back lol
I believe the defendant didn’t expect rent esp when he says “because he’s my friend” but Aziz messed up in expecting the stuff to stay in the room for 6 months. He could have offered him something to store it in garage. Defendant still a jerk though 😂
@@mamathemeatsold his car without notifying him of the 1.5K less amount, threw his things away without notification. Never asked for rent, but happily pocketed the 2k. All while calling him a friend. He didn’t do anything wrong that can be proven legally. But a normal person can tell what he did wrong generally, socially, morally. You need to look at what he didn’t do. Didn’t ask for permission to sell his belongings for 1.5k less than asking price, did not give him warning before trashing all his personal things, did not give him a chance to find alternative solutions to storage of his things. Never asked for rent in his absence but happy pocketed the 2k. We call him a jerk because we can see him, his behavior, how he is conducting himself. Purposefully phrasing the situation as “he got kicked out the country” when that is clearly NOT the case, and he is clearly aware of the connotation of someone illegally residing in America. but sure, visa renewal, illegal resident being kicked out of the country, tomayto, tomahto! In this case he got lucky and the plaintiff didn’t have written proof. Still a jerk.
Yup, apparently the Americans in this comment section can't do simple addition and subtracting. Math is apparently too hard yet you all think you're geniuses who know better than the judge🤣
I was really rooting for the plaintiff here🤦🏻♀️ The defendant had an attitude and seemed like he could potentially be a racist, plaintiff seemed quite naive and unfortunately his naivety cost him this case😢
For people disagreeing with the verdict the Plaintiff still owed rent for June. His car only covered the rent from January to May, June was outstanding. I think JJ should have awarded the defendant 400 dollars for the June's rent and awarded the plaintiff 400 for his "stuff". It all comes out the exact amount the verdict was. I find the problem was the defendant didn't have to prove he only sold the car for 2000.
She didn’t even ask for the cars worth and checking the blue book value, she didn’t check how much the defendant ACTUALLY got for the car (as he could easily be lying).. I think there should’ve been a bit more digging involved, considering that the defendant was in contact with the plaintiff and didn’t even warn him about throwing all his belongings away.
The judge is skating over the fact the plantiff left instruction for the car to be sold for $3500. She only gave him credit of $2000. based on the defendants testimony.
I think the defendant lied about the amount he sold the vehicle. If he would had counter sue, he would've had to prove the amount of $2000 was giving to him. I think he sold it at the value of the vehicle.
Even if he wanted the vehicle sold for more or the vehicle was actually for more, it really doesn't matter because he did the work to sell it and should have profited anyway.
I really disagree with the judge on this one. If the plaintiff is being made to pay for the room because his things were there, then the defendant didn't legally have the right to throw his things out. She also didn't make the defendant provide ANY proof that he sold the car for what he claims he did, which is WILD, because it was pretty obvious he was lying about the car's condition. There was a moment's hesitation when she asked him how much he sold the car for, and I believe he just picked a number that was less than what he would be owed for rent. And he sold it WITHOUT the plaintiff's permission, for less than the blue book value of the car. I would think she would at least give the plaintiff the benefit of the car's blue book value, especially considering the fact that the defendant sold it without permission. If the defendant undersold it, that shouldn't be the plaintiff's problem to eat. Honestly, appealing civil cases is difficult--and the contract to be on Judge Judy might bar someone from doing so-but I wish I could go back in time and tell this plaintiff to file an appeal to the decision. She was totally unfair, accepted a LOT of hearsay evidence from the defendant, didn't make the defendant prove any of what he said despite making the plaintiff prove EVERYTHING that he claimed, and ultimately came to a conclusion that allowed the defendant to get the benefit of the money from the sale of the car and the benefit of throwing the plaintiff's stuff away. I love Judge Judy, but it's difficult not to feel like prejudice played a role here, especially with how big the discrepancy was between how she treated the defendant and how she treated the plaintiff. She may not have even been aware of it, but she treated the plaintiff unfairly for a reason. Karma will get that defendant if it hasn't already. That man was your roommate for five years, and on top of the stress of having to rush back to your country of origin to renew your visa, you go and get rid of literally everything the man has to his name so that he comes back to nothing. What a piece of trash.
If you’re going to be gone an extended period of time but don’t know if you’re returning, why not ask to store your belongings in the basement or garage, packed up? Why would you think someone would keep your belongings indefinitely, in place? If he moved his things or threw them away before he left, he would have been able to sue for money from the car.
Exactly. As much as I hate that defendant, he technically wasn't in the wrong. If you fail to give a notice or have open communication from time to time, it will come back to bite you, and that's what costed the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to have open communication, didn't plan accordingly, and basically had to reap what he sewed.
The defendant is an arrogant jerk, but I agree with the judge. As long as the plaintiff's stuff is left behind in a home, regardless of what kind of hardship he had, he's still considered a resident of that home. If you decide to leave, then you need to take your stuff with you. The room isn't meant to be a storage facility... and even those aren't free either.
I understand the concept of "If your stuff is there, you're there" and therefore you should be paying rent, but I feel like the Defendant got acrewed here. I feel like the Plaintiff was trying to say that he had a verbal agreement that he wouldn't have to pay rent while he was dealing with his Visa. JJ told the Plaintiff's witness that she couldn't tell her about the verbal agreement (I'm assuming because that's hard to prove)...but then the Defendant comments "Because he was my friend", which to me confirms they had some sort of a verbal arrangement. I feel like the Plaintiff got screwed me trusting his "Friend's" word.
If you have a written contract the terms of that contract cannot be modified by verbal agreement. So even if there was a verbal agreement he doesn’t have to pay while he is gone, that agreement does not have force of law in this instance
The defendant wasnt really his friend. He was being low key shady with alot of his comments. JJ shut him down when he tried to air out his business about why he had to leave the country. It was unnecessary commentary and very personal to be telling the world on national tv. Then his remarks about the smells. But yet they lived together for 5 years. He's not his friend and at all
The defendant was not his friend. The female witness he brought is a real supportive friend. Every comment the defendant made about him was belittling, and condescending.
The part i dont get is where was the proof that he sold the car for 2000? Cause if he actually sold it was substantially more than he not.only got rent he also made a profit off his friend
This is a difference in cultural expectations. If the tables were turned, he would have kept the room ready, without complaint. Merely keeping in contact to see if he would return.
1:13 Judy slays me! 😂👍. And this idiot is a number of words I can't say here. I had a friend who's girlfriend didn't like me because we spent time playing pool and so on instead of him worshiping her night and day. I moved cross country and he agreed to store stuff, including an expensive guitar until I could send for it. I spent a couple weeks at my parents then found an apartment. I called him to send him money to ship it, "Oh we got rid of it!" I didn't care about the rest but that guitar was worth $1,500.00. I had two others I took with me, but it literally would not fit in my stuffed truck.
I was supporting the plaintiff at first, but why was his expiring visa an unexpected event that caused him to rush back to Saudi Arabia in a hurry? Surely, he must have known that visas are for only a certain amount of time.
My wife's driver's license expired 8 months before she realized it lol! Sometimes, the dates just sneak up on you if you're distracted by other concerns.
good call of the defendant to say he threw away the guys stuff only 2 days before he came back , that way he had the right to charge him rent up to that moment .
The car profits covered 5 months of rent; plaintiff's belongings were there going on 6 months (the law considers that abandonment), so the defendant was justified in keeping the car profits and dumping the belongings. It's unfortunate, and I don't care for the defendant's attitude, but the plaintiff needs to be accountable for his own circumstances. I could see JJ was trying to find a way to rule in favor of the plaintiff, but could not.
The defendant is a smart as.. and she should have been harder on him he needed to be put in his place, he clearly lied and probably lied about the amount he got for the car as well.
Judge Judy sometimes beats my understanding. If he took the money car that means he paid rent, this wicked man threw away his belongings then what exactly is JJ saying? She just didn’t like him maybe.
Well, he should have at least gotten back some monies for his belongings that were thrown out. If judge would consider the $2,000 as rent, then technically the guy had no right to throw out his stuff if he was "paying rent." still.
I really disagree with the judge on this one...that guy was a total jerk and kept saying nasty things and if he got the 2000 then why did he get to throw his stuff away? Total bs
I don’t agree with Judge Judy decision. The poor guy wasn’t physically in the home and he had to leave immediately due to his visa situation. And the defendant claims the plaintiff was a “friend” REAL friends don’t discard items w/o permission. I hope they aren’t “friends” anymore.
@Lenasevilla-yb4ei yes it is stupid,but then again the Arabian guy is so immature in my opinion,just give title and car keys to someone,at least keep the title...
Plaintiff paid $2,000 (from the car sale), not $2,400. Since there's one month of unpaid rent and the defendant wasn't able to contact the plaintiff, the stuff was at the point considered abandoned and therefore was thrown away. I don't think JJ was wrong in her verdict but I do think it's an a-hole move by the defendant, considering they both were friends and he's been a good "tenant" all these years.
@russeuro7944 Right! It's like renting a unit in storage facilities. Once you stop paying, they will clear the unit and everything will be removed. I think that's also why JJ ask the defendant's witness a few questions to make sure he wasn't living in the plaintiff's room along with anyone else. In order to make the determination that rent is needed, JJ needed to make sure the room was vacant for the plaintiff and his stuff and no one else occupied it during the 6 months.
@@gary-gt-tsang he's full of shit that's my point. first of all he said he got 2000. there is no proof he did. second he said he took them to the dumb 3 days before the guy came back, again NO proof he had his things for 6 months. it's an outrageous verdict.
I think judge was mistaken here. So the guy threw the stuff away but also was paid to keep the stuff. He should have been asked to produce evidence when was the stuff thrown. He got free money.
![Judge Judy [Episode 9962] Best Amazing Cases Season 2024 Full Episodes HD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zE4O86SGolM/mqdefault.jpg)
The defendant seems like a wicked , hateful person.
I originally thought the same but the more the details came out, the less I felt that way. Visas don't just expire overnight. The plaintiff should have prepared for the possibility of it not being renewed and like JJ said if his stuff was there he has to pay rent. The defendant was tired of being strung along not knowing what to do with someone else's stuff who is not paying rent and I don't blame him.
He's certainly disagreeable, but the plaintiff left and assumed he didn't owe rent on a room he had stuff in. What would have done?
@@valcomments3045the defendant knew he still had to pay rent if his stuff was there though and the plaintiff clearly didn’t
what goes around comes around.
Probably a high school bully/ jock.. trump , liar, .. I would go as far as even saying rapist .
I love that Judge Judy cut the defendant off when he said that the plaintiff was being kicked out of the country, and she was very clear that the plaintiff just had to take care of his visa and it was nothing more than that.
He was forced to leave because he was no longer authorized to stay. The reason why he was kicked out doesn't change the fact that he was.
@@k.robertrichardson6779 if your kicked out of a country you generally don't get your visa renewed. Which he clearly did.
@@k.robertrichardson6779You can't come back into the country if you were kicked out
💯💯
@@k.robertrichardson6779get it right. He was not kicked out at all. He had to go back to SA to renew his visa. Being kicked out implys he did something wrong or illegal
He really said a lamp smelled and told the judge to take it to her house. I pity people who are this combative, must be exhausting.
Yea, this dudes attitude smells, defendent was tryna act cocky because he was jealous of the palintiffs friend and was probably trying to impress her by making the plaintiff look bad.
I thought it was great to give Judy a little attitude back.
To think: the plaintiff somehow put up with THAT👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉for FIVE YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and… He didnt just turn into this.. This is practiced
@@TheMightyThor83 me too..she was nasty to him from the jump..so he was giving her a little sarcasm back...
Feel terrible for the plaintiff, thought he had a friend 🤦🏾♂️
Smh white ppl will stab you in the back quick
Right?
Wait a second.... If the car money counts as rent - then why can he throw the belongings away? The room was technically paid for according to Ma'am/Judge/Your Honor
Well kindve. 5 months were paid for. Sounds like month 6 was not.
Exactly, she was dumb for this one! She is so quick to be a smart mouth and intimidating that she contradicts herself quite often. It’s annoying!
JJ fucked up in this one. He should have gotten his stuff or compensated for it. Maybe 500 dollars total. But 0? JJ fucked this one
Jj messed this one up because of her impatience
2000 != 2400
The landlord was not informed of the return date despite numerous attempts to find out.
He also had to do work to sell the car, he was not paid for this.
Lastly, in the past he had waived months of rent. Which is a pretty nice thing to do.
I think Judge Judy hit the nail on the head with this one after looking at the whole picture.
You can only carry someone so far before you get frustrated and ask yourself why you're doing it still.
How CONVIENENT that the defendant threw the stuff out 2 or 3 days before he came back though!!!
the defendant is a creep for sure, it's a shame the plaintiff did not have a substantive case.
Judge Judy was trying to help him out by asking the defendant and the witness about bedrooms and sleeping arrangements but there was no loophole.
plaintiff is a conscript lol
The plaintiff clearly didn't have a good grasp of the law and what it means to be legally present in rented space. He seems like a good guy with good intentions but ended up not getting anything out of ignorance. It's a shame but it's the world we live in
You can just see how awful of a person the defendant is.
Yea, don't let the guy in a suit fool you either.
He shouldn't have to pay rent for month his items were thrown away
@@NeonForceGetsugaYou don't get a receipt from the dump 😅
He didn't pay the rent for the month of June. The defendant said he received 2000 dollars that is rent for Jan- May.
His stuff was thrown out 3 days before he got back. He's not paying for time his stuff wasnt there.....
@@DyNaStYCaRl Depends where, if it is a city you absolutely get a receipt with exact weigh in and out, with a time and date stamp.
I feel bad for the 108 people who upvoted you. His items were thrown away 3 days before he moved out. The defendant waited for months. Please pay attention.
Defendant is a real piece of work.
He’s a tool no doubt
at least he showers, no stinking abdul, lol
The plaintiff looks like an intelligent, well-mannered guy. The other two are creeps.
Disagree. He’s a moocher and a procrastinator. Also entitled. He expected the defendant to carry him on his back.
He is, though I'm not sure that he's familiar with what the law says about leaving your belongings behind in a home that you don't own.
@@crpsaiyansure but the law and general social behavior for not always align. The defendant is a jerk in most society definitions
They looked like a big size bullies.
Sorry to me he looks like a guy that’s able to put on a suit, stand up straight and is selling a sob story about how it’s everyone else’s job to take care of his responsibilities.
Wow what a friend,threw his stuff out!
Never was a friend to begin with
As an American who lives overseas in the Middle East, with many former students going to uni in the USA, you all many not realize how difficult it is/was for Arab/Muslim students to get student visas/renewals. If this was during Trump's presidency - remember his short-lived ban on Muslims entering the country? My husband was refused a visa, with no explanation given. The fact that it took 6 months to get the USA to renew his visa (with all the requisite interviews, paperwork, and fees) is no big surprise to me. Many students here have to still delay their university entrance by up to a year, just waiting to get through all the steps and get approval for their visas. My husband is planning to reapply in January, to hope he can come visit my family with our son and I during summer holiday, as he hasn't been able to for years. I really felt bad for the plaintiff. And the defendant (not withstanding whether rent was owed or not), showed himself to be a racist person - insinuating he was being kicked out, and commenting that everything in his room smelled. I have lived here - most Arab Muslim men are super clean (washing 5 times a day for prayer helps, as well as full showers after s3x), plus cologne is quite a status symbol here - the "smell" the defendant may have noticed was soap and cologne - maybe the defendant should become acquainted with them himself.
The verdict on this episode just shows how much integrity Judge Judy has.
Instead of looking at what the plantiff didn’t do, they need to look at what the defendant didn’t do. Didn’t ask for permission to sell his belongings for 1.5k less than asking price, did not give him warning before trashing all his personal things, did not give him a chance to find alternative solutions to storage of his things. Never asked for rent in his absence but happy pocketed the 2k. Just like everyone else is saying, if we are calling the 2k rent, than he had no right to throw out the stuff of his rentee
I agree with the everything you're saying and in all rights, the defendant is garbage, but this was a fair call. Unless the plaintiff can prove the defendant disposed of his items well in advance, let's say the very month he left the country, the plaintiff has to pay rent because he essentially used that room as a storage unit whereas someone could have been living in the space.
Everyone has their own set of responsibilities, and headaches. The plaintiff left in a hurry without telling the defendant when he’d be back, and dumped this problem on the defendant’s lap. Zero money for rent , a signed pink slip that the defendant didn’t want initially, a room full of stuff, a bucket in the driveway/on the street , and just SHOWED UP 6 months later. He’s lucky parking enforcement didn’t ticket , and tow the car away. It’s probably safe to assume that the defendant had the car in the driveway for this very reason, so the car wouldn’t just be taken away. The defendant sold the car for less than what the plaintiff was asking for , but the car may have needed new tags , needed a smog , or whatever. Judge Judy wasn’t going to get into all of those details. The bottom line was that the plaintiff abandoned his things without telling his friend/landlord when he would return for them. You don’t burden a friend like that. Those kind of friends you don’t need. Did the plaintiff wait until the last minute to handle his Visa ? The plaintiff presented himself well, and was well spoken , but his entire case reeked of procrastination, and irresponsibility.
Lmao when he said u can take it to your house and check 😂. He got a slick ass mouth
Right I was like “what crawled up his butt and died” 😂
😂😂😂😂
At 3 :43 even the plaintiff laughed😂😂😂
I don't trust that the defendant just happened to throw away his stuff 3 days before the Plaintiff returned home. He could've thrown that stuff away in month 1 and just said it was there the entire time because he knew his only defense could've been rent money. Furthermore, JJ is missing the fact that the car was likely sold MONTHS before he returned which would've meant that the defendant, wasn't owed $2,000 at the time of the sale anyway. Dude is a crook and JJ was wrong to not give the plaintiff anything. He lost his car, clothes, and shoes for literally nothing. Lastly, if the defendant was in communication, he could've said, "hey your stuff stinks, i'm going to have to throw it away" if that happened the plaintiff could've decided if he wanted to continue to rent the space or not.
I assume there’s probably evidence of exactly when the car was sold. So he couldn’t get away with lying about when he sold it.
Oh WOW.
I was hoping plaintiff would win.
I believe his story. Given the outcome he would have been better Not going to court at all.
I’m glad he didn’t he’s a scammer
@@SpeckszDaBossyo mama
@@sk-nb5tl is beautiful I know thanks
The defendant is straight up trash... That fckr said... Oops
Fooled by the guy in a suit huh? @@sk-nb5tl
Unfortunately one of those case where as much as you want the defendant to lose and be humiliated because he’s a wise guy, he’s actually showing to be the winner… life’s not fair sometimes….
Agree and not a fair case at all she did not ask for proof of how much he sold it for (bill of sale, cash going into bank account etc) whose to say he didn't sell it for 3500? And I completely believe he told the plaintiff he could keep his stuff there and not pay. Unfortunately he should have had a text or something to prove. But how convenient he threw his things away 2 days before he came back 🤔 if he wanted rent he would have threw out by 3 months. Also how Convenient he was able to sell it for 2000 the exact amount he would have needed for the rent. Defendant is a big rotten liar and a bad person. Karma will come back to bite him in the ass.
@@TwistedSoulzit was a fair case. Renewing visa is a thing lots of international people have to do it happens but it sounds like he was not responsible because, you know when your visa is going to end. It's in your passport the expiration date. He was supposed to go early to get it renewed and he should have asked someone else to take care of his belongs or pay in advance for time he would be gone or something... Anyway I made a mistake before so I understand him but that doesn't mean he should have won
@@bunnyrabi It was not a fair case. Again. she did not confirm the actual purchase price of the vehicle. Just because he left out of Country (which the defendant was aware of) he did indeed come back it's not like he was gone for years this does not give the other man to pocket HIS money. Just like she said the plaintiff made no attempt to get his things moved the defendant gave no attempt to let him know I am throwing your things away next month please figure it out by then. Because then it becomes an illegal eviction if he pocketed the money form the car as "rent" per Judge your stuff was there "you live there" it's an illegal eviction then. Not a fair case.
@@TwistedSoulz First of all, Karma isnt real, its just a coping mechanism. Second, 2400 was the the rent owed, not 2000. third, conveniences are not law, if the plaintiff told the defendant when he was coming back(he didnt) and the defendant then threw his belongings away 2 days before he came back, then you might be onto something, but that wasnt the case, the defendant would have mentioned that(he didnt). Just because youre able to use a possible convenience to support an argument that doesnt mean your argument holds more weight. Just because YOU would of thrown someone out after 3 months doesnt mean the defendant would have done that, the defendant stated he DID hear from the plaintiff at first and stated the plaintiff said hed be back "at the end of the month" several times, after not hearing from the plaintiff for an extended period of time, he then discarded the plaintiffs junk, so why would he keep it there all that time if all he wanted was rent? Why would the defendant not sue for rent owed if thats all he wanted? The money for the sale of the car is not HIS money as you say, the plaintiff owed the defendant RENT, it is now, per the Judge, the defendants money. It is also NOT an illegal eviction because he did not pay rent for 6 months, he had every right to evict the plaintiff 2 months into him being gone without paying rent. The money the defendant got for selling the car also was NOT RENT MONEY until the Judge said that he will not get the money for the sale of the car, because he owed him rent. The Plaintiff returned and COULD have gotten his money for the sale of the car BUT, Judge judy decided the sale of the car will now cover RENT EXPENSES.
@@Tylerrrrrb not even going to read your comment this was several weeks ago dude. I don't even remember what this episode was however I had my opinion and didn't ask for yours.
I'm always amazed at how casual people can be with serious matters. I suspect the outcome of this case would have been different if the plaintiff had even once sent the defendant a message confirming that it was ok for him to be away without paying rent. Such an admission would have nullified any defense the defendant has to keep the money from the sale of the car, or for disposing of the belongings. And speaking of the car, the plaintiff has no evidence to show confirming how much he wanted for it, under what circumstances is the defendant allowed to sell it, etc.
😢
conscript saudi
I 100% believe the defendant, unfortunately if you don’t get things in writing, it’s hard to win a he said he said debate without proof
I'm happy that the plaintiff is staying far away from this jerk whom he though was a friend. A blessing in disguise.
The defendant is a such a jerk but he’s not wrong… argh it just shows how fair Judge Judy is.
No because if he's being docked for rent why is the guy allowed to throw away his belongings?
The defendant got 2000 dollars after selling the car, so it covers up for 5 out of the 6 months rent the plaintiff needed to pay. So now the plaintiff owns another 400 dollars for the sixth month, if you add the value of all his belonging together, I believe the value of everything will be more or less 400, so it's pretty fair in my opinion. @@TerryMoore-z9p
@@TerryMoore-z9p Do you really not understand that once the money ran out, leaving no funds against which to charge the rent, the rent was no longer being paid?
@@k.robertrichardson6779Read his comment again, but this time, try to process it in your brain.
@@k.robertrichardson6779did you write your response before reading his comment? Seems like you just wanted to write something regardless of what anyone else is saying. You know how to have a conversation Robert?
Knew he'd have to pay the rent as soon as it came out he left stuff there. Judge Judy always says if your stuff is there, you are!
That's the law
Yep. She does. That's true.
I thought the same thing because she does say that all the time
Right!
The defendant and his racist micro aggressions. The comment about him being “kicked out the country”,referring to his belongings as if they are garbage and the remarks about his belongings(aka him) stinking. Too bad the plaintiff didnt have his stuff together. What a jerk.
Was the plaintiff not required to leave the country?
@@k.robertrichardson6779He was here on a student visa which was required to be renewed.
I really hate that the defendant won his case. He sold the car AND tossed the plaintiffs stuff. And why didnt they check the blue book value of the car and go from there???? That defendant is a whole level of trash.
Don't get played by the nice looking guy in a suit either.
Nobody really won, but the reality is the plaintiff was still renting a room so he really did owe the defendant money. Nobody won anything, and goes to show ignorance of the law doesn't get rewarded.
The defendant was unpleasant, but the plaintiff had already lived in the US for five years and still didn't know that you can't use a room in someone's home as storage for free while being away. His error.
The defendant ; because he’s my friend!
I’m sorry but that’s not a guy I’d want as a friend
I agree; the plaintiff turned out to be a terrible friend.
Defendant seems like a racist, the comment about him being deported and his stuff smelling sounds like a major red flag
Or he wasnt a US citizen and his belonging stunk?? Nothing to do with race lol
Sub-mediocre Trump voter for sure.
and he had a greasy white guy living there rent free for an unknown amount of time. how a lamp and desk can be stinky is beyond me lol he has those still probibly still in the room or in one of his other rented out rooms...the defendant is a butthole and for some reason all the sudden decided he disliked his 5 year friend there is more going on behind the scenes here. my nosey self wants to know what really went down between them lol i mean he kept his stuff for all that time until a few days before he came back lol
Who cares if that’s true. You’re a racist for calling him a racist you racist
@@tylertyler82typical California reply 😅😅
I believe the defendant didn’t expect rent esp when he says “because he’s my friend” but Aziz messed up in expecting the stuff to stay in the room for 6 months. He could have offered him something to store it in garage. Defendant still a jerk though 😂
How is that a jerk I don’t get how he did anything wrong that’s a really long time
@@mamathemeatsold his car without notifying him of the 1.5K less amount, threw his things away without notification. Never asked for rent, but happily pocketed the 2k. All while calling him a friend.
He didn’t do anything wrong that can be proven legally. But a normal person can tell what he did wrong generally, socially, morally. You need to look at what he didn’t do. Didn’t ask for permission to sell his belongings for 1.5k less than asking price, did not give him warning before trashing all his personal things, did not give him a chance to find alternative solutions to storage of his things. Never asked for rent in his absence but happy pocketed the 2k.
We call him a jerk because we can see him, his behavior, how he is conducting himself. Purposefully phrasing the situation as “he got kicked out the country” when that is clearly NOT the case, and he is clearly aware of the connotation of someone illegally residing in America. but sure, visa renewal, illegal resident being kicked out of the country, tomayto, tomahto!
In this case he got lucky and the plaintiff didn’t have written proof. Still a jerk.
That defendant, with his “oops” at the very end. If anyone here were an employer, after seeing this, would you hire that guy?
I love Judge Judy so much. I play for my kids in the car and while cooking hoping they understand not to be dumb. You don’t get away with it.
So is he going to pay his stuff that he throw away ???? Wow that’s America for ya
He already did. The defendant got $2000. Six months rent is $2400. The plaintiff owes him $400 still, so the judge called it even.
Yup, apparently the Americans in this comment section can't do simple addition and subtracting. Math is apparently too hard yet you all think you're geniuses who know better than the judge🤣
That's America for ya 😂 I hope you don't live in this horrible country.
@@umungus518 America puts out more science than the rest of the world combined. Calm down with your ignorant ranting, child.
@umungus518 a bed, dresser, carpet, lamp, shoes, clothes, etc are well over 400$. And you wanna talk about being dumb😂
I was really rooting for the plaintiff here🤦🏻♀️ The defendant had an attitude and seemed like he could potentially be a racist, plaintiff seemed quite naive and unfortunately his naivety cost him this case😢
If he was racist he wouldn't have let him live there for 5 years. Stop that nonsense racist BS. And don't let the suit fool you either.
The defendant brought THAT dude as a witness to court??? 😂😂😂
😂😂😂
What was that?🤨🤨🤨
He was more polite than the defendant. 🤷♀️
@@michelleprieur1 Crazy right??
He was polite, well spoken and quiet. Nothing wrong with "that dude"
This story line is so interesting🤣
Defendant should be responsible in paying for the belongings that he "threw out".
For people disagreeing with the verdict the Plaintiff still owed rent for June. His car only covered the rent from January to May, June was outstanding. I think JJ should have awarded the defendant 400 dollars for the June's rent and awarded the plaintiff 400 for his "stuff". It all comes out the exact amount the verdict was. I find the problem was the defendant didn't have to prove he only sold the car for 2000.
All the geniuses in the comment section apparently can't do basic math lmao
The stuf cancels the rent
@@biruss hence why he didn't grt anything
She didn’t even ask for the cars worth and checking the blue book value, she didn’t check how much the defendant ACTUALLY got for the car (as he could easily be lying)..
I think there should’ve been a bit more digging involved, considering that the defendant was in contact with the plaintiff and didn’t even warn him about throwing all his belongings away.
I’m going to assume he had proof of the sale but that got edited out of the video.
The judge is skating over the fact the plantiff left instruction for the car to be sold for $3500. She only gave him credit of $2000. based on the defendants testimony.
He got what he could
I think the defendant lied about the amount he sold the vehicle. If he would had counter sue, he would've had to prove the amount of $2000 was giving to him. I think he sold it at the value of the vehicle.
Even if he wanted the vehicle sold for more or the vehicle was actually for more, it really doesn't matter because he did the work to sell it and should have profited anyway.
She asked for evidence that he told the defendant to sell the car for 3500. He said he did not have any.
Plaintiff’s witness is a good friend
Almost had a panic atrack looking for part 3.....
WHY can't this be shown in ONE part??
@@lindaallen4067 more likes. Marketing technique. I think
I really disagree with the judge on this one. If the plaintiff is being made to pay for the room because his things were there, then the defendant didn't legally have the right to throw his things out. She also didn't make the defendant provide ANY proof that he sold the car for what he claims he did, which is WILD, because it was pretty obvious he was lying about the car's condition. There was a moment's hesitation when she asked him how much he sold the car for, and I believe he just picked a number that was less than what he would be owed for rent. And he sold it WITHOUT the plaintiff's permission, for less than the blue book value of the car. I would think she would at least give the plaintiff the benefit of the car's blue book value, especially considering the fact that the defendant sold it without permission. If the defendant undersold it, that shouldn't be the plaintiff's problem to eat.
Honestly, appealing civil cases is difficult--and the contract to be on Judge Judy might bar someone from doing so-but I wish I could go back in time and tell this plaintiff to file an appeal to the decision. She was totally unfair, accepted a LOT of hearsay evidence from the defendant, didn't make the defendant prove any of what he said despite making the plaintiff prove EVERYTHING that he claimed, and ultimately came to a conclusion that allowed the defendant to get the benefit of the money from the sale of the car and the benefit of throwing the plaintiff's stuff away. I love Judge Judy, but it's difficult not to feel like prejudice played a role here, especially with how big the discrepancy was between how she treated the defendant and how she treated the plaintiff. She may not have even been aware of it, but she treated the plaintiff unfairly for a reason.
Karma will get that defendant if it hasn't already. That man was your roommate for five years, and on top of the stress of having to rush back to your country of origin to renew your visa, you go and get rid of literally everything the man has to his name so that he comes back to nothing. What a piece of trash.
If you’re going to be gone an extended period of time but don’t know if you’re returning, why not ask to store your belongings in the basement or garage, packed up? Why would you think someone would keep your belongings indefinitely, in place? If he moved his things or threw them away before he left, he would have been able to sue for money from the car.
Exactly. As much as I hate that defendant, he technically wasn't in the wrong. If you fail to give a notice or have open communication from time to time, it will come back to bite you, and that's what costed the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to have open communication, didn't plan accordingly, and basically had to reap what he sewed.
But he didn’t get his stuff or what their worth. JJ, that wasn’t fair!
was totally fair, the plaintiff didnt pay his rent
Plaintiff still owed 400 dollars in rent after the 2,000 from the car ran out.
The defendant is an arrogant jerk, but I agree with the judge. As long as the plaintiff's stuff is left behind in a home, regardless of what kind of hardship he had, he's still considered a resident of that home. If you decide to leave, then you need to take your stuff with you. The room isn't meant to be a storage facility... and even those aren't free either.
He should have been compensated something...given the situation. Be careful who you trust your things with.
He was. He didn't have to pay the defendant the 400 dollars he owed in rent.
No you shouldn’t be compensated for being irresponsible
3:43 The plaintiff couldn't help but laugh at the defendant's comment regarding the lamp that smells😂😂😂😂😂😂
I don't like how JJ decided, if the car served as rent then, he should get the worth of his belongings
Well he didn't have receipts.
I understand the concept of "If your stuff is there, you're there" and therefore you should be paying rent, but I feel like the Defendant got acrewed here.
I feel like the Plaintiff was trying to say that he had a verbal agreement that he wouldn't have to pay rent while he was dealing with his Visa. JJ told the Plaintiff's witness that she couldn't tell her about the verbal agreement (I'm assuming because that's hard to prove)...but then the Defendant comments "Because he was my friend", which to me confirms they had some sort of a verbal arrangement.
I feel like the Plaintiff got screwed me trusting his "Friend's" word.
If you have a written contract the terms of that contract cannot be modified by verbal agreement. So even if there was a verbal agreement he doesn’t have to pay while he is gone, that agreement does not have force of law in this instance
What kind of friend expects you to keep their shit in your room and not collect rent for 6 months. I would never treat a friend like that. Terrible
The lamp STUNK 🤣
Lol😂
The defendant wasnt really his friend. He was being low key shady with alot of his comments. JJ shut him down when he tried to air out his business about why he had to leave the country. It was unnecessary commentary and very personal to be telling the world on national tv. Then his remarks about the smells. But yet they lived together for 5 years. He's not his friend and at all
Do student visas randomly expire?
the defendant is hilarious LMAOOOOO
The defendant was not his friend. The female witness he brought is a real supportive friend. Every comment the defendant made about him was belittling, and condescending.
So he lost his car and also his belongings?? What kind of judgment is that?
The part i dont get is where was the proof that he sold the car for 2000? Cause if he actually sold it was substantially more than he not.only got rent he also made a profit off his friend
Ozzy came out of the crevice of the courtroom 🤣🤣
Thought the same thing!!!
Plaintiff was in a difficult situation and got taken advantage of by this jerk. Fair judgement nonetheless but the defendant is a cun1.
Wow! Choose your friends wisely 😌
Man if I could go on vacation or trip & not pay my rent or mortgage that would be awesome lol 😂
After even a month past due on the rent, why wasn't he evicted and the room rented out to someone else. Easily solved.
I hope the Plaintiff lives a successful life.
So do I. He can if he doesn't irresponsibly let his visa lapse again.
I was wondering when the old “verbal contract” would make its appearance.
This is a difference in cultural expectations. If the tables were turned, he would have kept the room ready, without complaint. Merely keeping in contact to see if he would return.
“Oops” 😂
it's hard to imagine the defendant and his witness living with the plaintiff in the same house. What a motley crew.
The defendant is such a smart @ss…
I'm more concerned that the defendant exhumed the body of Meatloaf and brought it as a witness 🤷♂🤷♂
I would much rather have the plaintiff be a citizen of the U.S. rather than the defendants.
Feel free to sponsor him the next time he lets his visa expire and gets kicked out to go regain authorization.
1:13 Judy slays me! 😂👍. And this idiot is a number of words I can't say here. I had a friend who's girlfriend didn't like me because we spent time playing pool and so on instead of him worshiping her night and day. I moved cross country and he agreed to store stuff, including an expensive guitar until I could send for it. I spent a couple weeks at my parents then found an apartment. I called him to send him money to ship it, "Oh we got rid of it!" I didn't care about the rest but that guitar was worth $1,500.00. I had two others I took with me, but it literally would not fit in my stuffed truck.
Crummy situation but agree with verdict.
I see a sitcom here. 🤣😂Trying to think who would play the uncle that does not pay rent.
With friends like THAT who needs enemies?!?!?!?!
The defendant’s friend at least answered questions properly.
Keep your affairs in order and this won’t happen. The defendant was under no obligation to look after Aziz stuff while not getting paid rent.
I was supporting the plaintiff at first, but why was his expiring visa an unexpected event that caused him to rush back to Saudi Arabia in a hurry? Surely, he must have known that visas are for only a certain amount of time.
My wife's driver's license expired 8 months before she realized it lol! Sometimes, the dates just sneak up on you if you're distracted by other concerns.
Saudi Arabia? Should be able to afford $400 a month.
What a great friend 😂
Judge was wrong on this one !! Ridiculous
This guy is a giant baby. Reminds me of a couple guys I’ve known😂
To think: the plaintiff somehow put up with THAT👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉👉for FIVE YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
what a bully
That's wat friends are for
Trust no one! He should’ve put everything in storage, including the car
I love the look of satisfaction on the white saviors face at the end
I was rooting for the Plaintiff.
good call of the defendant to say he threw away the guys stuff only 2 days before he came back , that way he had the right to charge him rent up to that moment .
The car profits covered 5 months of rent;
plaintiff's belongings were there going on 6 months (the law considers that abandonment),
so the defendant was justified in keeping the car profits and dumping the belongings.
It's unfortunate, and I don't care for the defendant's attitude, but the plaintiff needs to be accountable for his own circumstances.
I could see JJ was trying to find a way to rule in favor of the plaintiff, but could not.
Maybe true, but doing it just a couple of days before he came back??? Something sounds fishy about that to me.
The defendant is a smart as.. and she should have been harder on him he needed to be put in his place, he clearly lied and probably lied about the amount he got for the car as well.
Do visas not have a set time period of renewal? I don't understand why they only gave him a week's notice prior to renewal
Judge Judy sometimes beats my understanding. If he took the money car that means he paid rent, this wicked man threw away his belongings then what exactly is JJ saying? She just didn’t like him maybe.
Well, he should have at least gotten back some monies for his belongings that were thrown out. If judge would consider the $2,000 as rent, then technically the guy had no right to throw out his stuff if he was "paying rent." still.
I really disagree with the judge on this one...that guy was a total jerk and kept saying nasty things and if he got the 2000 then why did he get to throw his stuff away? Total bs
Good judgement, even though the defendant was a "smart mouth".
Very smart guy will sell his mother for money 😂😂😂
I really hate he won.. he’d use to getting his way I guarantee
JJ doesn’t like to give money away for non-sense cases. You left your stuff for 6 months and wasn’t paying the rent- you have no case.
I don’t agree with Judge Judy decision. The poor guy wasn’t physically in the home and he had to leave immediately due to his visa situation. And the defendant claims the plaintiff was a “friend” REAL friends don’t discard items w/o permission. I hope they aren’t “friends” anymore.
That’s the law. Not what you feel but what the law is
@Lenasevilla-yb4ei yes it is stupid,but then again the Arabian guy is so immature in my opinion,just give title and car keys to someone,at least keep the title...
Dang that sucks to sue someone but end up having to be the one who pays🥱
Get her JJ 😂
weird verdict on this one.
so he paid 2400$ for the guy to keep his things, and then he takes them to the dump?
fml i don't believe this.
Plaintiff paid $2,000 (from the car sale), not $2,400. Since there's one month of unpaid rent and the defendant wasn't able to contact the plaintiff, the stuff was at the point considered abandoned and therefore was thrown away. I don't think JJ was wrong in her verdict but I do think it's an a-hole move by the defendant, considering they both were friends and he's been a good "tenant" all these years.
Wow people really can't pay attention or do simple math yet get so mad. Watch it again and get your calculator out.
@russeuro7944 Right! It's like renting a unit in storage facilities. Once you stop paying, they will clear the unit and everything will be removed. I think that's also why JJ ask the defendant's witness a few questions to make sure he wasn't living in the plaintiff's room along with anyone else. In order to make the determination that rent is needed, JJ needed to make sure the room was vacant for the plaintiff and his stuff and no one else occupied it during the 6 months.
@@gary-gt-tsang he's full of shit that's my point. first of all he said he got 2000. there is no proof he did.
second he said he took them to the dumb 3 days before the guy came back, again NO proof he had his things for 6 months. it's an outrageous verdict.
If you're that determined not to understand, no one can force you to.
I think judge was mistaken here. So the guy threw the stuff away but also was paid to keep the stuff. He should have been asked to produce evidence when was the stuff thrown. He got free money.