OFFRE D'UNE DURÉE LIMITÉE. Obtenez 3 mois à 0,99 $/mois. Profiter de l'offre.
Page de couverture de 'Moving Damage' & 'Clipped Mirror' & 'Missing Jewelry'

'Moving Damage' & 'Clipped Mirror' & 'Missing Jewelry'

'Moving Damage' & 'Clipped Mirror' & 'Missing Jewelry'

Écouter gratuitement

Voir les détails du balado

À propos de cet audio

 The plaintiffs hired the defendant to move their property to a new home. While he was reassembling their dining table, he damaged it, and now the plaintiffs are suing for the price of the family heirloom. The defendant says he damaged a desk, which the plaintiffs were immediately reimbursed for. The table was not brought to his attention until after the job was done, and he hadn’t damaged it. The plaintiff says the defendant was trying to park her car next to the plaintiff’s car and ended up clipping her mirror. Information was exchanged, but when the plaintiff reached out to make repair plans, she was told the defendant refused to pay. She is suing for the cost of repairs. The defendant argues it was the plaintiff who backed out, causing the damage to her own car, not the defendant. The plaintiff pawned some jewelry at the defendant’s shop, which then disappeared from the shop. She doesn’t know if it was melted down, sold, or something else, so she’s suing for the cost of the jewelry. The defendant says she sent the plaintiff a certified letter regarding interest due in the items, which was paid. If the plaintiff had paid them, she would have a valid receipt, but she doesn’t. The defendant followed all the right protocols and doesn’t owe anything. Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Pas encore de commentaire