Suit Minus Pants Equal Lawsuit | The People's Court
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 07. 2024
- The plaintiff dropped off his designer suit pants and at the defendant’s dry-cleaning business. He says the defendant lost his pants, which makes the rest of the suit unwearable. He’s suing for the cost of a new suit. The defendant argues he tried looking for the pants and he offered the plaintiff money for the missing trousers.
Subscribe to our channel:
/ @peoplescourttv
Case # 22-040
#PeoplesCourt #RealityTV #Court - Zábava
If the dry cleaners are shady and know brand names- they could make a killing by " losing" an item.
JFC, second hand suits aren’t worth anything.
Well the pants did not just evaporate! Obviously someone stole them! Was it an internal job?
I doubt stolen, probably an employee let them go home with another order.
It seems silly to me, but understand why, a dry cleaners would offer X amount of services to anyone after losing an article of clothing... Why on Earth would someone want to continue to do business at a place that has proven to lose things???
Just buy him new pants? Good loyal customer and avoid the hassle
Dry cleaner is not sorry at all, laughing at the end and telling him to buy a new suit with a measly $130.
Dude a new pants is only $200. The jacket itself is $400. Plaintiff wanted the shop owner to buy him a new suit. Fuck that.
Wouldn’t ever do business with that cleaners
Hickey Freeman suits costs $600 and they are really nice suits.
Sure, but for a $600 suit the jacket will always be $400 ish and the pants $200 ish. If it’s a one year old suit he would almost certainly be able to order a replacement pair of pants. TBH he should have bought two pairs of pants with a suit anyway because the pants are the thing that wear out, not the jacket. Anyone who knows what they’re doing with new suits does that. This guy brought his mommy to court, so it’s not surprising he didn’t know.
The defendant is disgusting and smug about his irresponsibility. He should have paid for the plaintiff’s pants. Defendant deserves a bad review because he did lose the man’s pants.
He did. He paid $150. Dafuq you living under a rock? Watch the full video people making a stupid comment again you clown. lol
A new suit pants from Hickey Freeman is $200. The Jacket is $400. Scamming plantiff wanted the shop owner to buy him a new suit.
Wait that's so wrong. So he can steal everyone's nice expensive clothing and pay them $100 bucks. Then turn around and sell the item on ebay.
My thoughts exactly
No one is going to buy a used pants for more than $100. A brand new suit pants is $200. lol
The law that says a business can put a "contract" on the back of a receipt without getting ANY acknowledgement from the customer and the customer is supposed to abide by it is a ridiculous law. Unfair and should be changed. But we know our lawmakers favor business and corporations above all else. We don't really have our constitutional Republic anymore.
Defendant got caught with his pants downnn...
Defendant won though. lol
The black girl behind the defendant 😂😂😂😂 its us watching 😂😂
😂😂 3:54 She looks annoyed
Racist much? Yep you are. Try being color blind. It is a nicer world when all accept all colors of skin.
Hah😂I had to rewatch
Now accepting submissions for the funniest “he hardly knew her” joke…
So I could bring $1 million suit into a dry cleaner they could steal my suit and then offer me $100 for it … and it’s legal
If you dont like the policy go elsewhere. This is america
I don't think the comment was posted in a manner that said he didn't like the policy. He was asking a hypothetical question.
Answering it would be typing a "yes," and that would answer his question. He didn't say anything about not liking the policy, which I'm sure no one would be ok with it. He was just clarifying the defendants policy that should be changed. He is right, the cleaners could be stealing a lot of clothes that they know are very expensive because they don't want to spend that much of their own money on them. If they steal them and tell the client that they lost their clothes, they only end up paying 10X what they were going to charge the customer. Sounds like a pretty good hustle to get a lot of nice things that the cleaners set the price and therefore set the amount that the customer will receive when they pick up their items and are told they cannot find them. In this case, it appears that the pants were of much more value than the shirt, and so they didn't want them. The only item they wanted and just happened to come up missing (the pants) are probably hanging in the defendants closet.
Buy another suit just dont take it to those dry cleaners 😂
That does not seem right at all. They even acknowledge it's completely their fault. How is it they cannot be responsible for losing something that valuable, if they literally take it on in the first place? So if I taken something that's $10,000 and they choose to just keep it, all they would have to give me is $137? 💯 responsibility and their fault. What keeps them from just taking stuff home and getting clothes for cheap? There should be some concept in the law that says, the contract does not reasonably mitigate damages.
The law presumes that parties entering contracts are bound by the contract, generally absent misrepresentation. It's kinda fundamental to having contracts. If all contracts could be torn up later when you're unhappy, there's no clarity/confidence in the contracts. Theoretically, if you don't like that cleaner's terms, go find one who doesn't limit their liability (good luck on that, by the way). Think of it this way---cleaners would need to charge A LOT more when they accept high value items if it worked the way you wanted. Maybe some folks would be okay with that, but that's not where the market has evolved to.
@@newsflash7609 Exactly. That's what I think people are missing is the liability with cleaners. Things get misplaced often, it happens. They could find another cleaners, but I highly doubt there is a cleaners that says they will pay in full of the item lost.
@@newsflash7609 That makes sense. But I have also seen contact cases won't because the contract itself wasn't reasonable, or lawful itself. I guess there's a gray line in there and it seems like this should cross it to me. But I do see your point. Thank you!
You missed the point. Went over your head because you feel asleep. Best rewatch this one again.
@@trekgirl65 I thanked for the good point. Seems odd to me but I agreed with the thought I had not considered myself. Perhaps insults are best saved for someone actually not paying attention, like yourself.
How can you enforce a contract without a signature
I thought he would get more for loosing his pants. If that was me n they lost some items of mines. I wouldn't go there again.
This dry cleaner is digisting most people will not do business with him
It wasn't a brand new suit, in the first place. It was pants he wore for a year.
You got it. And the pants were only $200 to begin with, if it’s a $600 suit. $137 is more than reasonable.
OMG, it's Mr. Washy Washy
How about just doing the right thing as a business owner and buy the guy a new pair of pants.
Google 'the great suit pants lawsuit' for some serious wtf in our legal system.
Wow, just did. Thanks.
Since the defendant offered even more than the plaintiff was owed his countersuit should have been upheld because the review was a lie.
I think he stole the pants
Sucks for him, but I’m having a hard time finding any sympathy for the poooor defendant ONLY getting $350 measly dollars for his pants.
$350 is way more than what the pants is worth new. The entire suit is $600. The pants is only $200 if that.
he did lie in the review because he said they don't re embers you but he was offered a re embossment, he just didn't like. it.
Why did Kurt say he lost the case? He won, just for not as much as he wanted.
Im sorry but keep your $137. Name them and shame them. How much is your reputation worth😮😮
I can understand why the plaintiff was upset at the defendant. For them outright lose some mens dress pants to a suit is unacceptable.
👀🫢😶🙄
The business owner should carry business insurance with the Care, custody, and Conrtrol rider attached to the policy.
The customer should have made a claim against not only the business, but also the insurance carrier.
The judge glossed over the review which lied when it said he didn't Offer a refund.
wrong, she did not gloss over the case. You did and missed the point. And in certain situations, in court, you can get a refund when there are proven damages and missing articles. She did not lie. And the defendant did.
@@trekgirl65 I didn't say she glossed over the case, I said she glossed over the review the plantiff left online for the business. He lied when he said the company didn't offer a refund. They did, he just wanted more. That's defamation.
She was dismissive and I thought that deserved more attention.
Gotta remember that these cases are actually much longer than what's cut down and edited for us to see. They have to fit several cases in a one hour segment
I don't really get how the back of the receipt is where they write the policy. You get a receipt AFTER you've dropped something off. So that means you drop something off and THEN they tell you the policy. That doesn't seem fair to me.
Whenever I've used a cleaners I've always been given a slip when I drop them off and it has always had their policies on the slip. The slip is your proof that you dropped it off. People just don't read the slip. I've also never seen a cleaners that didn't have their policies prominently displayed at the counter.
@@tunisiancrochetchannel But you get the slip AFTER you drop the item off.
@@noalei in decades I've never been to a cleaner that didn't give me a slip at the time of drop off and their policies have always been displayed at the counter. The plaintiff admitted he had the slip and that it was on his slip. Of course you dont get a receipt until after the job is done and you've paid. But you do get a slip at the time of drop off. Otherwise you'd have nothing to bring back to pick up your items.
Not fair at all.
Disagree with the verdict
Well he ought to go dumpster diving and find some worn out old clothes and possible a dress or suit and take them to the cleaners and then never show back up. LOL
You lost and you did not get the point of the case. Rewatch it slowly.
@@trekgirl65 Obviously you don't understand satire and you need to go back and watch it. The case was simple. You might have to watch it 2 or 3 times.
Plaintiff looks like Eli Manning. 😂
Haha
I thought Michael Phelps…
Can someone find out where this business is and publish it ? Any man of character would have given the guy $350 in order to do what's right personally and for the business reputation.
I use to work at hickey freeman and yes its hard to match color when there made at the same time and your trying at a later date to get the same pants or coat.
😂 okay sure
Please picture yourself in the defendant's place. His suit is incomplete through no fault of his own. He probably despises that cleaner.
Wrong party, plaintiff was suing the defendant (the cleaner). Got it, good. LOL!
Good looking plaintiff
Nice receding hairline, yeah.
He pays a fortune for a suit and the pockets in the pants fray, if I was paying that much I would take them straight back to the store where I bought them.
@@M2161 How did the defendants negligence cause them to fray? He took them in with frayed pockets.
Lord i am too early 😅
All i can is dislike comments
I don't feel he should pay court cost because he was trying to give him that amount in the first place.
Mr. Bloom is so "typical" of his culture. Thyey are so privileged..
What the heck is that supposed to mean? How is he privileged? He wanted them to reimburse him for less than half the cost of his one year old suit which is more than fair. I think you can’t afford what he can and you are bitter.
I think he handled himself well and was on the up and up legally
the guy didn't speak English,, passs on supporting his business
Why did defendant have to pay court costs, he was offering to pay what ended up being the final judgement anyway and the plaintiff refused it. Sounds like a plaintiff problem not a defendant problem.
FIRST !!❤
You want a cookie with your diaper?
🍬 😊
CZcams kids its not here 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
First one here!🎉
Had to bring your mommy to court...cuz you still live with her..
Nothing's wrong with that. He's a young guy, probably recently out of college. Live at home and save some money.
That's mean
@@3l3llala13 young lol he's bald.. at least 30 get real..
@@ericericgoodwin8147not everyone who balds is old…. Are you slow?
@@M2161 so you agree if he's 30 and bald it's time to move out....
1, 543 viewer 🎉😂. I want my cookies. Lol
Once again she is wrong in relation to the review. He alleges they lose items and then refuse to reimburse, however they did offer to reimburse - just not to the tune he was seeking. She should have ordered the review to be amended to reflect the situation, or remove it - as it stands it's defamatory as it's untrue.
lol
🙄
This loud mouth 304 always gives the plantiff a hard time .y'all loss his item. And he had to come back few times .why he had to take a full loss because of someone else mess up smh. That.s why jm.will never recover from to her new show.s is low rateing.😅 Karma is a 🤦🤦🤦ch. Never win when you play dirty. The plaintiff should have gotten all what he ask for. Itch. 😮
Really, she has another court room show and in its second year. You are missing it. She is a great judge. Bye.
All I kept hearing from the Defendant is "me love you long time" in his accent. 😂
Wow. That is incredibly hateful.
That’s because your view of the world is microscopic.
Worried about an ugly suit, okay with the hair.