details. >> announcer: conned into renting a condemned home? >> there was no stove. there was no living room window. >> judge patricia: these premises were not fit for human occupancy. >> judge larry: after she left, did you re-rent it? >> yes, we did. >> judge tanya: ugh. >> judge tanya: you are slumlords. >> announcer: "hot bench." judge tanya acker. judge larry bakman. judge patricia dimango. three judges. three opinions. one verdict. >> judge patricia: we've reached our decision. >> announcer: in a court of law, it's called a "hot bench." amber sand is suing her former landlords, glenn watson and his girlfriend, michelle rogalski, for moving costs and the return of rent. >> judge patricia: thank you. please be seated. >> sonia: your honor, this is case number 280, sand vs. rogalski and watson. >> judge tanya: thank you,

miss sand, you are suing the defendants for $1,275, and you claim that they scammed you into renting a condemned apartment. >> yes. >> judge tanya: and, mr. rogalski, miss watson, you claim that she broke the lease and you don't owe her anything. >> yes, she did break the lease. >> judge tanya: do you have a copy of the lease? >> i do not. >> judge tanya: do you have a copy of the lease? may i see it, please? when did you move into this apartment? >> on the 1st of june. i signed a six-month lease. it wasn't even a month into me living there, and the water was disconnected due to the fact that they did not pay the water bill in an entire year, and i contacted city hall and found that out. >> judge tanya: how much money did you pay them when you moved in? >> $900. >> judge tanya: do you have evidence of that payment? >> you have it in your hand. there's a copy of when i gave them the deposit. >> judge tanya: miss rogalski. >> yes, ma'am. >> judge tanya: you said that she moved into the apartment before she actually signed the lease. how did that happen? >> the lady that was previously living there and her are friends, and she had moved in under that lady's lease.

that she actually moved in? >> we were there, getting some stuff out of the garage. she was carrying up her cleaning supplies and whatnot. >> i was watching the apartment. there was no living room window, so, like, basically, all of her stuff was free game, so, therefore, i would stop by and check on the apartment. but i contacted them because i was interested in renting the apartment. >> judge tanya: she had a lease, yes? she had a lease? >> come june 1st, she did have a lease. >> judge tanya: tell me when you started to realize that there was, allegedly, no running water. >> on the 23rd of june is when the water -- there was no water. >> the city got out there on july 6th and turned it back on. >> judge tanya: so what the heck was she supposed to do for nearly two weeks without water? >> she never reported the water being off. >> judge tanya: did you report it? >> yes, i sent them a text message saying that the water was shut off. >> judge tanya: let's see. >> i also made numerous phone calls and left voicemails and never got any response. >> judge tanya: june 23rd -- "my water isn't working." >> i did not get a text message saying that, and i was out of town on the 23rd. >> judge tanya: who did she send

let's just cut to the chase. was the apartment condemned by the city? >> only 'cause of the water being shut off. >> judge tanya: do you have evidence of the condemnation? >> i do. >> judge tanya: may i see that, please? thank you, sonia. "this structure is declared unsafe for human occupancy or use." now, will you explain to me why you did not simply give this woman her money back? >> we offered -- >> we had the water turned back on. >> judge tanya: the apartment was condemned. why are you wasting our time, keeping her money on an apartment that was condemned? >> for the time that she was there. >> judge tanya: judge dimango. >> judge patricia: can you show us, please, the evidence that you have that she was not paying the water bill? well, let me ask you this, while she's looking for that. tell us -- were you paying your water bill? >> the water bill is supposed to go on with the taxes. >> judge patricia: were you paying your water bill? >> it was a while, and i -- >> judge patricia: what's "a while"? >> i'm not sure if it was a year, but they -- i went down to the city, and they told me that they don't shut off water -- >> judge patricia: so for a year, at least, you were not paying your water bill.

the property taxes -- that's the past-delinquent. if you look at those papers, every single year since 2012, the water was disconnected in june, but they still have to pay the water bill. >> judge patricia: that's correct, they do, but, you see, they're already in a habit, which is "we don't pay for the year, then they take it out of our taxes. we don't pay for a year" -- see, yeah, yeah, you agree -- then they take it out." but the bottom line is, you were renting, knowing that your water bill -- which, according to your lease, was your responsibility -- was in arrears. there are several reasons listed on this notice as to why these premises were not fit for human occupancy. what else was not in that apartment? >> there was no stove. >> judge patricia: which, according to your lease, was checked off that you supply the refrigerator and the stove, and there was nothing in there. and what else? >> there was no living room window. >> judge patricia: who rents that type of apartment to someone? >> well, it's not the way it sounds. there was a window in there. >> judge larry: let me help you out -- slumlords.

she broke it. >> judge patricia: but you hear what you're saying? >> i did not -- my friend, who i took the place over for -- her kid broke the window. every day, i would text her. him -- i've never seen him before, ever. >> judge patricia: what is your relationship to her? >> boyfriend. >> judge patricia: 'cause i'm wondering why, if he's your boyfriend, she's never seen him. >> well, she did see him. >> i work out of town a lot. >> judge patricia: it's your property or his property, ma'am? >> he owns the property. >> judge patricia: and you dealt with her but not him? >> correct. >> judge patricia: well, i'm gonna say -- this letter that she wrote you was very kind. "the fact that i paid you $900 to live in an apartment with no oven and no living room window was poor judgment, but now there's no water?!" oh, please! judge bakman. >> judge larry: after she left the apartment, did you re-rent it? >> yes, we did. >> judge tanya: ugh. >> judge larry: in violation of the notice that it was condemned? >> no. here's a letter from the city. i was informed on the 2nd of july... >> judge larry: let me see it. don't say another word. >> ...about the water being off.

me, sir, is that you paid your water bill. doesn't tell me that the place is not condemned any further. when you re-rented, why didn't you cut her a check for the return of her security deposit? >> she lived there three weeks. >> judge larry: so what? she paid you rent. >> she had a lease, and it covered the july rent. >> judge larry: she moves into an apartment that's condemned, and you're now claiming you held on to the security deposit because she broke the lease? >> she never gave us any way to contact her. >> i attempted to -- >> judge larry: [ laughing ] let me see that, miss sand. >> and, honestly -- >> judge larry: hold on. hold on, miss sand. let me take a look at this. so, tell me, mr. watson -- when amber was living in your condemned unit, what address [laughs] was your girlfriend living at, who was conducting business on your behalf? >> 3rd street. >> judge larry: sonia, why don't you show it to him? why don't you just take a look,

certified letter is addressed to the same address you just gave me? >> yes, it is. [ laughter ] how come we never got it? >> i... >> judge larry: don't you think you owe her everything back that she paid you? save face? >> no. >> judge larry: let me ask you this, miss sand -- you're suing for $1,275 when, in fact, you only gave $900 to these people. what's the other money for? >> moving expenses. i had to take time off from work. >> judge larry: do you have any proof of the moving expenses? >> i don't have any. >> judge larry: you should have sued for punitive damages. >> judge tanya: yes, you should have. >> judge patricia: we're gonna retire to deliberate. thank you. >> sonia: this courtroom is now in recess. >> judge tanya: no water, no stove... >> judge patricia: no window. >> judge tanya: [ laughing ] no window! but she broke the lease. >> judge patricia: i'm really appalled by their behavior, and i am gonna tell you something else -- i'm taking this woman at her word that it cost her to move. we know she had to live there. we know she had to move. we know there's an expense to moving. she had to do so prematurely.

believe her, but i would have given her two or three times that, in punitive damages, for having to deal with these slumlords, so... >> judge patricia: i'm with you. i would have done the same. >> judge larry: well, we're in a majority opinion. >> judge patricia: i'm good. >> judge tanya: me too. >> judge patricia: are we all good? >> judge larry: yes. come to order. this courtroom is again in session. >> judge tanya: i don't know what to say to you two. i have never heard of anybody who can actually have the gall to look three officers of the court in the eye and say, "we don't owe her any money, even though we had her in a windowless apartment with no water for two weeks, and we didn't give her the stove for which she bargained. you two should be ashamed of yourselves. you are slumlords. judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $1,275. thank you. >> sonia: this courtroom is now in recess. >> common sense -- i should have known better than to move into a place that didn't have a living room window or a stove. >> she still lived there after the water was on. >> i mean, justice was served. >> i don't know about that.

>> sonia: case number 274 on calendar, bradley vs. gholson, please step forward. >> announcer: kimberley bradley is suing hair-salon owner ayanna gholson for the cost of synthetic hair and the return of a deposit. >> judge patricia: miss bradley, the defendant is a hairstylist. she agreed to put extensions in your hair. you gave her some money for a down payment -- $150. and then she didn't feel good. she was nauseous and couldn't finish up. you didn't want to go back to her. you want back your $150 and the $84 that you paid for the hair. now, miss gholson, you have a different version. one, the $150 was a deposit that was not refundable, and your contract says that if she cancels within 24 hours, you get from her 25% of the full price. >> correct. >> judge patricia: so you are counterclaiming for that. >> there's also a portion of the cancellation policy that says 50% if the client does not show up for their appointment. >> judge patricia: that being said, we're gonna go back to you.

>> i was just researching online. >> judge patricia: so you found her online. when was this, that you reached out to her? >> i believe it started, like, july 23rd, via text message and phone call, discussing the style that i wanted. >> judge patricia: what did you want? >> that's not true. >> judge patricia: just a second, please. >> she started to schedule. >> judge patricia: just a second. >> when we were discussing -- originally, i wanted a particular style, and i have an example of the picture that i sent her. >> judge patricia: pass those up. and i'm gonna ask you -- did you see this photograph that she's sending? >> ma'am, the cost of her service is $850... >> judge patricia: did you see this photograph? >> ...and i'm suing for 50%... >> judge patricia: did you see this photograph? >> ...because i started doing the style... >> judge patricia: did you see this photograph? >> yes, of course i saw the photograph. >> judge patricia: thank you. [ laughter ] >> i just want it to be clear -- my policy says 50% if she doesn't show up. >> judge patricia: so, she says in this, "i like the length and how the ends are wavy." that kind of looks like... >> so, that's me sending the picture and then me -- >> judge patricia: okay, so, now you make an appointment with her. >> august 1st. >> judge patricia: when did you give her the $150?

>> judge patricia: so you saw her in person? >> i did it via paypal. >> judge patricia: did you get something via paypal at $150? >> at the time of booking, i requested a $150, nonrefundable hair deposit, as is my business policy. >> judge patricia: okay, now let me stop you a second. >> she reserved an appointment and canceled on me... >> judge patricia: can i stop you? that's the real question. >> ...before i got a deposit the first time. >> judge tanya: no, you can't. >> judge patricia: i see that. >> judge larry: it's like a runaway train. >> judge patricia: i see that. >> announcer: "hot bench" continues in a moment. >> judge patricia: why, after a conversation with her, would you go and have her do your hair?

head.

provided by... >> announcer: three judges. three opinions. one verdict. "hot bench." kimberley bradley says salon owner ayanna gholson never finished installing her hair extensions. ayanna is countersuing for a canceled appointment. >> judge patricia: you said you take $150 for hair deposit, but she's disputing what that was for. when you first meet, do you come with your daughter to do her hair? >> well, first of all -- >> judge patricia: do you bring your little girl -- >> first of all, that has no bearing on -- >> judge patricia: do you bring your little girl -- >> my space and whom i bring in my space -- that has no bearing on... >> judge patricia: do you bring -- >> ...the fact that my cancellation policy is 25%... >> judge patricia: okay, see, i'm really trying to be sweet. >> but yes, my daughter was with

>> judge patricia: did you go to purchase the hair with plaintiff and your daughter in the car? >> absolutely. >> judge patricia: good. did you give her another $84 to purchase the hair? >> i gave the hair to the person at the supply store, so yes, i bought the hair at the store. proof of that? >> yes. >> judge patricia: so, the $150 that you were chattering about to buy the hair, you didn't use towards the hair. >> ma'am, i take a $150... >> judge patricia: is that correct? >> ...deposit as a standard deposit. >> judge patricia: that's not what you said to me. you said, "i take that to buy the hair." okay, so, moving along -- >> i didn't say that. she said that. i did not express to you that i take $150 to purchase the hair. it is a deposit. >> judge patricia: why, after a conversation with her, would you go and have her do your hair? i'd want to put a bullet in my head. [ laughter ] my goodness! okay, so, now, you go there. what happens? she starts to put the hair in. >> she starts to put the hair in. she stopped to get the child something to eat, to drink. she stopped to go to the bathroom several times, and after she did five braids, that's when she came back in and said she was too sick to continue.

scheduled to do this in two days, 'cause it takes a long time, this process. >> it takes 10 to 12 hours for this type of style. >> judge patricia: so, you say, "i'm not going back," after that. where's the hair now? >> she still had it. >> judge patricia: but you would give her the hair back? >> absolutely. i don't need it. >> judge patricia: okay. judge acker. >> judge tanya: miss bradley, how long was the defendant working on your hair during part 1 of the appointment? how many hours? >> it wasn't hours. it was like 30 minutes. >> judge tanya: 30 minutes? >> yeah, less than 30 minutes. >> judge tanya: so, just so we're clear, when you booked this appointment, the understanding was, you were getting half of your hair done on sunday and half done on monday -- yes or no? >> yes. >> judge tanya: okay, if that is what you agreed to, and if on day 1, you were unable to finish because you got sick, why does she have to pay you to finish the appointment? >> that morning, when i came in, i let her know -- "i woke up with an eye-splitting headache, but i'm here on time to start your hair because we've already made an agreement. i made a commitment, and i'm gonna be here on time to do that." >> judge tanya: the appointment was for two days, and were you able to complete the work that

>> i started her hair on sunday. >> judge tanya: were you able to complete the work? >> i was not able to complete -- >> judge tanya: you were not able to complete the work. >> i could not complete 10 or 12 hours... >> judge tanya: so you did not complete part 1 of the appointment, correct? >> no, i completed part 1. >> judge tanya: what part was that? because you only worked on her hair for 30 minutes. >> we did a color consultation. >> judge tanya: stop. >> we went to the hair store to purchase hair. >> judge tanya: stop. >> all that's included in my -- >> judge tanya: stop. all you are doing right now is really digging a hole for yourself, because you are changing your story. you've admitted that you had a migraine. i'm not mad at you for having a migraine, but if you think that you can say to this woman, "i can't finish half of your hair, because i'm sick, but you still have to pay me for the rest of the appointment," you're crazy! judge bakman. >> judge larry: oh, please, no. [ laughter ] >> announcer: "hot bench" continues in a moment. >> no -- >> judge larry: ...based on a cancellation. don't talk over me. did you ask for pain and suffering?

you should have! >> announcer: three judges. three opinions. one verdict. "hot bench." kimberley bradley has accused salon owner ayanna gholson of owing for the cost of synthetic hair and the return of her deposit. ayanna has a countersuit for a canceled appointment. >> judge larry: how did you make the appointment, miss bradley? >> i originally texted her, and then i called her. >> judge larry: did she explain anything about a cancellation policy? >> no, sir. >> judge larry: you're countersuing for $425, claiming she owes you 25%... >> no, you have a misunderstanding. >> judge larry: ...based on a cancellation. don't talk over me. >> okay. >> judge larry: did you ask for pain and suffering? [ laughter ] you should have! >> my family said i should have, but no. >> judge larry: now, what are

>> because she did not show up to monday's -- >> judge larry: that's a cancellation, correct? >> that's a no-show. >> judge larry: i want you to explain what the cancellation policy is and how she had notice of that. >> on my website, there's an online booker, as well as the policy is on my main website, my main domain. >> judge larry: did she make an appointment through the online appointment service? >> she called me first. >> judge larry: when she called you, did you explain to her the cancellation policy? >> i explained to her the cancellation policy here, and i also expressed to her that it's on the website. i also expressed to her that, you know, the hair -- the deposit -- >> judge larry: stop. is that right, miss bradley? >> this was after the sunday appointment came to an end. >> judge larry: okay, so this did not occur before you booked the appointment? >> no. >> judge larry: all right, i have no further questions. >> judge patricia: we're gonna retire to deliberate. ladies, thank you. >> sonia: this courtroom is now in recess.

continues in a moment. closed caption is provided by... winter nasal congestion. is it a cold? sinuses? allergies? for all of them... there's allegra-d . a maximum strength decongestant for 24 hour relief. try allegra-d . when i have a breakout from eczema, i feel like i'm in this shell. gold bond eczema relief relieves five frustrating symptoms of eczema. my skin's back. >> announcer: three judges. three opinions.

"hot bench." >> judge tanya: it feels like a very simple case. this was a two-day appointment. the defendant didn't finish the first part of the appointment. how dare she come here and ask this woman for more money? >> judge patricia: i totally agree with you. i mean, the whole breach here was by the defendant in the first instance. she has no basis for a counterclaim, to say, "well, you breached." well, she was compelled to breach -- bringing your child, taking breaks, saying that the money was $150 for a hair deposit, having the woman pay for her own hair with the $84... >> judge larry: and the fact that there was no meeting of the minds regarding the cancellation policy. there is no recovery for the defendant in the countersuit, and i'm with you in terms of the plaintiff recovering on the complaint. >> judge tanya: can i just throw something out there about this hair? let's give her the money. we don't know what condition that hair is in. >> judge patricia: i'm with you. sounds great. i'm ready.

come to order. this courtroom is again in session. >> judge patricia: it's a little unprofessional, under any circumstances, to take your child with you to a salon, to work. she engaged in a contractual obligation with you. you canceled on sunday, then, on monday, she called you and said, "i'm just not coming back. you, then, are counterclaiming 'cause you say she breached. the breach, in the first place, was you. you're not entitled to any money on the breach of contract. the judgment is in your favor for the amount you asked for, for the $234. we're not even gonna trust her to give you back the hair in the condition you bought it in. if you need the hair, go buy it yourself. your counterclaim is dismissed. >> sonia: this courtroom is now in recess. >> announcer: "hot bench"

and on the next "hot bench"... >> i didn't even check the yelp page. the yelp page was awful. >> i'm a businesswoman. >> like, she has one star. >> i took very good care of her. >> the example that i showed you... >> and she's scandalous... >> ...was temporary synthetic hair. >> ...she's very selfish, narrow-minded... >> do your research, 'cause, clearly, i didn't do mine. >> it's not a game. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com