FULL VIDEO AT THE END OF THE POST
The Mistaken Demolition
Miss Latini, the plaintiff, owned a home.
Her driveway was mistakenly jackhammered and dug up.
The defendants, Mr. Contreras and his partner, were cement masons.
They damaged her property without her consent.
Miss Latini had not hired them for any work.
The defendants believed they had been hired for the job.
They operated under a mistaken impression.
The Defendants' Story
Mr. Contreras explained his role.
He stated it was not a company, but a side job.
He clarified that he and his partner are both cement masons.
Judge Judy asked about his profession.
Mr. Contreras confirmed he works in concrete and cement masonry.
Judge Judy pointed out that it was not a side job.
It was his actual profession.
Mr. Contreras admitted that he and his partner went to the property.
They jackhammered part of Miss Latini's cement driveway.
He answered yes to Judge Judy's direct question.
He was instructed to simply answer the questions.
The Scam Unfolds
The plaintiff never hired the defendants.
The defendants' defense centered on a scam.
They were contacted by someone online.
This individual claimed to own Miss Latini's property.
The scammer expressed a desire for a new driveway.
The defendants provided a quote for the work.
The quote for the new driveway was $6,000.
They visited the property to assess the job.
Miss Latini was not present during this visit.
The person they were dealing with online was also absent.
The online contact agreed to the price.
They promised to wire the money.
However, before wiring the $6,000, the scammer made a request.
They asked the defendants to wire them $300.
This was supposedly to confirm legitimacy.
The Defendants Fall for the Scam
Mr. Contreras admitted to wiring the $300.
Judge Judy highlighted the foolishness of this action.
She recounted the scenario as described in the defendants' answer.
The scammer claimed to be out of town.
They stated they were receiving cancer treatment.
The defendants wired $300 to confirm legitimacy.
This was done before receiving the $6,000 for the driveway.
Judge Judy asked Mr. Contreras to identify any inaccuracies in her summary.
Mr. Contreras stated the scammer claimed to be the owner.
Judge Judy dismissed the identity of the scammer.
She emphasized the nature of the scam itself.
She explained that the defendants were scammed out of $300.
They then destroyed Miss Latini's property.
Judge Judy concluded that the defendants were not smart.
She clearly understood how the incident occurred.
The Jackhammering
The defendants proceeded with the work.
They jackhammered part of Miss Latini's driveway.
This happened after they wired the $300.
The online contact then disconnected their phone.
This occurred when the defendants tried to get the $6,000.
Miss Latini returned home to find her driveway damaged.
She discovered the jackhammered portion.
Offer to Fix vs. New Driveway
Mr. Contreras claimed he offered to fix the damaged part.
He stated he would fix the part he jackhammered.
Miss Latini denied this offer.
She said he never used that phrase.
Mr. Contreras insisted Miss Latini wanted a new driveway.
He claimed she wanted a new driveway for $4,000.
Judge Judy intervened in the escalating discussion.
She told them to listen.
Judge Judy's Scammer Analogy
Judge Judy explained the situation to the defendants.
She stated they made a mistake.
They were conned.
She used an analogy of someone meeting an online scammer from Nigeria.
This scammer asked for bank information.
Judge Judy said this was similar to what happened to them.
She reiterated the scammer's request for $300.
The scammer promised to return it with the $6,000.
The defendants sent the money.
Assessing the Damage and Repair Costs
Judge Judy asked to see the bill for the repair work.
She wanted to know the exact amount spent.
Miss Latini presented two checks.
The total amount from these checks was $2,268.
One check was paid before the repair work started.
The second check was paid after the work was completed.
Miss Latini also spent an additional $8.95 for concrete.
She explained that she ordered the concrete herself.
This was done to save money on the repair.
Judge Judy's Assessment of the Repair
Judge Judy noted that Miss Latini got a bargain.
The defendants had quoted $6,000 for a new driveway.
Miss Latini had the repair done for $3,160.
Judge Judy stated this was not even a third of the driveway.
She suggested the defendants should be grateful.
She told them to get down on their knees and kiss her feet.
Additional Costs and Claims
Miss Latini incurred other expenses.
She hired a private investigator to find the defendants.
She also claimed lost wages due to the incident.
Mr. Contreras stated he would have answered his phone.
He claimed nobody called him.
Miss Latini said she did not know who had done the damage.
She considered it an act of vandalism.
She found the situation scary.
Defendants' Continued Claims
Mr. Contreras maintained he could have fixed the driveway.
He said he would have paid for the concrete out of pocket.
He claimed he was still scammed out of $400.
He stated Miss Latini never gave him the opportunity to fix it.
Miss Latini expressed satisfaction that her driveway was fixed.
The Verdict
The transcript does not explicitly state a final verdict or outcome.
However, Judge Judy's statements indicate her view.
She held the defendants responsible for the damage.
She acknowledged they were victims of a scam.
But she emphasized their foolishness in the situation.
She focused on the actual cost of the repair.
She did not address the claims for the private investigator or lost wages.