FULL VIDEO AT THE END OF THIS POST
NO WITNESS, NO WIN!
A Car Repair Dispute Lands in Court
Imagine buying a car and then facing endless repair issues.
Now imagine the mechanic you hired doesn't show up to court.
That is the situation in this Judge Judy case.
The Plaintiff Seeks a Refund
Virginia Fuller is the plaintiff.
She is suing mechanic Hane Hoffman.
She wants a refund for what she calls fraudulent car repairs.
The Nearly 20-Year-Old Car
Ms. Fuller bought a car in late December 2015.
It was almost 20 years old.
She paid $1,400 for it.
She drove the car until May 2016.
Then she took it in for brake work and new tires.
The Smog Check and Frame Work
Ms. Fuller later took the car for a smog check.
She mentioned needing frame work to someone next to the defendant's business.
Judge Judy noted that Ms. Fuller drove the car for several months without having it smogged.
Ms. Fuller confirmed she wanted money back from the defendant for his work.
Suing for More Than the Car's Value
Judge Judy pointed out a significant detail.
Ms. Fuller was suing for $2,450.
This amount was more than the $1,400 she paid for the car.
Ms. Fuller tried to explain her reasoning.
She mentioned information from the state.
Judge Judy quickly cut her off for hearsay.
The Credit Card Reversal Confusion
Judge Judy then brought up a key financial detail.
Ms. Fuller had paid the defendant.
But then she had the amount reversed on her credit card.
Ms. Fuller stated she had $1,180 something dollars reversed.
She initially paid the defendant $2,380 something dollars.
She had receipts for this amount.
Judge Judy asked how much money Ms. Fuller actually got back.
The defendant's bank records showed a reversal twice for $1,180.
Ms. Fuller claimed she got "zero" back.
She tried to explain.
She said the defendant refunded her $1,180.
But it did not show on her statement.
She called her bank to reverse the charge.
She was paying financial charges on it.
Her bank did reverse the charge.
Double Refunds and New Work Orders
Ms. Fuller explained more about the refunds.
She said the defendant's bank processed his refund twice.
But when she picked up the car, he got paid $3,750.
She presented a receipt for $3,750.
Judge Judy noted this amount was in the complaint and answer.
The Car Was "All Screwed Up"
Judge Judy recounted what the defendant allegedly told Ms. Fuller.
He said he could not fix the car.
He claimed it was "all screwed up."
He also said it was a salvaged car.
Ms. Fuller did not know this when she bought it.
Judge Judy suggested Ms. Fuller should have written off the $1,400.
She should have started over.
Ms. Fuller confirmed the defendant said he could not fix it.
He also said he would reverse the charge.
The Bank Statement and Multiple Work Orders
Judge Judy asked to see Ms. Fuller's bank statement.
Ms. Fuller explained a complex series of events.
The defendant reversed $1,180.
But his worker undercharged her.
So, he wrote up another work order.
This new work order was for $1,280, $1,182, and $1,308.
One work order was on the 24th.
Another was on the 25th.
Ms. Fuller clarified that before the new work order, the defendant refunded her $1,180.
About $125 was subtracted for a bumper sticker.
The Defendant's Absence
Judge Judy asked if Ms. Fuller had spoken to the defendant since filing the lawsuit.
Ms. Fuller stated she wanted $2,400 back.
She claimed the defendant did not fix the car.
She had to take it elsewhere for more work.
She stated the defendant got paid $2,400 after reversals.
She wanted that money back.
Then, Judge Judy noticed a crucial detail.
There was no witness present.
The defendant, Hane Hoffman, was not there.
Ms. Fuller tried to explain.
She said he was invited.
She said he had his own shop and could not come in.
Judge Judy quickly interjected.
"But you can't testify to that."
She told Ms. Fuller she could not testify to what someone else did.
Ms. Fuller stated she had the work the defendant did.
She also had his photos.
Judge Judy asked if the defendant was supposed to be there.
Ms. Fuller replied that he had promised to come.
The Dismissal
Judge Judy made her decision.
"Well, when you get that witness, somebody will reevaluate your case."
The case was dismissed without prejudice.
"We're done," Judge Judy concluded.
Watch the Full Judge Judy Case Below
See how this complex car repair dispute unfolds.
Witness the plaintiff's attempts to explain the financial transactions.
Watch Judge Judy's reaction to the missing defendant.
Scroll down.
Press play.
FULL VIDEO
CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE FULL VIDEO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4KWd6ovAwo
