The People's Court Season 20 Episode 87 Debt Disaster

The People's Court is a highly watched court show that tracks the cases of small claims and disputes which are often decided on by Judge Marilyn Milian. In the 20th season's 87th episode of The People's Court, the theme revolves around the financial struggles of individuals. This episode is titled Debt Disaster.

At the beginning of the episode, the plaintiffs and the defendants are persuaded to share their stories to guide the audience through their plight. The defendants in this episode are often presented in a precarious financial condition. One of the cases is about a couple who hired the plaintiff to repair their home. They claim that the work was never completed satisfactorily and they were overcharged for the work that had been done. It turns out that the plaintiff had never obtained the proper licensing and permits that were required for the job. So, the judge needed to stay focused on assessing the damage claims instead of talking about licensing and permits.

Another case in Debt Disaster is about a tenant and a landlord who had a disagreement. The tenant withheld rent after the landlord failed to perform necessary repairs to the rented property. The landlord in this case attempted to argue that he had performed all the repairs but was met with resistance by the tenant who cited the state law’s requirements for repairs. The judge steps in and listens carefully to both parties to reach a conclusion that is fair to both. As the case unfolds it becomes clear that the landlord failed to do the repairs in a timely manner and the tenant had the right to withhold rent payments as a result.

The next case involves a contractor and a homeowner who were struggling in a dispute over a payment for work done. The plaintiff, the contractor, was hired to remove a tree from the backyard but the payment was never materialized. The plaintiff claims that he completed the job, received a check, and the check bounced. In addition, the defendant complained that the job was not done properly and the tree was not completely removed. After investigating and hearing both sides, the judge finds that the plaintiff completed the job properly and that the defendant did indeed provide a check, which was registered and certified, but which ended up bouncing due to insufficient funds. Finally, the judge orders the defendant to make an immediate payment to the plaintiff for the tree removal job and the bounced-check fees.

The last segment in Debt Disaster presents the case of a woman who was eagerly seeking to refill her oxygen tank. The plaintiff, who is in urgent need of oxygen, was given a bottle that was almost empty by the paramedics. In seeking to refill the tank, the plaintiff made a stop at a gas station where she encountered a defendant who was working there. The defendant then stepped in to refill the plaintiff's oxygen tank and promised to do so at a reduced rate, yet the plaintiff felt the price was still not right. Afterward, the defendant presented the plaintiff with an invoice that was preposterously high, which the plaintiff refused to pay. Subsequently, the defendant is brought before the judge to answer for the allegations of price gouging and overcharging. Throughout the proceedings, the judge listens to both parties' accounts and views. The defendant claims that the price was reasonable and that he had done everything correctly. On the other hand, the plaintiff argues that the price was outrageous given her need for oxygen. After a thorough investigation, it turns out that the defendant had indeed taken advantage of the plaintiff's vulnerable state and charged her exorbitant rates. The judge, after hearing the evidence and reviewing the documents, orders the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff for the amount over and above the rate that would have been charged based on the local price for oxygen.

In summary, The People's Court season 20 episode 87, Debt Disaster, is a revealing program that presents a variety of problems. The cases portrayed in the show illustrate the financial crisis in which some individuals find themselves and highlights their disappointments in seeking satisfactory resolution. The judge looks at the problems brought before her in an impartial way, listens to both sides of the story, and hands down a just decision. Despite the challenges of financial strife, viewers are able to come away with an understanding of how the courts can help resolve the conflicts of everyday people.