Making a False Promise 

She does that when she already knows the answer or the answer she’s come to.. and I’m like then WHY ASK

U took the words right out of my mouth. I love Milian too but sheesh!. She couldn't finish one sentence. On the other hand 10k for this is ridiculous

Facts! That was very obnoxious.

I hate when people say this stupid comment, the judge literally asked the plaintiff time and time how she feels the defendant did something wrong and the plaintiff uses the same excuse that doesn’t even make any sense so why would the judge let her finish the sentence if shes just repeating her self and saying gibberish…

@williewarner6465 well, guess we disagree. If she already knew what she was going to say and she wasn't going to let her talk, then it's stupid to keep asking. This is how some people speak to their kids, hopefully not you though 👍🏻 Maybe I think your comment is stupid, I'm not the only one who noticed 😉 If someone thinks interrupting was not excessive in this particular case then they likely interrupt people constantly. Glad we can all have our opinions.

I get annoyed as well, she always interrupts the plaintiffs and defendants in every case. She needs to bite her tongue. That's arbitration for you.

She does that so often smh

This is one of the first cases where I said out loud, "If you'd just shut the hell up and let her speak!" - JM likes hearing herself talk way too much. It sounded like the Plaintiff was trying to explain she gave them authorization to run the background check in September, but JM kept interrupting her. Then she let the Defendant speak without interruption and he ended up saying just that, but they didn't have her IDs to run it. They should have gotten everything they needed from the get-go and she could have known long before October that she wasn't getting the job.

Yeah that’s this judge! She expects litigants to answer her immediately, but once they start, she will interrupt them as much as she wants, but will shut anyone down that tries to interrupt her!! SMH!!

@@righttoouropinionthanks4710 yes it gets incredibly annoying. She does it a lot but this case in particular was hard to watch. I understand interrupting when they aren't actually answering her question but the Plaintiff was trying to answer. I honestly think that JM was pissed off because her lawsuit was for 10k. Not saying she would have won, but if she sued for

Don't think the Defendant broke any laws, but this is definitely unprofessional practice. They should learn from this and conduct themselves better. Maybe instruct Sally to watch her rhetoric.

@@kinghutt79How is it unprofessional? Most companies go through the interview process and then do a background check before hiring. The plaintiff is a scammer.

Nice picture.

​​@@oldageisdumbNo the office workers started to take her through the hiring process telling her basically she was hired. They shouldn't have brought her back to the office for a walk through until the back ground check was completed. The office staff were wrong for doing that. That was unprofessional. How is the girl a scammer? She wasn't given a chance to dispute wether the information on the back ground check was accurate or not. She applied for a job that she needed to help her pay for her debt. How is that scamming. People are living pay check to pay check. You don't know what she may have gone through to end up like that. So don't judge 🤔

@@valariehunter5389 She’s scamming by trying to get $10k from a company for an absolute BS reason. Companies do that all the time and it’s not u professional. She had absolutely NO GROUNDS to sue them and she tried to hustle $10k. Anyone with half a brain cell knows that an offer is contingent on the results of the background check. If you don’t understand that, that tells me something about your brain cells. And they have the right to not hire her for any reason, so no, she doesn’t get to dispute it. She had horrible credit, it was plain as day. Come on…you can’t really be sticking up for this scammer?

Big Facts

She almost always does that... same with Judge Judy, who continues to say shhhhhh, wait a second, shoosh, shhh, shh 😅

They do that to get straight fax which she wasn’t answering. Plus they have to interrupt multiple times to find out where the lies are cause. Would you believe that people lie when they’re in court?😮

What are you babbling about??? The plaintiff had a terrible background check that disqualified her from the position. Instead of wasting the courts time she should pay her bills and stop being a cry baby victim looking for free money.

@@richarddawson5836 she does interupt the litigants A LOT! But in this case, the plaintiff's case is outragous! I 100% agree with you on that! But the judge has an annoying habit of not letting litigants finish their sentence 😅

She was getting evicted 😂😂😂

ikr

Asf😂😂😂

So if you don’t get that paycheck you’ll just consider the prior week or two to be volunteer work??

@synnove1046 yes I've worked too many temp jobs in my past

Lol

Thank you. These people in the comments are just ridiculous to think that she deserves to be paid. If that was the case, I would sue and so would the millions of people that get rejected from a job offer. Get the heck out of here.

👩🏻‍⚖️: “Did you have a job?” Defendant: “freelance” = NO JOB

@@akairiyahiko2602I’m surprised she didn’t sue the credit companies that are trying to collect on her 😂

Yup! I've even started jobs contingent upon my drug test results. If your background is suspect, you know you're on borrowed time Lol

The plaintiff was never hired. This lawsuit was completely ridiculous.

I had a written job offer extended, and I signed the offer. They did the background check and I went and did the drug test. All results were back and I got copies of the drug test results and the background check. 2 weeks after signing the job offer I was told they could not hire me. I was so upset I couldn't believe it. They had all of that information, I signed an offer and then for that to happen was just crushing. I did not feel it was fair but I did understand. It was due to my credit. If you are lucky enough to live in a state where they cannot withhold a job from you because of your credit, then you are lucky. I feel it's not fair that companies will not hire you with less than perfect credit. I mean I understand their position but it still is not fair. Things happen sometimes. ALso, I've heard the judge say if they have bad credit it means they don't pay their bills and this absolutely not always true. I have a low credit score because I have a lot of credit cards but I always pay my payments, never late and never miss a payment, so that statement that they don't pay their bills is false.

They could always back out of it… or could close down/ bankrupt!

Exactly!🤦🏾‍♀️

You think someone with bad credit was paying her rent on time or another non payment would hurt her already bad credit?

@jjman533 I was talking about her having a place to live, not her credit. But yeah, I do know people with bad credit who pay their rent on time.

In california you give 30 days or more notice... so either she lied or she was kicked out already.

Damn she got on my nerves

​@@jjman533my credit isn't good thanks to medical bills but I've NEVER been late on my rent. Not once.

Cause the plaintiff is a money hungry rat wasting her time

She is a racist.

We know why she was rude🤨

@@yahira6928yes we do, because this WOMAN… was trying to cheat the system in getting 10K when she was wrong… surely that would warrant being rude to or are you slow?

Because the lawsuit was dumb from the beginning. She wasn’t an employee yet, and someone with terrible credit is looking for $10,000

I love Judge Milian and she's usually logical and fair how she judges but this wasn't a good look for her. It seems like she was taking it personally and I didn't like that.

​@@robbiecopeland9039ok maybe the amount was excessive but if you can't or won't realize the point of why she sued is like wow, is all I can really say. I see EXACTLY why she did what she did.

Like shuuuuuut uppppp

@@robbiecopeland9039 EXACTLY. the lady is insane to think they wouldn't check her background, it's so EASY these days to check on people's backgrounds.

She is the true privileged.

Exactly. She was ridiculous.

@@shandranewell2837 The point is that they never hired her.

@@saramichele7366 YES THEY DID...

@shandranewell2837 No they didn't 😂 They hadn't even completed the background check yet. And her being hired was CONTINGENT on the background check! Which most all employers do. If you truly believe that she was hired then I have a bridge to sell you.

You are correct, but better practice is completing the background check before an employer notifies the applicant of an offer of Employment

She should already know what's on her credit report. 6 collections? How can you not know this? I believe she knew, but was "hoping" it would not be an issue (to them)

She's such a scammer, those people are so lucky she didn't get in.

She knew what was on her credit report and that should have been her first and last indicator that she DID NOT have the job. Not paying your bills will lose you a job every single time.

​@@lucky1uShe didn't scam anyone. The woman applied for a job. So she has bad credit. She probably needed a better job than what she previously had. People make mistakes when they're young trying to navigate life.🤔

High IQs dont need to hear entire answer if person needs to hear nust fee or singke word answer.

​@@wileecoyote5749You need to learn how to write 😂

JM cuts people off when she already decided she doesn't like you or she already has decided the case. Sometimes she likes to trip people up.🤔

its a tactic used to make you frustrated, usually most people will sigh loud and roll thier eyes, and throw a fit, and say its not fair... but its more psychological to see how you compose yourself

i think this is what people mean whenever they say "i didn't really get a chance to speak" after losing a case

And it’s a disgraceful bogus ass lawsuit

She just never lets people finish a sentence after she's just asked them a question. I'm finding her infuriating to watch, much less to listen to these days. Now I know why her days were numbered.

@@SamuelGBerman She knew she would fail her background check.

The plaintiff is full of crap. She's just wasting everyone's time. She can't even pass a background check. They definitely couldn't hire her to be involved in managing an entire apartment building.

Pleasant? It was all a facade. You could see right through it at the end.

😂😂😂😂

She's a foreigner feeling entitled.

@@smoothlyabrasive9805 foreigner? That's a overreaching and nothing to do with the isdue at hand.

@@smoothlyabrasive9805how do you know she’s a foreigner?

America has a 400 year bill they have yet to pay to Black people. Its time for them to write that check. Your response is digusting. You don't know her situation. Mighty odd that they tell her she had the job before the background check came back. You need to weigh your words because you never know what tomorrow may bring.

Right!

And once she was living there, she could refuse to do any work and refuse to pay anything, and it would take months of headache and lots of money to legally evict her....and I'm betting she knows this very well. Just like she knows very well that six collection agencies are after her for her bad debts. They totally dodged a bullet. She's just angry because she was so close to a successful scam, and they stopped her in her tracks.

@@JamieM470 Exactly!

My Guess is that she was running from a dog she had tied in her last apartment, why was she so quick to give it up before her new job & apartment were in place ?

Wow good point 👉

Yes, because the plaintiff was not answering the simple question "What did they do wrong?" She kept saying "I feel like they should have done this..." "I feel like they should have done that...." "The background check was supposed to take less time..." Well that doesn't actually answer the question "What did they do wrong?"

I see what you mean, but in a real court the judge would have never heard the case to begin with. The fact that she knew they were going to run a credit check makes this a completely frivolous law suit. JM only heard this case for the entertainment value. This would have been a 2 second case on Judge Judy.

The judge Judy show is also for entertainment so a 2 minute case wouldn't be very entertaining.​@@allbullaside7778

She was TOTALLY being evicted from where she was living. She’s a scammer.

It's hard to believe how stupid the 'average man on the street' answers are when questioned by Harvey. Until you have a total meeting of the minds, their is no work agreement. If you aren't covered by a union contract or a signed business contract, you can be let go at any time for any or no reason in every state because you are an 'at will' employee.

lol yeh. The look on the audience’s faces while she was telling the story was telling 🙄

⁠​⁠that was evident when 👩🏻‍⚖️ @6:58 “I like you to tell me EXACTLY what was on the background check…..” The look on the plaintiff’s face = priceless. Kudos to the defendant because you can tell he was only gonna summarize without embarrassing the plaintiff and you can even hear it in his nervous voice when he said “uhh exactly, is that ok??” 👩🏻‍⚖️ gave zero F’s and was definitely calling the plaintiff out 😂💀

Where did you get the impression that she was evicted?? She said that she told the place that she was living at, that she would be out of there on the first. The same day she was supposed to move into this new apartment for this job but she found out the night before that she wasn't approved. Obviously, the place that she was currently renting, already found a new tenant by then. So she lost the apartment she had because they can't let her stay with the new tenants coming in. I guess one could argue that she may have been in the process of being evicted while she was trying to get this job with a new apartment and the dates just happened to have lined up coincidentally. But, there's no actual evidence to make that claim, other than a hypothetical theory that it's technically possible. Obviously, she could be lying about her situation but again, there's no proof to the contrary. Also, the explanation that she gave does make sense logically. So if I'm missing something here, please let me know.

Ever heard of editing? Yeah it doesn't happen in tv shows. You are an easy sheep to fool.

😂😂😂😂

She's not gonna pay them off, she just wants more stuff, she can't afford .

Yep! All about the Benjamin’s! 🤨. 🙄

That's uh bit ofa "reach"....they used tha credit check asa way 2 disqualify her. Tha background check didn't show felonies, or violent crimes. That should've been tha sh1t 2 disqualify her....not poor phukkn credit.

@@greggpoppabich9281she was going to be HANDLING TENANTS MONEY and was going to be a potential TENANT herself, of course credit mattered. It typically does.

Agreed, they knew they misled her which is why they conferenced called her

I understand your point. The issue is as a litigant, especially the plaintiff, the judge gives you to explain why you are here and why the defendant is wrong. What actually happens is, the litigants want to counter and offer new information after the judge has given them the chance to explain the issue. She cuts them off because otherwise she would be there all day.

Lol ever try to get your point across to a Latina? Not happening

Very rude

Yep. Sometimes it's hard to watch her. Talks too much.

She was a judge in Miami before People’s Court.

not at all. the plaintiff was there being greedy and the judge doesn't give grace to people like that

So we pity liars ?

@@user-bp2kl7sq8d Are you out of your mind that women never shuts up...she does more talking than the plaintiff and the defendant combined...... she is literally arguing their case for them and being the judge

She is a liar. And just trying to get money for no reason. She FAILED BACKGROUND. Who on earth thinks u can sue for that

@@josha.bdoge2 its a tactic used to make you frustrated, usually most people will sigh loud and roll their eyes, and throw a fit, and say its not fair... but its more psychological to see how you compose yourself, and it sounds like you would have gotten frustrated and walked off or said something inappropriate to be kicked out

I think she was given the right information from the start and he kept moving the goalpost to put someone he wanted in the job, why else would he not bring one of them in to back him up?

She needs pay her bills period 😅😅

​@@queenlauraa3968You don't know what has happened in her life so don't judge. People are living pay check to pay check. She needed a job to repay her debt. 🤔

@@queenlauraa3968 Of course she does, but sometimes people need a leg up and I still believe he used it as an excuse to put someone else in the job, remember she was originally told her rent was free and he never disputed that.

@@valariehunter5389 she don’t look like she struggling at all . She looks well dressed & well taken care of . So she can’t be doing that bad . A lot of people are ghetto fabulous. She’s suing them for 10,000 for nothing that obviously says a lot about her 😅😅😅😅😅

100%

When they did that to you did they admit that they were abusing their employees and paying them so severely low that it was laughable actually not even laughable it was pretty pathetic

They did a credit score check for a job (that’s not a teller or armed guard for Wells Fargo, etc)?!?! I’m my state that’s all you can check it for is one of those jobs… And screw them, you made out..

She has the education but is literally doing what we are doing. 🙃

Aren't we all arm chair attorneys. Sometimes the judge misses. And sometimes they're biased.🥴

@@craZbeauTfulAre you kidding?!

So you actually need her to explain that to you? Obviously - she is an attorney and a former practicing judge and has a law degree. Although laws vary from state to state, the law degree is not specifically tailored for each state. But the concepts are similar. The specifics, such as in this case, are easily researched by any reasonably competent attorney. So of course any TV court show is going to have a “judge” that actually understands the law. And of course all litigants are “arm chair attorneys”. This is Small Claims Court, where no attorneys are required. That means that litigants are almost always representing themselves (attorneys are not required but are allowed). Therefore most are arm chair attorneys.

She is a scammer

What makes her a scammer? She simply doesn’t understand that her offer was contingent on a background check and it doesn’t matter that they waited until the last minute.

@@fitnessfocusedshe knew a background check was happening. What did she think it was for?

So all you saw was the plantiffs skin color and you decided she MUST be a scammer? Gotcha

@@forgetmeknotts3044 Your assuming that's dangerous.

No it doesn’t. She felt that she was misled. They had what they needed at the initial interview. She did a second interview before coming in to see the apartment.

@@akimat418 As judge Judy would say, her feelings are irrelevant… the man clearly told her that her hiring was Contingent upon a clean background check, and if she thought that somehow her history was going to magically disappear, she was wrong.

​@@akimat418she could have had a third and fourth interview but I guess she hasn't had enough jobs to know that if they're not happy with the background check they're not going to officially extend an offer.

What you are talking about is incredibly different than this People’s Court case. Government background checks are way more intense than a standard credit check.

@@synnove1046 Understood. Still, the point applies that the employer needs to make it clear that the position is contingent on passing the background check.

Pretty sure Sally and Sandy didn't even come close to emphasizing that point.

Alternatively, the woman could have just kept looking for another job instead of wasting time suing people.

They aren’t going to run a background check on potential employees that they don’t like

Right. Many people don't understand that. It's not her fault. It was dirty either way.

They wanted to hire her and were preparing for if they did hire her. They didn't know her credit was so bad because she never disclosed that.

She had plenty of time to provide concrete explanations. She is risk with bad bad credit habits.

@@smoothlyabrasive9805 Having bad credit is not a crime. Just poor life decisions. Not the end of the world. Get off your high horse!

@@marysanders3380 I'm not on a high horse I'm on God's cloud thanking him everyday for a healthy life so far in my life, BUT she had time to explain.

@@marysanders3380you’re correct however, the position she was applying for requires a credit check with good standing. Would you hire a CFO with 2 bankruptcy filings for to run the finances for your business? I think not. Well, you could be you would be a fool.

@@metorphoric You can spin the narrative all you want. If the background check was that important based on the job; that should have been discussed foremost in the interview process. No you hired or showing no apartments directly after an interview. The only problem the plaintiff had was it wasn't in writing that the job was hers. If it was in writing, it would have been a slam dunk for the Plaintiff. But my point is Judge Milan mind was already made up before any testimony. Even the judge said she read the case before presiding over it. Judge Milan can't stand Black people taking advantage of the system more than any other race. That's the point I'm making!🙄

Saying you're hired and extending an offer are 2 very different things. If you don't believe so, I would advise you to not do anything before the company that says "you're hired" extends you a written offer, not verbally.!

Wether it was a money grab or not you still want to be heard. You would feel the same way if someone basically said you were hired and started walking you through the intake process.🤔

I just think she's a con artist. I really do.

very privileged

@@MikeNelli-uq2wlit’s not privileged, it’s smart.

@@BeccasaurousRex270 I know y u think she's smart

​@@BeccasaurousRex270y am I the only one you had something to comment at

This episode got everyone thinking the company was LUCKY not to hire this lawsuit fishing scammer. She is UNEMPLOYABLE and good to expose hee on national TV and on the internet. I'm sure she will have worse credit today than when they did a background check on her then.

Yes. Repeatedly, reminding her. From the start 😮

Smdh 🤦🏽‍♀️

Girl by with your long forehead lots of people have bad credit !!!

She jumped the gun, you never let go of a place if you don't have another one lined up. It's a shame, I'm sure she was excited, but she jumped the gun.

It’s not his fault she jumped the gun and made a bad choice

There is NO case for 1 month rent because SHE gave her consent to a background check. Further, it was SHE who "assumed" she would get the job, NOT them. They have NO duty to her at all because she was NOT an employee of theirs. Hence, they have ZERO responsibility toward her

Milian can't STAND educated, well spoken Black people. Shes racist af...AND she's aging very badly😂😂😂😂😂

Hopefully you understand that the judge reads all about the case beforehand. Most of the theatrics we see here are because it's a TV show.

It's also irrelevant. Being a Black gay man, I've been unemployed for years, and post coronavirus/pandemic, I cannot find a job; and I go on interviews, and I'm never hired. So now I'm doing gigs/freelance/event staff food/catering work at conventions and festivals etc.), and I'll be honest, my background isn't squeaky clean no, but that's my past, and this is now. I'm a hard worker, but I face discrimination on interviews/background checks etc. Unfair. Background checks are supposed to really double check the person isn't using a false identity. That's it. But it seems they are 99 percent of the time, used to unfairly judge people on occurrences in peoples past which are nobody's business unless it's some high profile CIA job. Not to work at a call center, supermarket, restaurant or hotel, or in this case a leasing manager job etc. (whether stuff on the background check, were warranted or warranted, or a parking ticket they never knew they had etc. or if what comes up on the background check is that persons fault or not). Hence why a lot of people with haphazard backgrounds work under the table and/or are self contractors. I feel for Plaintiff. If she just went for an interview and "We'll call you", and background check pulled up her past, and they declined her job offer, okay. But clearly they basically on-boarded her onto the team, and did this Smh. I feel if she sued for a smaller amount (hell no not 10k like 500 bucks for inconvenience, and if she had proof Sandy and Sally/his employees treated her like that) she could have won this case.

😂uncross your arms.....😂😂

Even if they had, she did not deserve$ 10.000😢!

I am assuming she was told contingent upon the background check, you can pick up your keys on xxx date. I would have liked to know if a written job offer as provider. Should have clear language regarding the terms of employment.

if she was hired where is the contract?

@@nameundefinedname5307 verbal offers are also legally binding. Harder to prove in court however.

Yeah, that's how I feel. She probably would have sued them for something else if they did hire her.

She has say in which cases they take

What a leap in logic.

Uh what.

What? “JJ” is on a different show. It seems obvious to me that judges on TV court shows do NOT read in depth about their cases. I’m not accusing them of any wrong-doing I’m just saying it does not seem like any more than a normal once-over. I notice them miss things often. But even if a judge reads every single document very closely, and does great research, how do you think that research guarantees that they’ll discover “false information?” They can’t read minds nor do they have superpowers. Litigants have to bring evidence and/or witnesses in order to prove or dis-prove any information that they provide.