Tenant Troubles 

pay your bills

😂😂😂😂😂😂

But imagine the "I told you so!" satisfaction she can milk forever after this especially since it was on national television. 😂😂

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

She just randomly plays this episode in the house

Yep

Looks like his wife told him not to file.. hmmmmmm

I think the wife probably told him that, but he was so mad about everything he probably couldn't let it go. Oh well 🤷🏾‍♂️

🤦🏾‍♀️😂

was just going to say this

In truth hubris must kick our butts a few times in life lol, it’s the only way to truly be happy.

Hubris! That's a great word!!!

That was my first thought! Who the hell would let an old man in to look at naked kids in a tub?? BS.

Me too

I thought the same that’s a disturbing confession. He seems to have a hidden camera in bathrooms

I get excited with counter suits 😅😅😅

Me tooooooooooo 😉…

There can be only one ⚔

Obviously you dont oay for heat

Seriously? That's your logic? If you can't heat your home you should be homeless. Hmmm....who ties your shoelaces for you.

@@janicester smh rent fool you can rent if u can't afford to heat your home

@wileecoyote5749 yea I do and I'm not wearing coats in my house if u can't afford the house rent an apartment... peace buddy

70 degrees is picture perfect for living where I do. It's literally 103 degrees right now

They're in NY

Interesting that NY doesn’t acknowledge prorated rent.

It depends on the "judges" hormones for the day. She's done it both ways before, just depends on her mood swings.

Depends on where they are from. She rules depending on their hometown laws.

The lease didn't end in the middle of a month, they overstayed. Why would you get to overstay however long you felt like, then only pay that portion?

THAK U! I said the same!

Basic math Kids+tub=flooding

Do you dummies even listen. Not only was his ceiling wet but so were the other tenants. Which made him go up to their house and see why water was coming into his house. Derp!

Well the show pays for whatever judgments are made. On paper plaintiffs had a solid case, had defendant not got lucky with incidental rules. If plaintiff wasn't lying that defendant let them stay those extra weeks, defendant automatically loses countersuit if he said yes, but since he said no, even if he's lying under oath which people do anyways, he won in the countersuit by a loophole.

He under normal circumstances can't, but if it's on the lease that specifically states the thermostat/furnace/air conditioning, cannot be altered/modified, tenants if they decide to breach this rule, can't say anything if the landlord gives them a fine or fee for doing that. Also if on the lease landlord said everyone in the building goes dutch on electric bill, someone using excessive power gets blamed.

@@taralen1101 Did you WATCH the video? It's not.

It depends on what the lease says. I know Judge Milan is scouling at him for that, but she would favor him if he put that unfair thermostat rule in the lease. If doctor eggman told them not to mess with the thermostat, you get cold one night and turn it up when he told you on the lease not to, you're screwed if he decides to charge/give you a fee for that because his power bill went up etc. But if the lease says nothing about this, then yes you're right, and you need to file a lawsuit/landlord-tenate dispute at that point etc. It's wrong, I don't like this man either spying on the plaintiffs grandchildren in the baththub smh. But it depends on what rules (however unfair) he has mentioned on the lease which we both haven't seen or read we just can gather from this case segment/episode etc. @@stephaniehowe0973

Put lockbox on thermostat

@@wileecoyote5749 🤣 That doesn't make it legal in anyway

At a glasses place

Why should she prorate the rent? Eviction said they had to be out on the first of March - they weren’t so they have to pay for all of March.

Youd be evicited

I OWN my home!@@wileecoyote5749

Where did it say he had a hidden camera?

Stop making things up. Was the drama from the court case not enough for you?

No idea what this means, but I like it 😂

How many videos you gunna post this crud

Everyone bud bang bang niner gang baby

Because that's not what she meant, and you know it. She meant proof of damage after they moved out, and estimate which defendant claims he had but I doubt he did as that wasn't even shown or presented as evidence. Defendant either is lying and making this up, or in the event it is true, he's peeping and spying on them and just wow, any way you put it. Smh.

That is what a month to month lease is. If there is no language regarding prorated rent, then they have follow the rules of the month to month.

The judge can decide given the circumstances to prorate the rent (even though you can argue some states follow prorate rules but idk) and definately after hearing defendant with zero proof say plantiffs grandchildren were playing around in the tub flooding it. How in the hell would he know that unless he was spying on them etc. Really terrible case how plantiffs lose their security, and defendant gets the remaining balance. He can take his money and understand he only won on his countersuit of the rent, due to a very twisted loophole. smh.@@rtypepe

HA HA 1 minute into a new month YOU OWE whole month

Oh please grow up. Insulting LL COOL J shows how so immature you really are, @TeamTaur. Very immature.

Yeah, Adrian. Judge Milian doesn't take facts into account. She didn't give the defendant the ceiling painting or the excess electricity, but she did give him the rent he was due because they stayed over. Obviously pure racism.

How is this racist by any means? They didn’t pay rent in both Feb or march and somehow the judge making her ruling is racist? Gtfo. You’re the problem here in this country by pulling this nonsense.

They screwed themselves. they stayed into the next month so he couldn’t rent it to someone else. Why should the defendant loose a month of rent because they couldn’t get out in time?

?? first, do you get that neither party got exactly what they asked for, and do you understand this is a TV show and both parties are fully compensated regardless of what happens in "court"?

not understanding the problem here. seemed straightforward to me that they were bound to lose this case.