First, the plaintiff claims that when she bought a car from the defendant, he illegally forged her name on some bank documents, and she reported him to the department of consumer affairs. Because the terms of the loan are wrong, she wants out of the deal and wants her deposit back. The defendant says the plaintiff returned the car to the bank, who she took out the loan with for the car, so he has nothing to do with him. He also claims he received the deposit for the car a year ago, making it nonrefundable.

Then, the defendant says she and her ex-boyfriend planned on splitting the cost of a hotel and rental car for an out-of-town wedding they attended together, but now that they’ve broken up, she says the defendant is stiffing her for his share. She is suing for what she’s owed. The defendant claims that their relationship was on-again, off-again, and the plaintiff only started demanding to be repaid for the trip after she broke up with him via text message.

Plus, the plaintiff purchased a Sub-Zero freezer from the defendant, only to find a broken piece in the condenser that a repairman said could not be fixed. He claims the defendant led him to believe the freezer was in good working order just to get rid of a piece of junk. He is suing the defendant for more than the money he spent on the freezer. The defendant claims he told the defendant he had never plugged the freezer in and was therefore not responsible for whether it worked or not. He also says the plaintiff knew he was taking a chance with purchasing the freezer.

Don’t forget to rate and subscribe so you never miss an episode.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices