View Full Version : EBAY scammer gets their due on Judge Judy
loporjai2003
02-23-2007, 06:00 PM
JJ ripped this "you are buying a photo of the product" scammer a new one !
http://break.com/watch/233184/Judge_Judy_destroys_an_eBay_scammer/
Kitsune Sniper
02-23-2007, 07:07 PM
She got pwned.
I HATE Judge Judy. And I still think she pwned that scammer.
rcgamer
02-23-2007, 07:10 PM
Go Judge Judy!
It is the few people like this woman that give some people a bad impression of Ebay.
jajaja
02-23-2007, 07:19 PM
Haha owned! $5000 too, damn!
Greg2600
02-23-2007, 07:35 PM
Part of the agreement in coming on that show is that neither person actually has to pay the losing judgement, if it's monetary and not a car or pet or something.
skankinmack
02-23-2007, 07:48 PM
so thats what an e-bay scammer looks like huh?
i didn't think they were real humans. just heartless monsters who feed of the souls of the innocent people he/she has scammed.
Sailorneorune
02-23-2007, 09:51 PM
That made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Thanks OP!
I hope that woman spends time behind bars and that her children are taken away from her permanently. How does someone turn into such a scumsucker?
I'm not sure she has to pay a dime of the $5000, though. According to wikipedia, "The award for each judgment is paid by the producers of the show from a fund reserved for each case."
badinsults
02-23-2007, 10:36 PM
Haha, great. Now if only that happened to all of them. I'm sorry but saying your are selling a photo when you have a big description of a phone is fraud. A store that said, "PS3 PHOTO FOR SALE - $600" would not get away with it, and ebayers shouldn't either.
dendawg
02-24-2007, 01:53 AM
Hells yeah, that bitch got pwned!
Unfortunately, if this was a real small claims court, she'd get off. (JJ and all the other court shows are abitration, and plus, JJ can use her own discretion in deciding cases.)
Now if only they had a show that showcased only Ebay scammers.
Why would she get off? Her ad was deceptive and contained false information.
mr_nihilism
02-24-2007, 02:06 PM
I hope every time that cow walks down the street people erase that stupid smug look off her face by punching her.
Kitsune Sniper
02-24-2007, 08:15 PM
Why would she get off? Her ad was deceptive and contained false information.
Deceptive? Yes. But the auction actually said it had a photo, not an item, so legally she's in the clear.
I'm NOT happy with that, but that's how it is.
The law would not be on her side. Do you think Best Buy could get away with something like that? Not to mention the weight of the item is clearly stated in the auction and it does not match up to the weight of a piece of paper. Deceptive advertising is ILLEGAL.
Sailorneorune
02-25-2007, 12:03 PM
If there were a show dedicated to ebay scammers getting theirs, I'd need TWO DVRs. :D
dendawg
02-25-2007, 05:35 PM
The law would not be on her side. Do you think Best Buy could get away with something like that? Not to mention the weight of the item is clearly stated in the auction and it does not match up to the weight of a piece of paper.
Do you honestly believe law enforcement would give two shits over someone being scammed on Ebay, unless the amount involved several thousands of dollars/euros/whatever? In cases like this, sadly the onus is on the scammee to take action. The amount involved is usually not worth the effort to file suit, hire attorneys, possibly crossing state lines, etc.
ubikuberalles
02-25-2007, 05:45 PM
Deceptive? Yes. But the auction actually said it had a photo, not an item, so legally she's in the clear.
Not true. Judge Judy pointed out that the "item" weighed 4 oz and there was no way that two pieces of paper could weigh a quarter of a pound. The scammer tried to cover her (rather large) ass by putting the word "photo" in the description. She did a poor job of it and that's why it should be considered fraud and not a prank. She's not in the clear and I won't be surprised if the Atorney General indicts her and her husband.
jajaja
02-25-2007, 05:48 PM
Not true. Judge Judy pointed out that the "item" weighed 4 oz and there was no way that two pieces of paper could weigh a quarter of a pound. The scammer tried to cover her (rather large) ass by putting the word "photo" in the description. She did a poor job of it and that's why it should be considered fraud and not a prank. She's not in the clear and I won't be surprised if the Atorney General indicts her and her husband.
True that. Funny when scammers shit themself when they do mistakes like this hehe.
Griking
02-25-2007, 07:33 PM
Do you honestly believe law enforcement would give two shits over someone being scammed on Ebay, unless the amount involved several thousands of dollars/euros/whatever?
Um, yes I do. I've personally have contacted a crooked seller's local police department and they actually helped me get my money back. What do you suggest, let the seller get away with it?
What I think is bullshit is if it's true that the producers of the Judge Judy show pays all judgments. Because of this this scammer never really learned a thing. Yeah, big deal, they found in favor of the buyer for $5000. The television show pays for this and the scammer still made $500 by selling pictures.
No wonder she looked so smug.
aaron7
02-28-2007, 12:33 PM
The part about weighing 4oz was about the phone itself, not the photo. Technically the seller was still in the clear; though I'd never condone such actions.
Emuaust
02-28-2007, 03:37 PM
Slightly OT but my opposition here in town is getting taken to court for ebay fraud that could see him do time,
The funny thing is that his lawyer is my best customer LOL
Muscelli
02-28-2007, 04:29 PM
here is her myspace
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=40422900
Iron Draggon
02-28-2007, 10:39 PM
WOOHOO! I hate Judge Judy's attitude, but in this case it was right on target!
A lot of the court shows can be one sided a lot of the time, but this is one of those times where everything was spot on. I found it hilarious that she was trying to laugh the entire situation off and from the looks of her profile, it doesn't look like she's laughing anymore.
Kitsune Sniper
03-01-2007, 01:32 AM
Not true. Judge Judy pointed out that the "item" weighed 4 oz and there was no way that two pieces of paper could weigh a quarter of a pound. The scammer tried to cover her (rather large) ass by putting the word "photo" in the description. She did a poor job of it and that's why it should be considered fraud and not a prank. She's not in the clear and I won't be surprised if the Atorney General indicts her and her husband.
But the description was for the phone, not for the photos.
IF the auction said the description was for the photos, then yes, it's invalid. But if it said that it's for the items -in the photos-... well, that's another thing.
Edit: Then again, I'm not a lawyer so what the hell do I know. :P
Snapple
12-18-2007, 02:40 AM
I just saw this video, because it got posted on Digg and blew up with new popularity. Total ownage. Loved it.
Dark_Sol
12-18-2007, 03:34 AM
Kick ass!!!
PSerge
12-19-2007, 08:38 AM
Good Stuff.. I only wish I had seen the video earlier... That made for a good laugh....
Alucard79
12-19-2007, 10:00 AM
That was funny as hell. I have to say that I don't care for Judge Judy too much because of her holier than thou attitude, but on occasion, she tears into someone pretty good.
stonic
12-19-2007, 11:57 AM
-----
The 1 2 P
12-20-2007, 01:35 AM
I have good news for everybody. I got scammed out of alittle over $2,000 on ebay(thats not the good news). But what makes this even more interesting was that the person scamming me was my ex-girlfriend's father.
Long story short: I agreed to sell sets of baseball cards for him. I listed them and he sent them out to the winners. Since they were never in my possesion, little did I know that this shady jack ass would go thru all the sets and take out all the rare chase cards. So I had to pay these two buyers back out of pocket(they paid thru paypal and then I took the money out and gave it to jack ass) and it nearly drained my entire savings account. I was just about ready to go to his house and turn him into an opera singing woman when my girlfriend suggested I take him to small claims court.
So I filled the lawsuit for small claims court(no lawyer is required and you can sue for up to $5,000 depending on which state you live in), actually took a day off to go watch other small claims court cases to prepare myself and went in to court on my date. Not only did I sue him for the money on ebay, I also sued him for all my court cost(you have to pay a fee to file a case in small claims court).
So I showed up but his chicken shit ass wasn't there. His lawyer was and she paid me every penny I sued him for--in cash. She didn't even want to go before the judge because of all the proof I had. So I got all my money back and that was that. This is proof that not all scammers get away. Granted, I live in the same state as him and that made it alot easier to take him to court. But the fact of the matter is: the good guy won and the bad guy lost.
If theres anyone else on this forum going thru a similar incident of scandal/scamming, please feel free to private message me and I will offer you all the knowledge I aquired while successfully sueing and winning against one of the millions of dick head scammers.
otoko
12-20-2007, 02:10 AM
Hazzah. This is great!.. I'm glad to be one of the few not scammed. I know I have just as much chance as anyone.
Thankfully I eBay so little that it becomes less and less of a chance I will.
Kejoriv
12-20-2007, 01:35 PM
love that video! JJ throws it down! haha
mnbren05
12-21-2007, 04:02 AM
Based on my limited legal studies thus far JJ has a point. If the auction states this is a photo only auction, but then goes on to declare a size, weight, height, etc the seller is in trouble. The only way scammers can legally get around this is by saying up front that the auction is for a photo only and no real item will be shipped. The seller must also make certain to mention that the photograph is of a real item and the dimensions mentioned are accurate of the photographed item. The law will in most cases be a mix of grey areas as scammers can get away with great deal through clever wording. However, if the wording is purposely misleading, fraudulent, or unclear the buyer tends to be in the right. Which is why I would assume JJ ruled in her favor. The seller had intent to defraud buyers by offering an item not for sale. In reality I would say that 90% of these cases can be avoided through careful examination and the "if its too good to be true" thought process. Although, like this woman and her husband some scumbags still present acutions that catch the best of us.
Oobgarm
12-21-2007, 06:38 AM
http://www.dustincarter.com/images/wut.jpg