[Judge Levy] You loaned your car.
Someone hits you.
- And then what, they left the scene? - That's correct.
So, why did it take you a month to get a police report?
- Um... - Was that because it was only
after the accident that you got insurance?
- I'm not sure, Your Honor. - Yeah.
I was just wondering why
he was--kept giving me the runaround.
You were just as involved in this scam as he was.
[announcer] Now, on Tribunal Justice.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]
[exciting music plays]
[announcer] Today's case was filed in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Your Honor, this is case number 2002,
West versus Powell.
All parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
Thank you, Cassandra. All right. Ms. West,
your former friend here borrowed your car, was involved in an accident.
Yes.
[Judge Levy] You got an estimate to fix the damage
and he refused to pay it.
You're suing him for $7,968,
- which is the cost to fix your car. - Correct.
And, Mr. Powell, you say the accident wasn't your fault,
that you were the victim of a hit-and-run.
Furthermore, you claim that the estimate was unreasonable
because the amount that she's requesting is more than the car is worth.
- That's correct, Your Honor. - [Judge Levy] And you're just saying that
your former friend is being unreasonable.
- That's correct, Your Honor. - [Judge Levy] All right.
Ms. West, you're the plaintiff. Why don't you start by telling us
what kind of car you had
and when it was that you lent it to your friend over here
- and why. - Yes, Your Honor.
So, it is a 2014 Chrysler 300 S.
I purchased it in March 2022.
By February 2023,
in order for me to purchase the home,
I also had to pay off the car at the time of purchase, which I did.
Is this a photograph of your car
- that you provided to us? - Yes, Your Honor.
I appreciate everything that I worked-- I have worked hard for.
I am in recovery over four years.
Since I've been in recovery,
I have maintained a job. I've maintained sobriety.
- I appreciate all that. - What I want you to do is tell me
when it was that you loaned your car to the defendant
- and what the circumstances were. - So on...
April 18th 2023,
I explained to him that I had bought another vehicle
that I use all the time now and I put my car up in the garage.
And he had stated that his vehicle,
his truck was having some issues
and he had to put it in the shop
and asked me if he could use my car.
And I said, "I will let you use the car but you have to get insurance on it
because the only insurance that I have on it right now
currently is comprehensive."
[Judge Levy] So comprehensive, in other words,
that if it was involved in an accident,
- that it would not be covered? - Correct. Yeah.
- [Judge Levy] Okay. - If somebody else was driving it...
[Judge Levy] And is that correct, Mr. Powell?
That's what she told you, that if you wanted to borrow the car
on April 18th that you would have to get your own insurance?
- That's correct, Your Honor. - [Judge Levy] Okay. Continue.
So he had the car. We stayed in contact.
He told me that he got insurance on the vehicle.
[Judge Levy] Did you ask to see a copy of it?
- I did not. - [Judge Levy] Why not?
'Cause he--he's a friend and I trusted his word that,
- you know... - Okay.
... that he would, you know, take care of it...
Mr. Powell, did you get insurance despite the fact
that she didn't ask you to see a copy of it?
- Yes, I did, Your Honor. - And the reason I'm asking that
is because the reason that we're here
is because your insurance did not cover the accident, correct?
- That's correct. - [Judge Levy] So my question to you
is I'd like to see proof that you actually had
a policy in effect as of the end of April,
beginning of May 2023.
I don't have that, but I just have the letter...
When was it that you got insurance on that car?
I got insurance on it possibly two weeks after April.
About two--oh, but definitely before May?
- [Jeffrey] Yes. - Okay. Go on.
He messaged me on Messenger
stating that somebody hit him in my car.
- [Judge Levy] So it was May 7th? - Yup.
- And you remember that as well, sir? - Yes, Your Honor.
[Judge Levy] All right. Do we have a photograph
- of the damage of the vehicle? - Yes.
- [Judge Levy] Okay. - [Tanya] So, Your Honor,
that is when I ended up taking it
- to get an estimate done on the vehicle. - [Judge Levy] That's okay.
And what discussion, if any, do you have with him regarding payment?
So he still had it for approximately
three, four weeks after the accident,
which he had time to go and get an estimate done himself.
He had time to sit and talk to me about, you know,
working out a payment plan or doing something.
[Jeffrey] Yeah, the reason why I didn't
is because I figured that the insurance would pay for it.
- [Judge Levy] Your insurance? - Yeah. My insurance.
[Judge Levy] The insurance that you bought before May 2023?
- Correct. - What did you think at that point?
[Tanya] Um,
I was just wondering why he kept giving me the runaround.
I constantly have to get a hold of him, text him,
and I asked him, I said, "Well, did you make a police report?
- Did you call the police?" And he said... - [Judge Levy] And what did he say?
- "... No." - [Judge Levy] Okay. Hold on.
Mr. Powell, why not?
You're claiming that someone hit you
and then what, they left the scene?
- That's correct. - [Judge Levy] So how long
after the date of the accident, May 7th,
was it that you went to the police?
It was a week later.
- [Judge Levy] A week later? - Yes.
Are you sure about that?
- Yes. - How about a month?
June 7th, right? Because as part of your case,
you submitted to us for our consideration a copy of that police report, right?
That's correct.
So why did it take you a month to get a police report?
Um, just--I have no excuse about that.
I was just...
[Judge Levy] It sounds suspicious though, don't it?
- Why'd you wait a month? - I just didn't know what to do, sir.
[Judge Levy] Okay. You don't know what to do.
Would it be fair to say though that there came a time in June,
June 7th, that you finally did file the police report, right?
- Yes, sir. - How'd you do that?
- I did it online. - [Judge Levy] Oh.
So you were in control of the information that you put online?
- That's correct. - [Judge Levy] Would it be fair to also
say that you knew that that police report could be used
as proof of the accident and how you say it happened,
and that the insurance that you say you got but you can't find proof,
you knew that insurance company was eventually gonna want a police report?
- That's right. - [Judge Levy] And that's why
you made sure that when you included information
about the accident in that police report, you were accurate?
- Yes. - Thorough?
- Yes. - And complete?
- Yes, Your Honor. - [Judge Levy] Did you lie about anything
- in that police report? - No.
Are you sure?
I think I'm sure, Your Honor.
- [Judge Levy] You think you're sure? - Yes, sir.
[Judge Levy] Let's take a look.
This is the police report. Minneapolis Police.
You typed in time of the crash
was May 23rd, 2023
at 5:15 p.m.
Why did you lie in the police report and say that the accident happened
on May 23rd instead of May 7th?
- The accident didn't happen on May 7. - [Judge Levy] Really?
We spent like the last five minutes talking about how you were sure
it took place on 05/07 because you have a text message
at 4:58 p.m. saying to the plaintiff,
"Somebody hit me." Does that help?
- That's correct. - [Judge Levy] Great.
You also included in your answer
in this lawsuit, it happened on May 7th.
Was that because you didn't actually have insurance on May 7th
and it was only after the accident that you got insurance?
- I'm not sure, Your Honor. - [Judge Levy] Really?
Are you sure about that? You wanna stick with that answer?
Let's go through this police report a little more, shall we?
This is what you wrote.
"I had my turn signal on, ready to turn
when a gray Honda truck seemingly trying to catch the light
before I turned and sped up
versus slowing down and sideswiped me.
The person in the Honda got out, looked at his car,
and when I asked for insurance information,
hopped back in the car and fled the scene."
That's what you wrote, right?
- Yes. That's correct. - [Judge Levy] Great.
So here's my question.
Why didn't you give a description of the guy?
How were they supposed to find this driver?
Was it a guy or a girl?
It was a guy, sir.
[Judge Levy] Black, White, Hispanic?
Black.
Was he tall, short, average?
He was tall.
[Judge Levy] What kind of hair did he have or was he bald?
Both.
Are you just making this up as you're going along?
- [laughter] - Maybe he's just describing Byrd.
[laughter]
He may be doing that.
You know, in all seriousness though, I don't wanna make light of this.
I suspect the reason you lied about the date was because
you didn't actually have insurance on May 7th
and so you had to push the date so that you can then show
that when the accident happened,
you had insurance on the vehicle, right?
That makes sense.
But, Ms. West, here's my question to you.
Can you think of anything that you supplied us with
for some strange reason
that would seem to implicate you in insurance fraud?
He did ask me--tell me that he needed a bill of sale.
[Judge Levy] Oh. And what did you say?
[Tanya] I...
When I talked to him on the phone, I wasn't really comfortable with it
but he said that was the only way
that his insurance company would pay for the damages.
So I--that's why I messaged him and said
"Hey, when are we gonna do this fake bill of sale?"
- [Judge Levy] This fake bill of sale? - [Tanya] Uh-hmm.
- Right? - [Jeffrey] Well, actually, I tried
to buy--I tried to buy it from her.
That's your story? That's what you're gonna stick with?
Well, you don't have a heck of a lot more. You know what? I'm done. Judge Acker.
[Judge Acker] Thank you, Judge Levy.
Just to clear a few things up.
Byrd, you were not the mysterious hit-and-run driver, correct?
- [laughs] - Thank you. I'm not.
[dramatic music plays]
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
I don't believe you had a hit-and-run.
People that get in a hit-and-run, they're furious. They're vindictive.
They're angry. Especially if it's not their car.
You were none of that.
How long have you been sober for?
[dramatic musical sting]
[dramatic music plays]
[announcer] Tanya West is suing former friend Jeffrey Powell
for wrecking her car and now refusing to pay,
but Jeffrey says Tanya is asking
for more than what the car is worth.
I wanna go to the heart of your defense.
And the heart of your defense,
it's that you don't trust the estimate that she provided.
- That's correct. - I'll note for the record
that a 2014 Chrysler 300,
at a minimum, is $9,986.
So I would like for you to explain to me
the basis for your position that the $8,000 repair
that she quoted you is somehow more than the value of the car.
Where do you get that information from?
Well, after I found out that my insurance wouldn't pay for it,
so I told her to go and get a estimate on the car
and give it back to me and I'd pay for it out-of-pocket.
[Judge Acker] And she did supply, at first, an estimate, wasn't it?
[Jeffrey] Yeah. That's correct. $7,900 something.
And then didn't you go find a second estimate?
- Yes, I did. - [Judge Acker] And the second estimate
- was $4,200, isn't that true, sir? - Yeah, but I never was
- supplied that second estimate. - [Judge Acker] Hold on.
As I recall the evidence and I'll confirm it,
you said that's too much.
And, further, you said that the car
only should cost $1,500.
Now, what's the basis for that? Are you a mechanic?
No. But I did look up how much the parts probably--possibly cost.
How much the parts possibly cost?
- [Jeffrey] Yeah. - Now, you're not a mechanic,
so I'm assuming that when you were trying to dissect and analyze the damage
that was caused to the car while it was in your custody...
- Well, I did try to... - ... you didn't take the car apart,
you didn't see what was underneath the car.
Can I say something in my defense, Your Honor?
- You can. - Well...
I really appreciate her for allowing me to use the car.
I'm also in recovery.
I was going through a tough time.
And I even offered her
to pay it out of my pocket
because of the kindness that she gave to me.
You say you offered
to pay out of your pocket.
That's the only option that you had.
You were not doing her a favor by saying, "Hey, you know what?
I'm going to own up to my responsibilities."
That's not an offer. That's what you should have done.
But when I got the estimate from her,
it was $7,900.
And on that estimate, when I explained it to her too
on a text message, I said that that's the insurance estimate.
That's not like a out-of-pocket expense.
[Judge Acker] Sure. Sometimes if somebody knows
that somebody with deep pockets
like an insurance company is paying, they inflate it.
- [Jeffrey] Yes. - That's why this $4,200 estimate
that she secured interests me.
Ma'am, I know I saw the text message, and I'll look for it.
I don't wanna waste court time.
But do you recall advising him
that you'd found an estimate for $4,200?
Yeah. I went and took it to another place for a second estimate.
He did go--walked around the car.
He gave me that estimate. And he said,
"This is just an estimate. We don't know like..."
- How much it's actually gonna cost? - "...how it's gonna cost
once we start tearing it apart
and seeing the damage up under it 'cause it got hit in the wheel."
[Judge Acker] That's helpful.
But yet you, just on your own,
come up with this $1,500
and you think we should settle on that?
Profoundly unfair, sir.
- Judge DiMango? - [Judge DiMango] Thank you.
You're a liar.
Everything that I've read
that has been written by you, a lie.
You spun this poor woman around in circles
with your BS.
It's clear that all of your statements were diversions.
You know, she says about the car and then you'd say,
"Oh, guess what? I'm going on the radio tonight."
Nice lady that she is, she says,
"Oh, that's nice. I'm happy for you."
Non sequitur. Nothing related to it.
Diversion. People that lie divert.
So, let's start by saying you had no insurance at all.
But I can say that you did bring the car
- for an oil change, right? - That's correct.
[Judge DiMango] 'Cause you know why I know that?
'Cause it's on the CARFAX.
Like, "Oh, he did bring the car." I thought this was a good start.
And then I saw the date on the police report and I'm like,
"Wait a minute. I thought the accident was the 7th.
Why is he reporting this accident on the 23rd?"
Judge Levy pointed out one of the reasons
was 'cause you were trying to get insurance.
But he thought you actually-- maybe he thought. I don't know.
That you got the insurance, but you didn't get any insurance.
I knew you didn't just by listening to you.
And when she says to you,
"Did you send the pictures to your insurance company already,"
and you say what?
This is, by the way, on June 1st.
I need the police report.
I don't believe you had a hit-and-run.
People that get in a hit-and-run are furious.
They're furious. They're vindictive. They're angry.
Especially if it's not their car. You were none of that.
- How long have you been sober for? - Four years.
[Judge DiMango] Did you have any setbacks
- at any point in time? - No.
[Judge DiMango] So, that was my thought at first.
Well, maybe you didn't stay around the scene
because in my experience from my many years on the bench
is that when people don't report accidents immediately or call the police,
it's because they wanna hide something.
Ma'am, I did have insurance on the car.
No. What are we doing here--where is it? Where's the proof?
You were trying to pull a scam on the insurance company
and in the end, ultimately, it was her. So, I don't have any other questions.
I do. I believe you, Mr. Powell. I know you had insurance on the car.
What we're dealing with here is the difference
between an insurance company insuring someone who does not own a car--
and GEICO insured you but just not for collision.
They're not going to insure you for collision
if you don't have an insurable interest
but they would insure you for other things,
for liability insurance for instance
or if someone committed a crime against you, like a hit-and-run, right?
- [Jeffrey] Yes, Your Honor. - And that's the reason why you needed
that bill of sale to prove to GEICO
on that extra insurance that you were entitled to the payment.
Yes, Your Honor.
My question to you though
is how much of this did the plaintiff know?
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You've been sitting here all quiet there, Ms. West.
It ain't gonna go so well for you now.
Ms. West, knew what was going on
with respect to the insurance
and the fake bill of sale.
- You knew. - Yes.
I knew about the-- that he needed the bill of sale.
Whose idea was it for the fake bill of sale?
- It was mine, Your Honor. - [Judge Levy] Okay.
And you knew that that fake bill of sale
was something he needed to send to GEICO, right,
and that they will be more likely to pay that claim.
I had to kind of put things together
to prove that you were just as involved in this scam as he was.
So you go to the auto body place,
- the $7,968 bill, right? - [Tanya] Yeah.
And it's you, Tanya West, the insured. What date was it?
It was after I got the vehicle back from him.
It was after you submitted to him the fake bill of sale.
Fake bill of sale we know is June 13th, 2013.
Now, all of a sudden GEICO thinks that you're the owner,
it's on July 18th, 2023,
which is well after you already signed off on this fake bill of sale.
But GEICO smells a rat, right?
- Yes, Your Honor. - Yeah.
GEICO smells a rat
because on June 9th,
they, GEICO, sends you a letter saying,
"Please email me the following,
bill of sale, cash withdrawal receipt
for when you purchased the vehicle,
name and contact information of prior vehicle owner."
They smell a rat.
And you know why else they smelled a rat? I'm gonna tell you why,
and it has to do with this fake claim of yours that it was a hit-and-run, right?
'Cause you know there was no hit-and-run. You know that.
And I'm gonna tell you why. You might as well tell me the truth.
Eyes of God.
- It was a hit-and-run. - [Judge Levy] There really was?
- Yes. - Okay. Here's why you're lying to me
right now, and I don't understand that.
[dramatic music plays]
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
You've already admitted that you got a second estimate.
You never provided that to us,
'cause you were hoping we would force him to pay you
$8,000 when you knew there was another estimate,
and you would have taken that extra money and put it in your pocket.
[dramatic musical sting]
[dramatic music plays]
[announcer] Tanya West is suing former friend Jeffrey Powell
after he borrowed her car and wrecked it,
but Jeffrey says Tanya is asking
for more than what the car is worth.
You know there was no hit-and-run. You know that.
And I'm gonna tell you why. You might as well tell me the truth. Eyes of God.
- It was a hit-and-run. - [Judge Levy] There really was?
- Yes. - Okay. Here's why you're lying to me
right now, and I don't understand that.
In the accident report, when you put in the narrative
that you had your turn signal on,
that the guy was rushing and he hit you.
The person in the Honda got out, looked at his car,
and when I asked for the insurance information
hopped back in the car and fled the scene.
I wanna see a show of hands of everybody here,
if this happened to them,
who would call 911?
You didn't.
Because if you did call 911
regarding the date that you actually got in that accident,
it would have been May 7th,
not May 23rd,
the day that you put on the accident report.
That 911 call would have been memorialized, recorded,
time stamped, date stamped.
That's why I know there was no hit-and-run.
But now, Ms. West, here's the thing,
you've already admitted several times that you got a second estimate
- of $4,200. - Yes.
You never provided that to us.
The estimate, that's just for the outer cosmetics too.
That doesn't have anything to do with underneath.
'Cause you were hoping we would issue you that order
and force him to pay you $8,000
when you knew there was another estimate,
and you would have taken that extra money and put it in your pocket,
- right? - No.
[Judge Levy] I have nothing further.
So we're gonna retire to deliberate at this time. Thank you.
[Cassandra] Court is now in recess.
[dramatic music plays]
All right. People lie. Documents don't lie.
Plaintiff, it's her burden.
So she's got to prove
that the defendant owed her a duty of care. She did.
That he breached that duty, he damaged the car. He did.
And that there was a proven value amount of damage.
$7,968, that's what she's suing for.
However, she also testified
when forced to that she had a cheaper estimate of $4,200.
It was a material omission and the reason she did that
was because she wanted to walk out of here
with a judgment against him for almost $8,000,
4,000 more than she was entitled to.
The fact that she failed to provide us with that document,
the estimate of $4,200, in my opinion,
means that we are without the necessary information to rule on her claim.
She has unclean hands.
We can agree, the defendant,
he was gonna stick with that lie until he can no longer lie
and he said that she was involved as well. And, of course, she knew about it.
She said, "When are we getting together to sign this fake bill of sale,"
where she knew that the only way she was getting paid
was if she provided false documents to the insurance company.
Furthermore, she got a copy of that accident report
and she knew that that accident report contained the date that it did,
May 23rd, which was false,
so as to fit within the coverage of the defendant's policy,
which I believe eventually he did get.
And in my opinion based upon that,
when you come into court with unclean hands,
you get nothing.
I disagree.
I think she made a big mistake.
I think that after having been confronted with this damage
with a friend who wasn't stepping up to his responsibility, she panicked.
I think submitting the false information to the insurance company was wrong
and I think that this is a situation where I might distinguish
between the sort of mistake for which one should be chided
and the sort of mistake that can defeat you from any recovery,
and I'm just not sure it's the latter.
I found her credible as to her testimony about that $4,000 estimate,
because when I first asked her about it, she said that they told her,
"Well, we think we can do it for this.
We're gonna buff out some of the cosmetic damage."
I am not sure what that estimate would have covered.
I'm also not sure that if she receives anything,
that she shouldn't be capped by that,
because you're right, it is a material admission.
But I am sure that I, for one, am not prepared
to dismiss her entire lawsuit because she's only here in court
and only has this problem 'cause she tried to do something nice.
So, to me, that mitigates.
Well, you said people lie, documents don't.
People lie and documents lie
because the people filling out the information are lying.
- 'Cause liars [indistinct]. - So--I mean, yes, they lie.
- That is true. - [Judge DiMango] And this case
was fraught with lies, and I'm not comfortable
finding that she proved her case
by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence
based on the amount of lies
that we have uncovered in this case from both sides.
So, I think the truth is that one is less than two?
[laughter]
- [Judge Acker] I'll respectfully dissent. - All right. Thank you.
[dramatic music plays]
Court is back in session.
All parties are reminded that you're still under oath.
All right. Ms. West, Mr. Powell, we do appreciate you coming in here
and telling us your truths and your stories.
And what we learned is that what you told us in your complaint
and in your answer was anything but.
You prepared a fake bill of sale and you helped him do it,
and but for the fact that insurance company caught on,
you would have been successful.
We also learned that you filed a false police report
and you were aware of that.
And then to come into court, Ms. West,
and ask us to award you money?
We do not have a unanimous verdict.
It is Judge Acker in the minority
and it is Judge DiMango and I in the majority.
Our decision is you don't come into court, tell lies,
and be exposed as fraudsters and expect to win.
That's called unclean hands.
So, Ms. West, the decision of the majority
is that your application and request
for $7,968 is denied
and your case is dismissed.
[gavel bangs]
[Cassandra] This case is closed.
Parties are reminded to stay here. One second.
I didn't look at it as a fraud at the time.
Well, that's not true.
I just feel like I was played by him.
We can make amends with each other and, you know,
continue on our journey of recovery, yeah.
I don't really--don't have much to say except for--to Jeff.
- Truth is the only way to go. - Trust nobody.
[announcer] Have you been assaulted?
Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media
at Tribunal Justice.
[dramatic music continues]