He was a personal trainer to your husband?
- Correct. - Then you got a little nasty.
I no longer have to deal with you, his dementia, his falling.
The guy that you've been dealing with, training,
- had dementia. - He refused to pay.
Once you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
My frustration began to build.
[announcer] Now on Tribunal Justice.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]
[announcer] Today's case was filed in Los Angeles, California.
[Byrd] Your Honors, this is case number 2052
on account of the matter of Balton versus Johnson.
- Thank you, Byrd. - You're welcome, Judge.
Parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
Ms. Balton, the defendant was a personal trainer
to your husband who has dementia,
and you're now suing the defendant for $1,700
because that's the amount that you say you overpaid him
for personal training services.
Mr. Johnson, you say that any overpayment
is actually offset by damage
that her husband caused to your car
because in addition to training him,
you also drove him around to and from the sessions.
Ms. Balton, you said at the very beginning of your complaint
that you didn't engage with Mr. Johnson very often.
I think you invited him to a holiday dinner last year
to thank him for being so kind to your husband.
How long have you known him?
I haven't really known him at all.
My husband has the relationship with him.
The only reason I got involved is because my husband has dementia.
So I have power of attorney, I handle all of the money.
Kyle will text me through Venmo, tell me how much I owe and I pay him.
And that's basically been our relationship.
I believe you said your husband was diagnosed a couple of years ago.
The actual diagnosis was two years ago, but as you may know,
dementia does not have an on-off switch,
- unfortunately. - Exactly, sure.
And I think he's probably had it for about ten years being undiagnosed.
Sure. And Mr. Johnson,
how long have you been training the plaintiff's husband?
Since November 23rd of 2015.
[Judge Acker] Did you notice changes in his behavior
over the time you were training him?
I noticed changes more in his mobility than his behavior.
So his behavior got a little worse
within the last year and a half when I was training him.
Ms. Balton, let's talk about the fees.
You indicated that the initial training was $90
and then you said at some point, it increased to a $100?
Yes. Chuck lost his license because of the dementia.
So Kyle nicely scheduled him at the end of his day
and then--because his day was over,
he'd then drop Chuck off on his way home.
So that was very helpful and very kind of him
and then he agreed that he would have to raise to a $100 for that
to compensate for gas and whatever.
Completely fine.
[Judge Acker] Is that your understanding, sir?
That is not true, Your Honor.
Mr. Sharp lost his license
because he lost consciousness while driving
and crashed into a fire hydrant
and he didn't wake up from having lost consciousness
until he was in the ambulance.
- What part of what she said isn't true? - [Kyle] She was--she was saying she--
he lost his license due to his dementia.
He lost his license due to passing out and crashing his car.
Might he have passed out because of the dementia?
- [Kyle] I am not a doctor... - I mean, I--I'm just--
I'm gonna move on because I don't quite understand
- what the point of that quite was. - Well, because she's saying,
- again, he lost his license... - What we're talking about right now, sir,
is how much you were charging, not why this man lost his license.
- So $100 is what you were charging? - That's correct.
And a $100 included the personal training...
And the transportation home.
[Judge Acker] ... and the transportation.
- [Kyle] Yes. - Correct.
So I'd also give him rides beyond that
because we also had a friendship, it wasn't just strictly business.
- [Judge Acker] Sure. Sure. - Yes.
And how many times a week was your husband
- working with the defendant? - Three times a week.
[Judge Acker] Three times a week.
- Three times a week, sir? - Yes.
When did the defendant stop training your husband?
Uh, it was like towards the end of May, beginning of June.
[Judge Acker] I'm gonna read one text message.
"Please Venmo $2,700 to cover Chuck's training
for May and June ASAP.
I can't let any of my clients continue two months without payment."
- You were surprised to get that. - Very.
[Judge Acker] Now, why were you surprised?
So, every month when I got the Venmo at the beginning of the month,
I would Venmo the money.
As I said in the text that follows,
I never got a text from Kyle in May
at the beginning of the month saying I owed him money.
I work as a location scout so I'm sort of a crazy schedule
in addition to taking care of a husband with dementia.
So when he told me,
I said, "You didn't tell me at the beginning of the month.
Meaning, you know, "You don't have get an attitude about it.
I'll pay you. I'm good for it."
And I didn't even stop to think at the time that it was too high.
He said, "We'll just settle it all--
you know, we'll settle it all when you get home."
'Cause I think I was out of town working.
Now, I'd like to interrupt you because there were some days
that your husband was not able to make the training appointments,
- correct? - Correct.
Before we get to the issue of your car damage,
was there some understanding that you were going to compensate her
for those days or the days he wasn't able to show up?
Not only was there days where that occurred
but I already compensated Ms. Sharp for $400 before appearing in court today.
[Judge Acker] But that's after you threatened to sue him?
Correct. So there were four days that I have--that I can account for.
There were two other days that I think that he missed that I can't account for.
So it becomes a case of he said, she said.
But the gravamen, the central point of your defense, sir,
is not we didn't miss these days or he made these days.
- It is that the damage to your car... - [Kyle] Absolutely. Absolutely.
... that her husband caused was so extensive...
- Over a period of time, yes. - [Judge Acker] ... that it offsets
- any overpayment that you might owe her. - [Kyle] That is correct.
I wanna get head around how this damage happened
but I think first it would be really helpful
to get a sense of your husband Chuck and the mobility issues
that I think are really germane to why you say this damage took place.
Can we play the video
of the plaintiff's husband walking in the gym?
Did you take this video, sir?
[Kyle] Yes, I did yesterday, Your Honor.
'Cause he had not been in the gym and I didn't have the opportunity until.
[car horn honks]
[Kyle] That is actually Mr. Chuck Sharp having fallen
within seconds after his driver dropped him off
and his driver is only about 20 feet away.
[Kyle] Chuck you ok?
[Judge Acker] What driver? I thought you were the driver.
[Kyle] No, he has a driver bring him to the gym,
- and it was only my job to take him home. - [Judge Acker] To take him home.
[Kyle] And the driver that brings him to the gym,
I arranged that driver for him.
[Judge Acker] Who's taking this video?
[Kyle] I am.
Because I knew Mr. Sharp would be coming into the gym at one o'clock.
So if you saw the actual beginning of that video,
I was on the-- across the street when he fell.
And then when he fell, I made my way across
and offered to help him up
and he declined in that video
and said, "No, I don't want you to help me up."
And I was there to try to obtain evidence
to demonstrate to the court his lack of mobility.
That is exactly what I thought you were doing.
When I saw that video, I was like, "That's staged."
- He made that video to make a point. - There you go.
Now let's look at your video that you made where you demonstrate
how the plaintiff's husband damaged your car.
- Okay. Okay. - Let's take a look at that.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
With regard to your car damage,
is there a reason why you could not put this through your--
either your homeowners insurance or your car insurance?
Because Mr. Sharp had already agreed to pay for the damage.
Mr. Sharp has dementia.
[dramatic musical sting]
[theme music plays]
[announcer] Lori Balton is suing personal trainer Kyle Darren Johnson
for $1,700.
Lori claims he overcharged her for months,
but Kyle says damage Lori's husband did to his car
more than makes up for any money he owes her.
Let's look at your video that you made where you demonstrate
how the plaintiff's husband damaged your car.
- [Kyle] Okay. - Let's take a look at that.
Upon entry of my vehicle...
Mr. Sharp would turn his back to me at the driver side...
and take a seat in the car...
swing his left leg in...
hook his toe underneath...
the glove compartment where the AC panel is...
so he would have leverage to swing the other leg in...
and over time that put pressure on the clips
that caused the AC panel to fall to the floor.
To exit the car Mr. Sharp...
would swing both legs out...
no really any need for him to hook his feet 'cause he's exiting...
and right here where my airbag pillar is...
the grey area where it meets the black...
the weatherstrip is where it began to separate...
and Mr. Sharp will upon exiting the vehicle
would stand and lean into that
and push himself forward to get out
using the left shoulder because he didn't have the balance
to just lean forward and get out...
I didn't know that a Lexus was quite so fragile.
I don't understand this.
Well, actually, the reason this happened is because those panels
and the airbag pillar are not bolted in,
they are clipped in because an airbag needs to deploy.
[Judge Acker] Take it up with Lexus. I mean, honestly...
- [Kyle] But Your Honor... - ... this seems like such a stretch.
You know you're driving somebody with mobility issues.
She's paying you.
You're getting extra money to drive someone with mobility issues.
It's quite a stretch.
At some point, ma'am, did not the defendant say
that he was raising his rate
from a $100 to a $130?
And that was when you said,
"Hey, you can't renegotiate when I've already paid you."
- That is not true. - [Lori] Well, there are two issues
on the rate of $130.
First of all, Kyle says in one of the emails,
"You guys are so ungrateful to me.
I gave you a $30 break in the rate
and you guys never even appreciated it."
So again, my working with him was very limited to the Venmo request.
So I was never made aware of that.
So then that amount of $2,700 that he asked for
that I just paid willingly
because I thought we'd work it out afterwards.
Yeah, 'cause you said, "I didn't realize I was late.
- Here's the money." - [Lori] Exactly.
He says, "Effective Friday, June 9th,
Chuck no longer gets a discounted rate."
And that's where you point out, "Hey, but I already paid you June.
You can't change the rate for June."
And your response sir was, "Don't tell me how to run my business."
- And then you got a little nasty. - What...
[Judge Acker] I'm gonna turn it over to Judge DiMango.
For somebody who's claiming to have a friendship and a caring for someone,
you did get really nasty.
I mean, I wrote myself a note here, "Wow. He went off the rails."
It says, "No longer have to deal with you, Chuck,
his steroid abuse, his dementia, his falling."
Why would you be so nasty?
[Kyle] To be honest with you Your Honor,
I had already paid $800 out of my pocket
for the damages to my airbag pillar
and he refused to pay after offering to pay originally.
- Okay. - However,
when my AC panel three weeks later fell to the floor
when Mr. Sharp hooked his foot under it,
I became so frustrated looking at yet another expense,
my frustration began to build.
[Judge DiMango] Okay. So let me pause you there.
Your original charge as you're telling us in here today
is to bill the person you're working with
- $130 an hour? - That's correct.
[Judge DiMango] Here because of your friendship
with the plaintiff's husband you said, "You know what?
I'm gonna reduce it $40.
I'm gonna bring it down to $90 per session."
- Correct? - It was--that's correct.
[Judge DiMango] And you, as she said, were kind enough to schedule him
at the end of the day and bring him home to her.
And for that service you charged $10 more.
- That made the bill $100. - [Kyle] That's correct.
How much in advance did you book your sessions
with the defendant
so that you can plan your days with your husband and all?
I--uh, well, he did it Mondays, Wednesdays,
- and Fridays always. - [Judge DiMango] Okay.
He would Venmo me at the beginning of the month, you know.
And he would give you the dates that you were scheduled to come in.
- Whatever that was. - Well actually, Mrs. Sharp was aware
it was always Monday, Wednesday, Friday for every month.
So when she had late payments,
even though she had been paying monthly
for close to a year, she seemed to not recall
that every month I need to make a payment to Kyle.
- And my... - So--wait. Wait.
... reminder to her was a courtesy.
Okay. So would you send him that money
all at once or did you wait
- until the services were performed? - [Lori] All at once.
But he needed to Venmo me
because there were also dates that Chuck did not come.
So Kyle had a policy that unless I gave him 24 hours' notice
that Chuck was not gonna be coming in,
that I had to pay for those sessions as well.
- But if I... - [Judge DiMango] So--wait.
So that's why in this May-June issue that we're all dealing with here,
your request for payment, was it in June, for May and June...
- [Kyle] Yes. - ... or was it in May for May and June?
It was in June and I received it on June 3rd.
- [Judge DiMango] For May and June. - And June. That's correct.
[Judge DiMango] Is there a reason here now
why you would not have paid May
and that in his request for payment June 3rd
it would have had to include the May dates?
An invoice is standard for work.
And I resent the fact
that he keeps saying it was a late payment.
Every single time he sent me a Venmo
- telling me I owed him money, I pay. - [Judge DiMango] But that's--okay.
So then my point here--you see this is--
and here we go with the breakdown in communication.
He thinks he doesn't really need to send you the Venmo request,
but you think that unless you get that
you can't remember that you're supposed to pay him for that month.
- Correct. - [Judge DiMango] So June comes along
and then you sent him $2,700,
which represents June and May,
so now you know it's gonna be a Monday, Wednesday, Friday of every month.
You know that all your sessions are going to be $100.
They didn't fluctuate the price of the sessions,
- did they? - No.
[Judge DiMango] You then would know in advance
that May has four Monday, Wednesday, Fridays,
and it's at $100 a session.
That's $300 a week.
At four weeks, that's $1,200.
At five weeks in June, it's $1,500, correct?
- Correct. - [Judge DiMango] Okay.
And then you say to him,
"Well, what about the days in May if he didn't make it?"
Now, there was a discrepancy in the papers
with regard to whether or not it was a six-day difference
or a four-day difference in May.
You do return the $400 to her,
but I don't see, ma'am,
that you were entitled to another two days returned on that.
I don't have proof of it, so it's he said, she said.
[Judge DiMango] Okay. So May is done.
So now we have June.
Did your husband go for services in June?
He may have gone for a day or a two at the beginning,
but I think it was right at the beginning
that he said he wasn't training him anymore.
But my guess would be one possibly two sessions, but again a guest.
[Judge DiMango] Do you have any indication in your books
- because I'm sure you'd be correct. - Yes, I have.
In June--okay.
Mr. Sharp attended June 1st.
[Judge DiMango] And the 3rd?
[Kyle] Yes. The 6th, the 7th.
[Judge DiMango] One, three, so four sessions.
And we will deduct the days that he did not go.
That would go back to her.
With regard to your car damage,
is there a reason why you could not put this through your--
either your homeowners insurance or car insurance
to get reimbursed for the damages to the vehicle?
Because Mr. Sharp had already agreed to pay for the damage...
Mr. Sharp has dementia.
What if he would've said to you,
"I will buy you a new car, too, if we can't fix it."
You would have said to us, "Chuck said it.
I mean, he said he was gonna buy me a new car."
- Come on. Really? - [Kyle] Your Honor,
is Chuck's dementia actually documented by a doctor?
- Because you... - Oh, yes, it is.
[Judge DiMango] You saw him.
- Do you think he's faking it? - I'm not. I don't think his...
[Judge DiMango] Do you think he's faking dementia?
- Oh, absolutely not. But I don't... - [Judge DiMango] Okay.
... believe that he has full on set dementia.
I believe, if anything, Mr. Sharp has...
Only when he says things favorable to you he's outside the dementia zone,
but when he says things unfavorable to you he's within the dementia zone.
Well, I worked with the man for over seven years.
Yeah, I think I would have an opinion on that.
[Judge DiMango] I think that if he's telling you, "I'm gonna pay,"
I'm not quite sure I would take that to the bank.
Judge Levy.
[Judge Levy] You know, I appreciate the fact sir
that you say that there's no medical evidence of his dementia.
We don't have it.
He's saying that you never showed it to him.
You never made it a special effort
to take your husband's private medical documentation
and give it to the guy who tells him to do this
and do this, right?
- You didn't do that. - No, I didn't.
- [Judge Levy] Shame on you. - I'm sorry.
[Judge Levy] Shame on you.
And talking about shame on people,
sir, how dare you suggest here
with this woman standing right here that perhaps,
the inference is "perhaps" her husband--
- How long you guys married? - Thirty-five years.
[Judge Levy] Thirty-five years who's living with the man
who sometimes doesn't know who she is
that, "Hey, maybe you're just trying to scam me
so I don't get my $130 to have him do this."
When you yourself in your text message,
when she says, "When did you get so nasty?
I wasn't even aware there was a problem
and Chuck has dementia."
This is all coming from left field.
If we were to believe what you want us to believe
you would have said when you response, "What dementia?"
I haven't seen any proof of dementia.
This is a big scam." That would you have said.
What you said was, "I learned from the best.
I no longer have to deal with you, Chuck,
his steroid abuse, his dementia."
You yourself acknowledge the fact
that the guy that you've been dealing with,
training, going to their homes for holiday dinners
when you had nowhere else to go had dementia.
And the fact that you come in here and suggest to this woman,
"Maybe this all a big scam" makes me sick.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
You looked like a moron out there recording a poor guy
who's on the sidewalk and he can't move.
I offered to help him up.
[Judge Levy] Oh, hold on one second. Do me a favor.
- Just make sure you catch me... - I didn't want...
... looking and doing a nice thing for him.
Take my phone and make sure you videotape me.
Are you out of your mind?
[dramatic musical sting]
[theme music plays]
[announcer] Lori Balton wants personal trainer Kyle Darren Johnson
to refund her for sessions that never took place.
Kyle says he owes her nothing
due to damage her husband did to his Lexus.
You know what else makes me sick?
I wanna see that video again
the one where Chuck fell down on the ground.
Uh-hmm.
-[Kyle] Chuck you okay? -Yeah.
-[Kyle] Want me to help you up? -No.
[Kyle] You don't?
[man] How are you feeling?
[man] How you feeling? Like ya'll feel, ya'll feel hurt?
Actually I'm fine.
[woman] Is there a reason why you are recording?
[Kyle] Yes, there is.
[Judge Levy] Is there a reason why you're recording?
That's what a complete stranger said.
You look a moron out there recording a poor guy
who's on the sidewalk and he can't move
and you're just setting yourself up for some evidence?
What did you think that was gonna do for you?
Demonstrate Mr. Sharp's inability to walk normally,
which leads to his lack of mobility, which leads to the damage to my airbags.
There's no question about his lack of mobility.
She wasn't gonna deny that.
You didn't need a video of him falling.
But it wasn't my fault that he fell, Your Honor.
- [Judge Levy] It's... - I just wanted to help.
[Judge Levy] Are you out of your mind?
- Did anyone accuse... - [Kyle] It's not my fault that he fell.
... you of pushing him?
What I'm saying is you had a lack of humanity.
I offered to help him up.
[laughs] Oh, hold on one second. Do me a favor.
- Just make sure you catch me... - I didn't want...
... you catch me looking and doing nice a thing for him.
Take my phone and make sure you videotape me.
- Are you out of your mind? Come on. - [Kyle] Well, I didn't--
it would be looking potentially an assault charge
for touching the man without his permission.
[Judge Levy] Hold on. Hold on.
You--one again,
my brother-in-law told me
that once you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
And here you go digging away.
So you're afraid that this man who's on the ground
might actually charge you with assault?
I have--I can't think for Mr. Sharp.
- All I can say is sir, I--legally... - [Judge Levy] Because is it...
... you can't touch people without their permission.
And being that there's a court case coming up,
I didn't wanna just go-- I offered to help the man up.
- I mean, what more should I do? - [Judge Levy laughing]
Yeah, I get that. I get that. All right.
So we now have the video of him
falling and being on the back like a turtle on the street
and clearly confused,
doesn't know where he is, right?
And that was what, in January of 2024?
- That's correct. - [Judge Levy] Right. Okay.
Was that much different in the way he looked in May?
I'd say it's pretty close to the same.
- [Judge Levy] Pretty close? - Yes.
And that's the day, May, when you get your Lexus form
in which you find out that it's gonna cause you money for the car
and that's when you ask him?
That guy?
You ask him if it's okay to pay?
Mr. Sharp had been making his payments for six and a half year.
She only came in in the last year.
[Judge Levy] In the last year?
Hold on. Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Last year. Does that include May of 2023?
Yeah, it does.
- You paid in May of 2023. - Correct, Your Honor.
[Judge Levy] So why not just ask her for the money?
I'm going to tell you--you know what? I didn't wanna hear you answer.
The reason why you didn't ask the person who is in charge of the money
was because you knew that you were more likely to get a yes
from a guy who you knew had dementia.
That is not true, Your Honor.
- [Judge Levy] I have nothing further. - [Judge DiMango] By the way,
we have a CARFAX here and I just wanna know from you,
- the car has been in an accident, right? - Yes, it is.
[Judge DiMango] And it had some front end damage in the accident
or front quarter panel damage?
Um, uh, it--possibly it did, yes.
[Judge DiMango] So now we have impact that was pre-existing.
And how old was the vehicle?
- I'm sorry. How many... - It's a 2006.
- 2006? - That's correct.
[Judge DiMango] This is an 18-year-old car.
I would guess that you had more than one passenger besides Chuck
- in that front seat? - Yes, absolutely.
- Yeah. - [Judge DiMango] Okay.
- Anybody have anything else? - I have nothing.
Then we are going to retire to deliberate.
Thank you very much.
Court now stands in recess, parties are excused.
[theme music plays]
He never raised the issue of this alleged damage
until she said, "Now, you owe me this money back."
Not once. There's no evidence that he ever did that.
A Lexus is not Faberge egg.
One, there's no expert testimony
or evidence whatsoever frankly
that this man's alleged pressure and his mobility issues
are what resulted in this damage.
I think that the defendant's defense
is simply an after-the-fact justification for keeping this woman's money.
And then on top of it,
the way he staged that video
and the lengths that he went to,
I think to try to further demean this man
I find really unseemly.
Put that aside, I think she's entitled to the $1,700.
I have to disagree with you on what she's entitled to
because she did admit that she wasn't owed the extra $200 for May
and they did do four sessions in June.
Oh, my--you're right, right, right.
[Judge DiMango] It's 1,500.
You then would deduct four sessions.
$1,100.
So I'm perfectly on board with that.
I think that we've seen all sorts of proof of that.
And with regard to the damages that he's talking about,
you have an 18-year-old vehicle that's been in an accident,
that's had front end damage
which is exactly where all of this was,
and he wants to say that now
after she's asked for a demand back of money
that he probably didn't wanna repay her, she now owes him.
I mean, it's just a very disingenuous claim
and I'm--you know, I'm troubled, too, by him taking photographs of the man.
And then later trying to say there's nothing wrong with him.
Let me just show you how he falls and now there's nothing wrong with him.
But I'm on board with dismissing that counter claim.
- I agree. - We are unanimous.
[theme music plays]
Court is back in session.
Parties are reminded you're still under oath.
Thank you, Byrd.
We have deliberated and we've reached a unanimous verdict.
Mr. Johnson, we are unpersuaded
that the plaintiff's husband's damage to your car
offsets the money that you owe her.
There's no expert witness in this case.
We don't know if this damage was caused by the accident,
if it was caused by the plaintiff's husband.
We don't know why it was caused frankly.
And so we found your defense not at all persuasive.
Ma'am, your math was a little bit off
because the defendant did keep contemporaneous records
of the training sessions.
And given that there were four sessions,
I think that we went through in June
plus the money that you received back,
you're not entitled to the $1,700.
You are entitled to be reimbursed in the amount of $1,100.
And that is our unanimous verdict.
And frankly, ma'am, I'm sorry.
It has to be really hard to live with someone in that condition,
- but we do wish you our very best. - Thank you so much.
- We wish Chuck our very best. - Thank you so much.
- Good luck to you as well, sir. - Appreciate it.
That's the unanimous judgment of the court.
- Thank you. - [Byrd] This case is now concluded.
Parties are excused. You may step out.
Well, I feel they really leaned on Mr. Sharp's dementia.
I don't really know quite what happened to him.
I mean, he was such a nice person
and it just--it was like a switch just flipped.
Um, Mr. Sharp's dementia is not to that degree in my opinion
after having worked with him for so many years.
Kyle, he's your friend.
Why are you standing there videotaping and not helping him get up?
I don't think it makes me looked callous at all.
Mr. Sharp falls all the time.
That whole thing, you know,
it's like stop digging when you're in the hole.
I cared about him more than he cared about himself
and despite all that, this was the result of my efforts to help him.
I got justice for Chuck.
[announcer] Have you been assaulted?
Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media at Tribunal Justice.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]