You own a cleaning business.
Right. That's correct.
There's different protocols you have to follow.
She didn't wanna follow the directions,
like, uh, four different occasions
- where she didn't show up. - Never.
You said multiple times you didn't show up,
they didn't show up, they didn't show up.
It was several times, Your Honor.
The problem is that it's one thing to say something
and it's another thing to prove it.
[[announcer] Now on Tribunal Justice.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]
[announcer] Today's case was filed in Palm Springs, California.
[Byrd] Your Honor, this is case number 2047
on the calendar in the matter of Swain versus Rios.
The parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
[Judge Acker] Thank you, Byrd.
- Ms. Swain, you own a cleaning business. - Yes, I am.
[Judge Acker] You originally worked with the defendant
- and cleaned his own home. - [Maricela] Yes.
[Judge Acker] According to your complaint,
after you started working for the defendant personally
then you started working for this property group,
uh, for which he's a quality control executive
or officer and a designer.
And you maintain that he terminated your services,
- owing you over $3,000. - Right. That's correct.
Gave you many excuses and never paid.
[Maricela] Right. That's correct.
Mr. Rios, you say that she just didn't do a good job.
In fact, you had to do some of the cleaning
and that she's in fact trying to get money for services she never rendered.
You maintain you owe her nothing.
That is correct.
These are luxury rentals in Palm Springs.
In the millions.
[Judge Acker] They're beautiful.
Can we put up exhibit seven?
Rio Ranch.
I just wanna show people some of these photos.
- It's gorgeous. - [David] Thank you.
[Judge Acker] There's a property called Blush.
- [David] That is correct. - [Judge Acker] Let's look at exhibit 11.
Let's look at Blush.
I mean, these were serious high end properties.
How much are you renting these for each night?
[David] Uh, they go from the average, from $700 to $2,000 a night.
[Judge Acker] So how long did you work with the plaintiff
before you brought her into this other property management?
I wanna say about three or four years now.
I'm--she's been working with me on my personal resident
and other properties that I had
and she did a fabulous job.
[Judge Acker] Which is why he brought you into this other venture.
- [Maricela] Right. - [Judge Acker] How many houses
were you responsible for?
The beautiful homes that we saw, and were there any others?
Normally four on the [unintelligible].
um, management and three on his side.
You started working with the property management group in April,
- as I understand it. - In April. Right.
[Judge Acker] How much did you charge per home?
Uh, for the Rancho, I was charging $280.
That doesn't include the, uh, laundry.
[Judge Acker] You have a team of people,
- so do you go out with your team... - [Maricela] Yes.
[Judge Acker] ... and do these properties?
Most of the time.
- Sometimes you send them alone. - [Maricela] Right.
- And they report back to you. - [Maricela] Right.
That's an important point that is going to come up later.
I know that you have an issue with the way some of these services were completed.
So, Mr. Rios, one of the things that you say is that, look,
she did a great job for a while,
but from May to September
during which she worked for the larger venture,
there's some little glitches.
I know there was a bed that was made without sheets
and I guess a guest wrote you and said,
"Hi, there are no sheets on this bed."
And you told her and you're like, "Look, let me know
if there aren't sheets on the bed."
That seemed like a big lapse.
Now, you and your team certainly know that if you're cleaning properties,
much less high end properties--
I don't care what kind of property it is--
- People want sheets on the bed. - Right.
And the problem is because they were not extras.
- I was doing the... - What do you mean they were not extras?
No. Usually what I do because it's not my first Airbnb.
I've been doing this business for more than 15 years
and they have always extra towels,
extra, uh, sheets, extra supplies for me to finish everything,
- but with his case, never happened. - [Judge Acker] You ask them.
You said, "I don't have any extra sheets."
- [Maricela] That never happened. - There are no extra towels.
- [Maricela] Exactly. - And this is to you, Mr. Rios,
because I note that in your answer you say,
- "She wasn't even doing the laundry." - Correct.
But as I read the evidence,
there was never any suggestion that she should have been doing the laundry.
- You were at the laundromat. - That is correct.
And never did you say--I didn't see anything where you said,
"Hey, Maricela. I need you to, like, step up the laundry."
Like you instead taking pictures of yourself at the Laundromat.
- Exactly. - [Judge Acker] So it seemed like
your beef is less with her,
with respect to the laundry, but with respect to your partners.
Tell me where I'm wrong and then I'm gonna tell you why I think I'm right.
Yeah. So it's quite the opposite.
So as going to these properties, not only were they plentiful
with a variety of extras of every single thing you could think of,
the problem that we had is, when we're coming to these properties,
some of the rooms are black sheets, some of them are hot pinks,
some of them are pink, some of them are bright white.
What I was noticing, you're gonna not believe--I mean, this is insane.
In a rush, she would mix--
her staff, I'm sorry, would mix hot pinks with blacks,
the whites were coming out for pinks
and we're talking about $300, $400 [unintelligible] alone.
So I took that task from her.
After five times of this happening,
I took a hundred percent of the laundry.
[Judge Acker] So at what point was this?
Because during the 105 pages
of text messages that she submitted,
I didn't see any mention of you saying you have mixed up the sheets,
- I now have to do the job. - [David] That is correct.
[Judge Acker] But I have to say to you,
I cannot fathom why it would not be within the purview
of somebody who's being paid good amounts of money
to come clean these properties, to do sheets.
I just haven't heard of that.
So is it your testimony that you were not responsible to do any washing?
No. In the beginning, that's why I charged $280
because the agreement was not to do the laundry.
He was supposed to do all the laundry
and I was supposed to be just cleaning in and out the property.
So my process changed
when I--they start adding more things to my task
like cleaning, um, the patio
because he put a tile on the patio, so I got to be...
[Judge Acker] That's another question I have for you
because one of the things that the defendant complains about
is that there was no real consistency in your pricing.
I imagine that you and your team
are reviewing these properties
and quoting a price for cleaning the whole property.
I mean, you weren't paying her to clean by room, were you?
- [David] No, not at all. - [Maricela] No.
Well, with him, I charged my--I give that price in the beginning
doing the house, uh, and refreshing the rooms for the new customers.
So, uh, the price changed of course
because he start adding things to my...
But when you say adding things,
now adding laundry may be a thing
because according to the text messages I saw, he was doing a lot of it.
His testimony, he says he talked to you about some things
that may not be reflected in these messages.
So I just wanna bracket laundry for a second.
Here's something else that I'm a little unclear on.
Can we put up exhibit one, plaintiff's ledger?
Because I noticed, ma'am, that you submitted this handwritten ledger.
Now, did you generate this document
- in preparation for your lawsuit? - [Maricela] Right.
That I have it in my phone
to prove that every time that I was requesting payment,
I always send my notes.
[Judge Acker] Where are those invoices?
Because that's the best way of saying,
"Hey, I cleaned Rios Ranch on this day.
You still owe me this."
I never saw invoices. So how can you help me there?
Well, that was my mistake because I didn't make invoice for him.
- I trust... - [Judge Acker] It's a big mistake.
It's a big mistake. Now, I will say this to you, Mr. Rios.
She's asking for money, and what I don't see in your responses
are, "Hey, you know what?
I think that you're way overcharging.
Let's talk about this."
Why is that missing?
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
She would say she showed up to a property
and then she cleaned it the following day when it was a whole another company.
[dramatic musical sting]
[theme music plays]
[announcer] Maricela Swain is suing David Rios
for over $3,000 owed in cleaning services
performed at luxury properties,
but David claims Maricela is confused
because of her own poor bookkeeping
and resistance to using a scheduling app.
[Judge Acker] She's asking for money, and what I don't see
in your responses are, "Hey, you know what?
I think that you're way overcharging.
Let's talk about this." Why is that missing?
[David] So a lot of things are missing because I said,
look, you're not just gonna be working for me no more.
You're gonna be working for a corporation and several of them.
I have three different companies that you're gonna be working with
on a plethora of 13 different houses.
There's different protocols you have to follow.
She didn't wanna follow the directions.
- I said you have to send the invoices. - You had a platform
- where you could go on... - Yes.
[Judge Acker] ... and see the houses? No, I saw that.
- Sixty pictures. - [Judge Acker] There was a platform
and you said, "I'm a professional. I don't need that platform."
Uh-hmm. Yeah.
[David] That was the biggest problem we had.
[Judge Acker] I'm gonna pass the case,
but this one I kinda got a kick out off.
Can we put up exhibit six?
Tell me about this picture, sir.
I did. And I was quite upset with her.
First of all, um, she said she has cleaned that specific property...
[Judge Acker] Which of the properties is that?
[David] Escape Island. It's a $3 million estate,
- two acres. I mean... - Escape. These names.
So you have somebody checking in to Escape Island.
You find out that Escape Island hasn't been cleaned.
- Exactly. I'm doing quality control. - [Judge Acker] And you clean it.
And instead of sending her a note saying,
"Why didn't you clean this?"
- You send her the picture. - Exactly.
[Judge Acker] And you were like, "Yes, I love it."
Not realizing that he actually did the work.
He set you up.
[David] And she still billed for that.
My problem with him is because they have another company
- besides me. - [Judge Acker] Hang on, hang on, hang on.
You may have many other problems.
- I'm concerned about this problem. - Yeah, I think that's the problem...
And the fact that you seemingly may have billed for something
that he did, and more preliminarily,
I'm concerned about the fact that I just don't see your invoices.
Judge DiMango.
Now, I'm sure you're not going to each of the places that are being cleaned.
And so you probably have women that work with you or men that work with you
that go in and do the cleaning.
So unless you are explaining to all of them
what needs to be done,
you're gonna have these problems and it's going to impact
on the amount of money that he gets for each rental.
- You understand that? Right? - Right. I do.
So would she know or would somebody know
what rooms need to be done and which ones don't?
Easy. Every room gets changed.
Every bed, every sheet, every towel, every makeup towel,
I don't even care if it smells good.
You walk into my property, you're gonna get a quality control.
I don't care whether it's gummy bears, the hair stuff,
exteriors of everything has to be on point.
Right. Because you really don't know
and you can't be saying to somebody,
"Yeah, I don't think they slept in that room.
- You could go there instead." - Correct.
Yeah. I mean, that would make the most sense.
Do you get paid by the hour or do you get paid by the job?
- By the job. - [Judge DiMango] You get paid by the job
- and then extras after that? - [Maricela] Ex-exactly.
Do you have a list of towels, sheets,
barbecue grill, deck--
do you have a list of additional charges for those things?
Yes. Usually when I do laundry,
I charge it from a hundred dollars to two hundred dollars
depends of the size of the property.
But he doesn't know. You see, I think what the problem here is,
is you have a very loose contractual relationship.
Probably based on your years together
of you going to his home doing a few things
and when he walks out, he may say, "All right.
Listen, take care. Have a good day. Oh, by the way,
I left the towels on the thing for you today. Could you do that?"
You know, that kind of communication.
That doesn't work when you're handling seven, eight, or nine properties.
- Exactly, everything changes... - [Judge DiMango] It's gonna mix up.
So I could see him not wanting to pay you for things he doesn't really know
what you're doing and for billing him for things that you're not doing.
Bottom line is, however,
she was asking for money and you were saying, "Okay, okay, okay."
So what is it you think you owe her?
I don't owe her anything from my behalf or my properties.
What I do feel that is that there's about--
um, there's a lack of money that wasn't given to her,
and that was only because she didn't know how to read the calendar, I guess.
So she would say she showed up to a property,
and then she cleaned it the following day when it was a whole another company.
And they had arguments with her.
And I said, "Look, the discrepancy is so bad on your notes,
start giving them invoices 'cause you can't say you're there on the 12th
and you're cleaning on the 13th when they had someone clean on the 13th."
And she said, "I'll reject those. I'll take those out."
And we never got those. Those were up to like $2,000
of times that she stated she cleaned and she really didn't.
And so I said, "You can't claim that."
And I was stuck in the middle. I said, you got...
So are you saying that you're the wrong party for her to be suing here?
Yes. I said, "Sue them. They're the ones who are giving you the..."
[Judge DiMango] And--okay, I'm gonna hold you there.
Why are you suing him and not Vibe...
Because I never deal with the other people.
He always pay me from his bank account and I have proof here.
Everything that I get from--paid is from his account.
Nothing from the other party.
[Judge DiMango] So why are you paying for the other company's debt?
So there's always been this discrepancy of $3,500 that was never paid out.
Wasn't paid to me, it wasn't paid to her.
And again, I said, "That goes with your invoicing.
They're paying other cleaning companies that you're stating you're there.
And if you wanted to fight about this,
let's have a meeting."
I've offered like, uh, four different occasions
where she didn't show up where I said, "Let's all get together, you guys,
let's sit down, let's have a conversation."
There are so many different text messages and I said, "Look, everybody,
this is what I've received.
This is what I've given her.
There's still $3,500 that is not accounted for."
And they all said, "Look, she didn't send us an invoice.
We have payments that we paid other people,
and she doesn't wanna go onto that app
to show us that she was actually there."
- [Judge DiMango] All right. - Uh, so I was stuck.
- I don't know what else to do. - [Judge DiMango] Thank you.
- Judge Levy. - Mr. Rios, the problem with that
is that you didn't provide us any evidence of that.
Nothing.
And you just testified that you've had these communications with her
in which you've said multiple times you didn't show up.
They didn't show up, they didn't show up, they didn't show up.
The problem is that it's one thing to say something
and it's another thing to prove it.
You gave us one, one text in which she didn't show up
and you said that that was you.
But that does not make out a defense for $3,000.
- It was several times, Your Honor. - [Maricela] No.
Several times where I was...
[Judge Levy] The problem is when you say that it's several times,
the natural response is show me.
I hope you understand what I'm saying, Mr. Rios.
- Uh, a portion of it, I do. - [Judge Levy] Okay.
Because, uh, again, we--we've given her ample time
to--uh, again, this was a third company that were managing her directly.
They were--they were giving her the assignment,
- they were conversating with her. - No.
They were paying her. And these are things...
- Whoa, whoa, they were paying her? - [David] Yes. They paid her as well.
No. I never have any payment from anybody, um, just him.
And then the technology that they were using, those apps,
they always send me the wrong dates
and I ended up wasting my time.
[David] Uh, that is incorrect.
The $3,500 that we were always discussing, it's all in written format as well.
And I--and I said, all of us put together
because there's a discrepancy of $3,500 that she hasn't been paid.
I haven't been paid. And I said, "And this is--if you're saying this
because you've already paid a second company," and which they did,
and they proved it to her,
um, she needs to adjust her invoices, and she never did.
- [Maricela] No. - She kept sending text messages.
We never discussed anything about it. Never.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
[Judge Levy] You kept her for your house?
Until they stole from me.
$35,000 of my diamond rings.
- And, again... - What?
[David] ... all she could say is, "I'm sorry, David."
[dramatic musical sting]
[theme music plays]
[announcer] Maricela Swain is suing property manager David Rios
for a balance owed on cleaning services.
But David claims Maricela's cleaning crews were unreliable
and that he was left doing a lot of the cleaning.
When I went through the text, it was clear
that she's asking for payment
and your response is, "We're gonna get it to you.
We're gonna get it to you. We're gonna get it to you."
I didn't see any of those texts where it says, you know,
"We gotta sit down about this $3,500."
- Exactly. - [Judge Levy] And I just don't see it.
Well, it's in--it's in there. It's in the document that says
she said she has a hundred and something,
um, uh, notations on there.
It says it on there as me saying, "You guys, we need to get together.
Let's have a meeting." And then you know her response was...
- [Maricela] I'm sorry. - "... I'm in the hospital.
- I'm sick again." - No. No.
[David] "I'm in the hospital again. I can't do this."
I said, "I'm going to bat for you."
You're not giving them invoices, you're giving this inconsistency.
They're showing proof that they've already paid a third party,
and you want me to come help you out.
I'm doing all I can for her.
So that's--at the end, all she had was my one house left.
I get it. I get it.
And you kept her for your house?
Until they stole from me.
$35,000 of my diamond rings.
- And again... - What?
[David] ... all she could say is, "I'm sorry, David."
- How is--how is it that I go to bed... - Oh, my God.
... I leave two of my diamond rings that I wear every single day...
[Judge Levy] Mr. Rios, I don't see that anywhere.
- Wow. - [Judge Levy] Thank you.
I have enough.
You know, Judge Levy made a great point with respect to Mr. Rios.
You know, there's all of this, this happened, that happened.
There's no evidence.
Fortunately for him, it's not his burden of proof.
It's your burden of proof.
For us to make a reasonable and legal determination,
I need more than "They owe me $3,000,"
when he's saying, "We all have to go over this accounting."
And that is why I, right now, ma'am,
I have absolutely no idea
what the true basis of your claim is
other than the verbal $3,080 you're citing now.
I need to see an invoice. It's just on your phone?
I don't have an invoice, but I have the text
- in between him and myself only where... - [Judge Acker] No, I know. I...
[Maricela] ... we discussed and I can send here.
[Judge Acker] Uh, I would like to see that. Byrd?
And the text message that you're showing me now indicates what?
You're gonna see there the list where I say, I don't have the invoice,
but I've been sending them all the time
- the proof--the list that I was... - [Judge Acker] Is that this?
- Yes. - Have you seen this list, sir?
This is something that was...
[David] Yeah. And, uh, again, the discrepancy $420 from $280.
Let's go back to her $280 when she was cleaning five rooms with six beds,
towels, every single thing you could think of at $280.
You know, I--it's--and nothing was--nothing was consistent.
So, she says she was entitled to $420 for it.
You say she was only entitled to $280?
- That's correct. - [Judge Acker] Did you pay her the $280?
That is correct. Yes, I did.
So is there a proof of that payment?
Um, I would--I sent it over...
[Judge Acker] Did you receive payment on any of these?
- [Maricela] On some of them, yes. - On some of them you did?
How am I supposed to determine
what they owe you if there's no invoice?
I think that you may very well be owed some money, but I can't guess.
I don't have anything else.
All right. We're gonna retire to deliberate.
- Thank you. - No problem. Thank you.
[Byrd] Court now stands in recess. Parties are excused.
[dramatic musical sting]
I'm still confused about what she's owed.
The ledger isn't helpful.
I don't think she's trying to run a game on anybody.
I think she just doesn't know.
There's no invoice.
To his point, I think that because there were these reimbursements happening
from these other participants in the venture
that he was more comfortable putting her off
and saying, "Let me talk to them. I haven't been reimbursed yet."
But again, even though his answer's a bit waffly,
I can't get my head around the amount
that she has proven.
In fact, when I showed her that list that was on her phone,
I said, "Did you get paid any of this?"
- She was like, "Some of it." - [Judge DiMango] Some of it.
I mean, I--I'm not saying that she may not be owed some money.
I just don't feel like I have enough to make
a legal determination as to how much.
[Judge DiMango] I think she's confused, and I think that's why we're confused.
And as long as it's her burden of proof,
if we're not clear, if we don't walk out of that courtroom
with at least a sense of how much it is,
whether he owes her or not, then she hasn't met her burden.
And I'm kind of in that same spot.
You do the work, you should get paid.
But if you come in as a plaintiff,
it's your burden to prove what you're owed.
And the best evidence of that, as you've indicated, are those invoices,
for whatever reason, she didn't feel comfortable
preparing them and providing them.
And, uh, we can't base a decision on speculation.
- So we're unanimous in dismissing. - Yes.
[dramatic musical sting]
[Byrd] Court is back in session.
Parties are reminded you're still under oath.
- Thank you, Byrd. - You're welcome.
We've deliberated and we've reached a unanimous verdict.
And, ma'am, Ms. Swain,
it is with regret that we have to dismiss your case.
And it's not because we think that you didn't do a good job.
We know that some issues were disputed,
but you just didn't have the evidence.
- Look, these are three people. - Uh-hmm.
[Judge Acker] We are three judges.
And this is a forum where we want people to get paid for their work.
The problem is that when it's unclear what the work was
or how much the fee was for the work.
You really have to have evidence.
And on this record, it was just impossible
for us to determine whether or not you were owed $300,
$3,000, $2,000.
- We would only be guessing. - Uh-hmm.
So that is why regretfully, uh, we must dismiss your case.
Good luck to you both. Thank you very much.
- [Maricela] Oh, thank you. - [David] Thank you.
[Byrd] Court has concluded. Parties are excused.
[theme music plays]
I don't know what to say. Right now my mind is all over.
I think it was very clear the evidence were there.
We never stole anything.
Otherwise, imagine, I would have been out of the business long time ago.
But then again, you bring in other people, you have to be responsible for them.
It was a bad lesson for me.
It's sad that it ended this way.
[announcer] Did someone destroy your property?
Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media at Tribunal Justice.
["Ride of the Valkyries" plays]