Beware of dealing with Mark Nixon

340mopar said

Judge Judy is not a real court.

I have been to court for the same thing Ron is going thru and the Judge made the statement at the end that he could not enforce the guy to pay me because he had the document that showed ownership. He said that I never should have signed over the title without full payment. It's the reason why banks don't sign over titles until payment has been made in full.

There is no breach of contract because the contract (title) has been signed over. Really this guy Mark could be convicted of Fraud if it can be proven that he intented to take people of their money on purpose.

Emails are not signed documents. All he would have to say was that someone else responded to the emails and it wasn't him.

Just like you can't prove this is me writing this.

Chuck

Click to expand...

Well, in small claims court, it's the discretion of the Judge that matters. You have to convince him/her that there was indeed a contract, verbal or in writing, and monies owed. You don't necessarily have to have a signed document to prove that an agreement was made. The plaintiff has the burden of proof, and perhaps in your case, the circumstances or evidence didn't convince the Judge beyond a resonable doubt that monies were owed.

An admission via e-mail is pretty damning evidence - signed or not. It's all a matter of convincing the Judge that you're the one telling the truth.

BTW - the title is not the contract. True, possesion is 9/10ths of the law, so it certainly throws a wrench into things, but if the agreement of payment was not met, and you can convince the Judge of that fact, he certainly has a case for getting his $$ back.