After over a year, you still didn't have your car back.
That is correct.
I wanted to finish it and work on it.
I was suckered.
So you put $20,000 into a vehicle
that's only worth $7,000.
-Correct. -Do you have a wife?
Does she want to kill you?
[announcer] Today on Tribunal Justice.
[theme music playing]
[announcer] This case was filed in Riverside, California.
Judge, this is case number 1089 on the calendar
in the matter of Calvillo versus Naranjo.
Parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
[Tanya] Thank you, Byrd.
Mr. Calvillo, you hired the defendant to repair your 1996 Bronco.
It's a vehicle you used to do some off-roading.
Here's a picture of the car.
[Jose] That is correct.
In order for him to do the work, you bought, from your own pocket,
$10,000 worth of parts, gave him the parts,
paid him $2,500 to do the work,
gave him the money,
and then after over a year,
you still didn't have your car back.
And you said to him, "Can you at least send me some pictures
so I know that you're working on the car?"
No pictures, no car.
You had to pay another $7,500
for them to release the car to you.
And now you're suing Mr. Naranjo for $2,500.
Which is the amount that you paid him
for work you say he never did.
Mr. Naranjo, you say, but the work did get done.
He knew when he reached out to you in the first place that you were very busy.
And on top of that, you did the work.
You and your shop, according to your answer,
made his car better than it was when he brought it into you.
In fact, what you said in your answer,
I thought this was funny,
"I understand holding onto a vehicle for sentimental reasons,
but a '96 Ford Bronco is not a classic.
It's not a monster truck.
It shouldn't be treated as such.
We made it almost brand new.
We owe him nothing."
Yeah.
What was wrong with it when you took it in to the defendant?
I hit a boulder going out to the desert when I took it out.
Which gave me a reason to upgrade my suspension.
And therefore I reached out.
So you had some damage and then you wanted some upgrades?
-Yes. -When was he supposed to start the work?
By the first of January, or have it completed.
I apologize.
[Tanya] So you dropped the car off sometime in November, right?
Correct.
And in November, though, you knew he was quite busy.
I mean, in fact, he said,
"I'm really busy." I'll get to it when I can." Right?
-Yes, Your Honor. -[Tanya] You know he's pressed for time.
Correct.
He gave you a deposit, which was how much money?
-2,500. Yes, ma'am. -[Tanya] He gave you $2,500.
So you certainly thought that he had some expectation
that you were going to do some work, right?
Yeah.
So in November, how long did you anticipate this project was going to take?
Not as long because it's a side project, too.
And he was well aware of that.
Because this is-- It wasn't going through the shop.
[Tanya] Yeah, so not as long.
How long? November, you get the car, you know you're busy. How long?
-I figured six weeks -[Tanya] About six weeks.
Because then we fast forward to December 6th
and the plaintiff says to you,
"Hey, Gabe, Do you think the Bronco will be done by the 18th?"
-You're equivocal. -Yeah.
[Tanya] You say, "I'll try. I don't know. I'll try."
When the defendant is saying, "I'm going to try,
I don't know if I'm going to make it by the 18th,"
what's going on in your head at this point?
Are you thinking, "It's not going to be done in January"?
[Jose] More likely not. So...
But you still had faith in the project?
Yeah, of course. I have faith in the person I hired.
Then, Mr. Naranjo,
you say, "I'll have it done probably the 29th or the 30th.
Some pictures later on this week."
But you didn't send him pictures.
And you didn't have the car done.
Why not at least send some photographs?
'Cause I haven't started pulling everything apart yet.
So was that not true when you said,
"I'll have it done probably the 29th or the 30th"?
I planned on it.
But just everything that goes--
[Tanya] You hadn't even started by this time.
I haven't pulled it apart yet.
So let's say between December 19th
and December 29th, you thought you'd get the car done.
-Honestly... -[Tanya] Please.
I realized I wouldn't have it done.
But why didn't you tell him that?
[Gabriel] It's hard to sometimes be 100 percent honest.
I mean, I don't know. I had good intentions.
[Tanya] You know why you fell on your sword?
Because this plaintiff collected months
and months and months of text messages from you,
where you said, "No, I got it. I got you."
In fact, let's move on to January 9th.
"How we looking, bro?"
January 30th.
"What time tomorrow will it be ready so I can make arrangements?"
And I know there's no response from you in any of these messages.
-This is you to him. -Mm-hmm.
"Last night, the passenger-side shocks are on and everything is set up."
Was that true? Or were you just making that up, too?
I had parts on the truck.
But there was some serious frame damage that I didn't realize that it had.
So why did you not say there's serious damage?
And then, in fact, you say to him,
"Let me know when you'll be dropping it off."
So in February, were you under the impression
that the car was almost done, except for this tidying up he had to do?
Correct.
Why are you being so patient at this point?
So basically, I get a phone call from him.
He apologized for the lack of communication and the job not being done.
And he tells me, "I took this job.
I want to finish this job.
Allow me that."
So, over the phone, verbally, I accepted that offer,
like, he's going to complete it.
Let's fast forward this story to March.
March 29th. "Send me a photo."
Your response, "I'm going to be unloading
some of my mom's stuff into the storage unit."
Yada, yada, yada.
"Get on your truck again tomorrow night before I go home.
I'll get you pictures."
Sir, come on now. I mean, I'm having a little bit of fun,
but doesn't it strike you that this is just rude and disrespectful
and a way to get somebody excited about filing a lawsuit against you?
I mean, you're yanking his chain now.
We're at the end of March.
Why doesn't it occur to you simply to say, "I'm too busy,
here's your money back, I haven't been able to finish the work"?
Or, as you suggested now, more recently,
"The car has more damage"?
I understand 100 percent and I would be irritated as well.
A lot of stuff has happened during that period of time.
I wanted to finish it and work on it.
I should have actually looked at the thing
and what I had to do before I took the job on
because it should've been three times the price.
Well, what was interesting to me is that in these text messages,
at no point do you say, "It's more work than I anticipated."
Sir, how do you end up getting your car back?
Yeah, I mean, at that point, I felt I was suckered.
So I basically ended up just calling the shop owner.
[Tanya] And you called the shop owner and the shop owner tells you what?
"Oh, that's your car? I thought it was his."
[chuckles] And you had to pay the shop owner
some additional money on top of the $2,500
that you paid the defendant to get your car back.
Correct.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
If the plaintiff here decided to go online and blast your shop
and say, "They lied to me time and time again,"
you don't think that's going to adversely affect the people
who might be spending $200,000?
You're being honest so far.
Don't stop now.
[theme music playing]
[announcer] Jose Calvillo is suing his auto mechanic, Gabriel Naranjo,
for the cost of repairs on his 1996 Ford Bronco.
Gabriel says Jose wanted more work done on the truck,
and he completed all the repairs.
Now, that $7,500 that you paid the shop owner,
what was that for? Was it for storage?
Or was it to actually do the work on the car?
That's to do the proper work to the car.
[Tanya] Here's his defense.
That I'm going to put a little better than you put in your answer.
"Took longer than it should have.
But the car is done.
We did the work.
As shady as it may have been,
I have to question whether or not you're really damaged.
Because this car that you love took a year, but it's done."
Judge DiMango.
The way I hear this story from you, sir,
it's like it was a toy for you, basically.
Would that be correct?
It was just a little side project to make a little extra money
and have some fun with what I used to do 20-plus years ago.
So his recreational truck was your recreational project.
Can we see a picture of the truck on the screen, please?
That's it. And that's it before it's fixed?
[Jose] That's it after.
After. When you brought this in,
because obviously you work in the shop,
and I'm sure the owner of the shop works there as well.
-Is that correct? -Yes, ma'am.
Did you say, "Hey, this is my truck, I'm working on it"?
No. Every once in a while, like very rarely,
I would do a little side stuff.
If you're in there working on something else,
he's not going to pay you,
and he can't always be keeping track of what you're doing.
So I can't believe that you're that indispensable and wonderful
that this owner was going to let you just bring in all these vehicles
and work on them on his time in his place.
I do it on my time after hours.
So when he closes down, you say,
"I'm going to stay here and work on this"?
I run the whole shop. Yes, ma'am.
So how come you did nothing on his truck?
'Cause we were trying to get ready for, like,
the Baja 1000 and other races.
You got the $2,500 right away, correct?
-[Gabriel] Yes, ma'am. -Did you use it right away?
No. Till, like, around the end of January.
So not to pay the Christmas bills?
No, it was after the Christmas bills. It was birthday stuff for the kids.
Because, you know, at some point, you couldn't tell him the truth
'cause you couldn't give him the money back.
-[Gabriel] Exactly. -So you're kind of protecting yourself
and you're stringing him along.
Now, you know, we always kind of pick on the person
who seems to be the one doing the bad thing.
But the reality is, we are responsible for our own lives.
We're adults. How far is the shop from where you live?
It's about 30 minutes away.
Why wouldn't you go there and look?
What's with this, "Send me a picture, send me a picture"?
Why wouldn't you go?
[Jose] So I went twice, but it's gated.
And I want the work done, and I want the work done right.
Obviously, it's a vehicle, and safety is safety.
So you didn't want to rush him.
Basically, you didn't want to rush him and you weren't rushing him.
And your position is, you don't have to pay him anything
because, in truth, that $2,500
went to the work that was done on his truck.
It got taken off the final bill.
Right. So the bill, for argument's sake, was 7,500,
but it would have been $10,000?
Yes, ma'am.
[Patricia] Did you hear anything about that?
-[Jose] No. -Did anybody ever tell you that?
"Listen, we gave you a 25-percent rip-off discount."
This is the first time I'm hearing about it.
Yeah, so how would he know?
And maybe this is only coming from you.
Did you get a bill from them?
For the 7,500 bucks.
And did the bill enumerate the things that were done for $7,500?
It didn't itemize anything.
It just said that and 7,500. It was just labor, correct?
It was not parts because you provided all the parts.
But this vehicle, the Kelley Blue Book value
is somewhere between 2,300 and 8,200.
So you put 10,000 plus 10,000.
So it's $20,000 into a vehicle that's only worth about $7,000.
-Is that what you did? -Correct.
-Do you have a wife? -[Jose] Yes.
Does she want to kill you?
[laughter]
That's a lot of money for something that is not a classic truck.
-[Jose] Yes, Your Honor. -So you must really love that.
Does it have some kind of sentimental value to you?
I'm very fortunate to have a good job.
[Patricia] Okay.
That I'm able to spend money on a toy. Obviously, of my choice, but...
Okay, but that's honest and fair.
You know, I always pick something
if I somehow I get money from a tax return or something.
I always pick something frivolous that I want to spend a little bit on
because I say, "Look, I didn't have this before."
So I get what you're saying about wanting to spend the money on what you wanted.
So if that's the case, if you feel that way,
and if you got it back and it's everything that you thought it was going to be,
then really, I think Judge Acker is correct
to say you're suing him $2,500
because it took you too long to get it perfect.
But meanwhile, what you're saying here is,
you left it to be perfect because you wanted it to be perfect.
And they incorporated that 2,500 into the bill.
Although, I'm not sure how comfortable I feel about that
because all he has is labor 7,500.
And we don't really know whether or not it would have been 10,000
if you didn't pocket the 2,500.
There is, like, paperwork on what it would cost to have it done at another shop.
So you have submitted on behalf of your defense
that other shops, who you're buddies with, would have charged more money.
You're justifying your bill to him
by showing us these other estimates from other dealers.
I have to say the two of you have been very professional in this presentation.
And I rarely say that, so...
At this point, I think I've gotten all the answers I need to make a decision.
Judge Levy.
Thank you. Notwithstanding the Kelley Blue Book value
that was just discussed by Judge DiMango,
these Ford Broncos, which I'm somewhat familiar with,
they come in all different ranges.
The souped-up ones could be $27,000, right?
-[Jose] Correct -Depending upon what is actually included.
And you're the expert in this, right?
So we're not talking about a jalopy Ford Bronco.
We're talking about one with specialty parts,
especially designed to do off-roading.
And the Kelley Blue Book value
that you ordinarily get for just a jalopy or a Zorchmobile
doesn't really represent what the value of these vehicles really are.
No, sir, actually, we have one that just came into the shop
that's worth over 150,000.
That's what I mean. So it's tough to take a Kelley Blue Book
on something like this, right?
-Yes, Your Honor. -[Adam] All right.
You know, I was a little concerned, Mr. Naranjo?
[Gabriel] Mm-hmm.
[Adam] About the representation that you made a minute ago
regarding this other shop that did the quote.
You wanted to give us an idea as to what this other shop was going to cost
with the price up here, and you work with these shops.
You guys are all in the same industry,
and you can tell them to put anything you wanted on there, right?
-Well... -Let me break that down.
It's a compound question.
You work with this other company, right?
No, I do not.
So you have no relationship with them whatsoever?
[Gabriel] No, I have no relationship.
And what about your boss? Are you aware of whether he does?
We build off-road racecars.
This is just a, like, a four-wheel parts type store where they sell kits
-and they install kits only. -[Adam] Okay.
We don't build or install anything like that, usually.
Okay, but this bill that you submitted to us just today,
it's $11,430, right? -Yes, sir.
So that's what you're saying
that it really should have cost to get the plaintiff's vehicle
up to where it needed to be.
And since he only spent 2,500, he got a really good deal.
The problem is that this shop was billing 55 hours at $200 an hour.
-[Gabriel] Yes, sir. -But your shop doesn't bill $200 an hour.
Our shop rate would have been 135 an hour.
My boss gave a discount for an hourly wage.
[Adam] You know, I want to talk about that discount.
This is the document that you're talking about, right?
[Gabriel] Yes, sir.
This document that you presented today that came from your boss,
knowing that you were coming in here today to defend against a lawsuit
that was brought about by this plaintiff, right?
Yes, sir.
And your boss understands what the significance of this is.
This is his reputation, his shop's reputation.
Yes, sir.
And he knows that you are completely 100 percent at fault
for not getting this man his car back when you promised to,
as you told Judge Acker no less than two dozen times.
-Right? -Yes.
And you were honest with your boss when he asked you,
"What happened? Why did it take so long?"
What were you telling him? You were honest with him, right?
-Well, yeah. -And you told him that "I gave him
a whole bunch of excuses."
Like, "My arm hurts, it's killing me."
Like, "I went on a vacation on Valentine's Day.
I ran into a little snag with some brake lines."
Even though at the time, you already told Judge Acker
you hadn't done any work yet.
That "I told him that you had to get your mom's stuff into a storage unit
and you promised to get it on tomorrow, that it's been hectic at the shop."
The daughter's accident, I'm really sorry about that
because I believe that that actually happened.
-Yeah. -[Adam] But that was another excuse.
So you told your boss that you gave this guy all these excuses.
Your boss knows that you lied to him.
And that was going to adversely affect the reputation,
not of your shop, because you don't own it,
but your boss's shop, right?
Well, not really, because we don't do this type of work.
Are you telling me that if the plaintiff here decided to go online,
which would be well within his right, and blast your shop,
the shop that you work at, and say that "I was lied to,
the work that they promised to do, they took over a year,
they lied to me time and time again,"
you don't think that's going to adversely affect the people
who might be spending $200,000 to do a Bronco at your place?
-Yes, sir. -[Adam] Of course.
You're being honest so far. Don't stop now.
[announcer] Coming up on Tribunal Justice.
On the form that your boss gave, that the IRS uses in order to determine
how much taxes your boss should pay,
because, right, 'cause you're not taking cash and pocketing it.
-Your boss doesn't do that, right? -No.
[Adam] And commit tax fraud, does he?
-No. -[Adam] Good.
Show me on that form where it says that this gentleman right here
paid $6,000 cash.
-It doesn't -It doesn't.
[theme music playing]
So, in the text messages that the plaintiff was sending you
and you were responding to, he asks on June 20th, plaintiff,
"Can you give your boss the 2,500 I gave you for the Bronco
or give it back to me?"
June 28th, because you don't respond to that text,
"Come on, man. I need my money.
Please don't make me pursue legal action."
And you don't respond to that.
-Yes, sir. -Because on August 3rd, 2022,
he says, "I'm going to need some money."
So if that's true, August 3rd, that nothing has been done yet,
nothing with his vehicle, nothing with the $2,500,
explain to me on this document,
it says the job was completed on June 23, 2022.
[Gabriel] He wanted me to give him 2,500
to pay the last 5,000 off that he owed my boss.
Your boss prepared this invoice.
He prepared the invoice saying that the job was completed
on a date that it wasn't completed.
I'm not making it up.
Why would he falsify his own document? Why would he do that?
So now he's been lied to by you,
he's been lied to by your boss, and he was willing to pay for the work.
I honestly don't know when he picked up the truck. So it could have been--
It was most certainly after August 3rd, right?
Because on August 3rd, when he sends you the text that says,
"I'm going to need some money or give me something that's worth $2,500,"
-if the car was done by then-- -He already had it at that point.
-[Adam] Is that true? -No, sir.
[Adam] That's what I mean.
What I need to see from you, if you have it, is this bill for $7,500,
this non-itemized bill from his boss.
Well, I left that in the truck.
And for some reason, when I cleaned it out, it went out with it.
I did print out a bank statement with the withdrawal of 6,000.
I saw that. What was that for?
That was to give his boss the 75.
Plus, I had $1,500 cash in my wallet.
Oh.
[Gabriel] And that shows the date as well.
[laughing]
I know why your boss isn't here.
Exhibit three, bank statement.
6/21/2022, you took out $6,000 cash.
-Is that what you're referring to? -[Gabriel] Yes.
And Your Honor, that was for to put it aside.
So when the work is done, I could quickly run to the shop
and pay the man what he was charging me to get my vehicle.
So, in this invoice, number 1752... Take yours out. Do you have it?
Yes, sir.
[Adam] June 23, 2022, completion.
We know that the job wasn't completed then.
That's when the plaintiff, we now know,
gave your boss an extra $6,000 in cash.
On the form that your boss gave, that the IRS uses in order to determine
how much taxes your boss should pay,
because, right, 'cause you're not taking cash and pocketing it.
-Your boss doesn't do that, right? -No.
[Adam] And commit tax fraud, does he?
-No. -[Adam] Good.
Show me on that form where it says that this gentleman right here
paid $6,000 cash.
-It doesn't. -[Adam] It doesn't.
Show me on this form where it says that he was being charged $7,500.
-It doesn't. -[Adam] It doesn't.
What it does say is discount, customer deal, employee issue,
and a credit of $4,585, right?
Yes, sir.
And therefore the remaining balance was $5,000.
-That's what it says. -Yes, sir.
[Adam] Your boss then lied.
And he falsified this business document, didn't he?
-I guess. I had nothing-- -[Adam] I guess he did.
I guess he did.
[Gabriel] All I did was ask for a receipt.
Listen, I know it's not you, sir.
I understand exactly.
You were very honest and don't, like I said, don't stop now.
Your boss had the opportunity to do something solid for this guy.
Your boss had the opportunity to say to him
that "You've been mistreated by my employees, by my business,
and I've been in business, and my reputation means everything,
and I'm going to fix your truck
because we've had it for a year, no fault of your own,
And I'm not going to charge you a penny, right?
I'm not going to charge you a penny
more than the $2,500 that you already gave my employee."
Your boss could have done that, right? He chose not to.
Instead, he chose to take $6,000 cash from the plaintiff,
falsify a business document
so he doesn't have to pay any money on that.
Yeah.
[Adam] So he took that $6,000, put it in his pocket,
Uncle Sam sees nothing.
Right? And thankfully you get a car, right, sir, that you're happy with?
Yes, Your Honor.
[chuckles] What a great system.
Great system for everyone but the taxpayers.
Great system for everyone but him.
Great system for everyone else.
And then for your boss to send you in with this is disgusting.
Absolutely disgusting.
You should go online and bash, not him, his boss
as being the fraudster that everyone here now knows he is.
He didn't have to send you with that form.
What? He didn't think we were going to read it?
Moron!
Not you, your boss.
Tell him I said it.
You know, I want to talk very briefly about unjust enrichment.
Unjust enrichment means that you took $2,500 from the plaintiff,
put it in your pocket, spent it on your Christmas gifts or whatever,
and didn't do any work on that car.
Yes, he got it back. He got the Ford back.
He's very happy with it, right?
I'm very happy.
Why should you keep $2,500 that you did no work for? I'm done.
We're going to retire to deliberate. Thank you both.
Court now stands in recess. Parties are excused.
[theme music playing]
A year. [laughs] A year to get the car back.
Here is where I am on this case.
On the one hand, right?
If there was evidence that the value
of the work that was done to the plaintiff's car
to get it up to snuff was $10,000,
then he's not owed any money because we would have conclusive evidence
that the $2,500 that he paid the defendant went toward the work on the car.
But the defendant told us, one,
that the $2,500 that he collected from the plaintiff, he kept,
because I asked him, I said, "Did you give that money to your boss?"
He said no.
We also know that the defendant did not do any work on the car.
Which is why I like your unjust enrichment point.
I would give the plaintiff that money back.
[Patricia] I would give him back the 2,500 as well.
I kind of think that because of what happened here,
I'm not trusting all of the surrounding evidence.
I don't think anybody has done anything to rip off the plaintiff, technically.
Because I think that he got the Bronco the way he wants it,
he's very satisfied with it.
But all the surrounding circumstances are just too flimsy a case for me
on the defendant's end.
I don't really think that we should in any way reward him for that.
We don't know if the plaintiff would have brought the car to him
if he knew it was going to be 7,500 or $10,000.
He might have gone elsewhere.
So I would like to give him back the $2,500.
I agree.
[theme music playing]
Court is back in session.
Parties are reminded you're still under oath.
[Tanya] Thank you, Byrd.
We've deliberated, and we've reached a unanimous verdict.
Let me first say that I certainly appreciate,
I think that my colleagues would join me in this,
I think the two of you presented a fine case.
Love the way you conducted yourselves here.
I think this was tough for you because you know what I think?
I don't think you're super shady.
I think you're a busy person.
I think you thought you could do this job in a shorter period of time than it took.
And I think all of these times when you're like,
"Okay, I'm going to get to it, I'm going to get to it,"
I think you really wanted to because this is your reputation.
You do work on these off-roading cars,
and I think you're probably really good at it.
So every time you were stringing him along,
maybe there was some little part of you that was thinking,
"You know what, I really will get to it next week,
and then it's all going to be good."
It just didn't work out like that.
You know, you bit off more than you could chew.
You took his money.
And the only evidence we have in this case
is that you took his money and you did not do the work.
So, sir, we are going to give you that $2,500 back.
We're going to order the defendant to return that.
It's out unanimous verdict that you be awarded $2,500.
You go enjoy your off-roading and good luck to you both.
-Thank you. -Thank you, Your Honor.
This case is concluded. Parties are excused. You may step out.
Oh, the decision was fair. I didn't do the work.
I'm just happy my story was heard.
Hopefully no one else has to wait a year to get their vehicle back.
Oh, it just needed a bunch of work on it and all of the new suspension put back on.
I'm just thinking he was a little too busy.
I understand the holidays and he has a family.
I'm happy it's done. Finally. A lot less stress.
I tell you this, I will never do business with them again.
[announcer] Need to take someone to court?
Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media at Tribunal Justice.
[theme music playing]