Did Man Clip the Docked Pontoon Boat? | Part 3

Judge Judy
28 May 202404:02

TLDRIn a dispute over a damaged pontoon boat, the claimant alleges that the defendant's throttle got stuck, causing his boat to hit and damage the claimant's vessel. The claimant insists that the incident occurred on May 13th, as per the police report, and that the defendant had apologized. The defendant denies calling the claimant on that date but admits to a conversation about the boat's vulnerable position. Judge Judy questions the claimant's recollection and the legitimacy of the police report, while also examining the boat's parking situation and the potential for damage.

Takeaways

  • 😀 The conversation between the parties involved a discussion about filing an insurance claim for the boat damage.
  • 😐 The person accused of causing the damage suggested filing a claim to waive the deductible, but the boat owner was unsure of the deductible amount.
  • 😕 The accused expressed inability to afford the deductible and walked away from the situation.
  • 😠 Judge Judy pointed out discrepancies in the testimony compared to the sworn statement, highlighting the importance of accurate recollection.
  • 😯 The accused did not call the boat owner directly on May 13th, but rather called someone named Joe, as per the police report.
  • 😶 There was a misunderstanding about who was accused of hitting the boat and who initiated the contact for discussion.
  • 😮 The boat owner had a previous conversation warning about the vulnerable position of the boat, suggesting some foreknowledge of potential issues.
  • 😵 The boat was parked along the seawall, not in a designated slip, which may have contributed to the incident.
  • 😮‍💨 Judge Judy questioned the convenience and safety of parking the boat in such a manner, implying it could have been a factor in the collision.
  • 😶‍🌫️ The marina employee was unsure about the need for a permit for seawall parking, indicating a possible lack of regulations or awareness.
  • 😐 The damage to the boat was minimal, raising questions about the validity of the claim and whether the incident occurred as described.

Q & A

  • What was the initial suggestion made by the man regarding the damaged boat?

    -The man suggested that the owner should file a comprehensive claim with their insurance company, who would then waive the deductible.

  • What was the owner's response to the suggestion about filing an insurance claim?

    -The owner disagreed, stating that insurance deductibles for boats are different from those for cars and that they were unsure of the exact amount of their deductible.

  • What was the man's reaction after learning about the potential deductible amount?

    -The man expressed that he couldn't afford the deductible and then walked away.

  • According to the testimony, what did Miles admit to on May 13, 2018?

    -Miles admitted to hitting the boat, apologizing for the incident, and explaining that his throttle got stuck, causing the collision.

  • Why did the owner believe that Miles did not call them on May 13th?

    -The owner realized that the testimony stated Miles called, but it was actually Joe who received the call, not the owner.

  • What was the context of the conversation between the owner and Joe?

    -The conversation took place across the canal, where Joe accused the owner of hitting the boat and asked for the owner's phone number to discuss the incident.

  • How did the owner eventually contact Joe?

    -The owner called Joe using the number found on the side of the boat after their initial conversation.

  • What was the nature of the conversation between Mr. Miller and the boat owner?

    -Mr. Miller discussed the damage to the boat and mentioned that he had previously warned the owner about the vulnerable position of the boat.

  • Why did Judge Judy question the boat owner about the location of the boat?

    -Judge Judy questioned the location because the boat was parked along the seawall rather than in a designated slip, which could have contributed to the incident.

  • What was the boat owner's explanation for parking along the seawall?

    -The owner stated that it was a more convenient place for renters to leave from, although it was not necessarily the best place for keeping the boat.

  • What observation did Judge Judy make about the proximity of the boats to the seawall?

    -Judge Judy noted that there was only about two feet of difference between the boats sticking out of the slip and the edge of the seawall.

  • How did Judge Judy summarize the situation regarding the boat damage and its location?

    -Judge Judy pointed out that the damage to the boat was less than two feet, suggesting that the boat's location might have been a factor in the incident.

Outlines

00:00

🚤 Boat Damage Dispute

The script opens with a conversation about a boat damage incident. A man suggests filing an insurance claim to waive the deductible, but the boat owner is unsure of the deductible amount and the man cannot afford it. Judge Judy questions the plaintiff's sworn statement about a phone call from the person who hit the boat, revealing inconsistencies with the actual events. The plaintiff admits the person, Miles, called Joe, not him, and the conversation was about the boat's vulnerable position and the damage. The judge also inquires about the boat's parking along the seawall without a permit, suggesting it might have contributed to the incident due to its inconvenient location for other boats to maneuver.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Pontoon Boat

A pontoon boat is a type of boat that floats on two or more large, flat, buoyant tubes, known as pontoons. In the video, the pontoon boat is central to the dispute as it is the vessel that was allegedly hit and damaged. The script mentions the boat's position and the potential for damage, highlighting the significance of the boat's design and placement in the incident.

💡Comprehensive Claim

A comprehensive claim in the context of insurance refers to a type of claim made for incidents that are not covered by collision insurance, such as theft or vandalism. In the script, the suggestion to file a comprehensive claim with the insurance company indicates an attempt to address the damage to the boat, although the plaintiff clarifies that this type of claim is more relevant to cars than boats.

💡Deductible

A deductible is the amount of money that a policyholder must pay out-of-pocket before an insurance company will cover the remaining costs of a claim. In the video, the mention of the deductible is significant as it shows the financial burden that the party responsible for the damage might face, with the plaintiff speculating about the amount of their deductible.

💡Throttle

The throttle is the mechanism that controls the amount of power that an engine delivers, often used in vehicles like boats. In the script, the claim that the throttle got stuck suggests a possible reason for the boat collision, indicating a mechanical issue that could have led to the incident.

💡Police Report

A police report is an official document detailing the findings and relevant information regarding an incident reported to law enforcement. In the video, the reference to the police report on May 13th is crucial as it provides a timestamp and a formal record of the events, which is a key piece of evidence in the dispute.

💡Vulnerable Position

In the context of the video, a 'vulnerable position' refers to the placement of the boat that could make it susceptible to damage. The defendant claims to have warned about the boat being in such a position, suggesting that its location could have contributed to the incident.

💡Marina

A marina is a dock or basin with water deep enough to accommodate boats, typically for mooring, storage, or repair. The script discusses the marina as the location where the boats are kept, and it becomes a point of contention regarding the proper placement and management of the vessels.

💡Slip

A slip is a portion of water in a marina designated for the mooring of a boat or ships. In the video, the discussion about the boat not being in a slip but along the seawall is important, as it raises questions about the proper and safe mooring practices within the marina.

💡Accusation

An accusation is a claim that someone has done something wrong or illegal. In the script, the accusation of one party hitting the boat is the central issue of the dispute, with the dialogue revealing the back-and-forth between the parties regarding responsibility for the damage.

💡Apology

An apology is an expression of regret or remorse for a mistake or wrongdoing. The script mentions an apology from the person who allegedly hit the boat, which is a significant aspect of the narrative as it suggests acknowledgment of fault and an attempt at reconciliation.

💡Insurance Company

An insurance company provides insurance policies and pays out claims when the policyholder experiences a loss or damage covered by the policy. In the video, the insurance company is mentioned as a potential solution for covering the damages to the boat, indicating the role of insurance in managing financial risks associated with property damage.

Highlights

The defendant suggested filing an insurance claim to waive the deductible.

The plaintiff clarified that boats do not have the same insurance policies as cars regarding deductibles.

The plaintiff admitted not knowing the exact amount of the deductible for boats.

The defendant expressed inability to afford the deductible and left the conversation.

Judge Judy pointed out discrepancies in the plaintiff's sworn statement regarding the phone call.

The plaintiff corrected that Miles called Joe, not the plaintiff, about the incident.

The plaintiff swore to the date of the incident based on the police report.

The defendant was accused of hitting the boat by Joe, not the plaintiff.

A conversation across the canal took place between the defendant and Joe about the boat incident.

The defendant provided his number for further discussion about the boat damage.

The plaintiff called the defendant using the number on the boat.

The plaintiff had previously warned the defendant about the vulnerable position of the boat.

Judge Judy questioned the convenience and safety of parking the boat along the seawall.

The defendant explained the boat was parked for the convenience of renters.

Judge Judy highlighted the potential difficulty for Mr. Miller's boat due to the close proximity.

The damage to the boat was minimal, suggesting the impact might not have been significant.

Judge Judy's inquiry into the actual position and impact on the boat's parking spot.