Occasionally I watch those silly judge shows because they can be
entertaining.  I caught one this morning (Judge Maria Lopez) that was
disturbing on two levels.

The plaintiff was a woman who left her dog and a cockatiel with the owners
of a grooming business/retail pet shop (the defendants) until she could find
an apartment.  Apparently she was reduced to living on disability checks
after an injury and couldn't afford her current place.  I know that can be a
pitifully poor amount of money, so it makes sense.  Maybe she was being
evicted; maybe her lease had expired and she couldn't afford a rent
increase.  I don't know.

Ostensibly the defendants agreed to keep her pets for a week until she could
find another apartment.  But the week stretched into *4-5 weeks*.  She
wasn't paying them to provide room & board for her pets.  The arrangement
was she would come in and clean the shop.  The defendants said it was to be
every day, sweeping up, simple stuff like that.  The plaintiff said it was
supposed to be 3 times a week.  The defendants said she showed up 4 times
total during the entire month.  The plaintiff said she couldn't remember how
many times it was.

The defendants said they kept calling her, saying they couldn't keep her
pets, she needed to come get them.  She claimed they never called her.  A
shop employee testified she, too, had left messages saying they've been good
enough to keep your pets free of charge but this can't continue.

They claimed when they did speak to her she kept saying she was "this close"
to moving into a new apartment.  Apparently she said this a number of times.
It started sounding like excuses and delaying tactics.  (There was no
mention of where she was actually living while all this was going on.)
After a month, the shop owners finally said enough was enough.  Pick them up
in 3 days or we will find homes for them.  She didn't, and they did.

The plaintiff was suing them for an ungodly amount of money, over $4000.
She got hysterical because they gave away "her babies".  She claimed she
didn't abandon them.  Maybe that wasn't her intention.  But she sure was
taking advantage of their good nature, wasn't she?  And if they were so
important to her, why didn't she uphold her end of the bargain?  Why only
come in 3-4 times in a month?  She wasn't even coming in to visit "her
babies".

The judge was sympathetic to her plight but agreed with the defendants.  It
wasn't their place to take care of her pets until she found it convenient to
come get them.

But here's the other thing that disturbed me.  The judge, while expressing
sympathy to the plaintiff (while ruling against her) said, "Get another
pet."  GRRRRR!  I hate when people say things like this!  When my sweet dog
Sampson died in 1999 I called my apartment manager about removing the
monthly pet rent.  She replied, "So get another dog."  *Only* people who are
not pet lovers could say such a thing.  There may be some people who rush
right out and get another pet.  I don't know anyone who has ever done that.
Replacing pets isn't like replacing a worn out chair.  They are living,
loving creatures.

Obviously she lost her case, despite all her tears and histrionics.  She had
no legal basis for suing them when they'd cared for, fed and housed the dog
and the bird for a month.  But the judge shouldn't have said, "Get another
pet."

NOTE:  There are apartment and house leasing firms across the U.S. (probably
all over the world!) that will show you listings of apartments, free of
charge.  I've used a firm like that twice myself.  It doesn't take 4-5 weeks
to find another place.  Sure, it may not be exactly the place you want.  But
if you *have* to go somewhere, look at what they have listed.  You generally
don't have to sign an extended lease.  I can't speak to other countries but
my apartment complex offers either a month to month tenancy (bad idea,
IMHO).  If you don't do that, they also offer a 3, 6 or 12 month lease.
Move in with a short lease.  Then continue looking for another place when
you can take your time about it.  And have your pets with you.  Know what I
mean?

Jill