Woman Tracked Down and Busted for Using Restaurant's Customers-Only Bathroom

page: 1
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Five dollars please......and then begins the corruption that has shaken the foundations of not only the United States, but most of the free world on an excellerated pace.



The bizarre tale began when Patricia Barnes stopped into the Flood Zone to use the restroom, which she did, before leaving without making a purchase. Then, a few days after her powder-room visit, Barnes received a handwritten note—mailed to her home—saying she owed the restaurant $5.


Ok, sounds wierd, but simple enough. But then you have to ask, how did they know where to send the bill?


Turns out the local sheriff helped track Barnes down by running her license plate, all as a favor to the owner of the restaurant.


Favors to a business.
And the Sheriffs response?


According to the Houston County Sheriff, Darrell Allison, though, it was no biggie.



“I would say that happens every day,” he told the TV station. “It’s a very common occurrence.”


Wow, that bad huh?



Yahoo



+3 more 
posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
What is wrong with the picture here? How does this seem so bad?


But, countered local state Rep. John C. Tidwell, “The way I interpret it, it would be illegal,” he said, explaining that license plate information is to be used only for law enforcement purposes. “The information should not have ever been given over to the business. That is information that is supposed to be dealt with by the state’s agency or the official.”


Now you can read this story and take it in a direction of right to charge monies for use of a bathroom or not, but there is a bigger picture here to see.

The little favors are not much different then what they do in DC with buddies on bills and contracts. They say if you want to change things to start at the local level and go up. I guess things like this would prove the therory right. If it's that easy on a small basis and you carry that up the ladder, nothing really changes.

I think it would be harsh, but the sheriff in this case should have abuse charges brought against him to make a point, but more important, to start moving in the right direction for once.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
I've always considered the "Customer Only" bathrooms to mean if you are ever a customer. I have no concern about using store washrooms without buying anything on that particular trip, and have only been asked once by someone and when I explained I've been a customer there, it was fine. The incident you describe probably had other factors involved, maybe the person did something in the store that hasn't shown up in the news, or, if not, the manager is just a ......



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Not much more to the story other than the owner did not want the extra 12 to 15 flushes a day because the gas station across the street had a broken toilet.

When I started reading the story I thought it was going to be that someone followed her home to get the address. Nope, more to the story then that.
edit on 1-3-2013 by j2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:40 AM
link   
I understand the "No shoes, no shirts" policy of most places. I asked a 7-11 manager what that was about and he basically said they A) don't want people slipping on stuff because they're not wearing shoes, and B) they don't want riff-raff in there, like most stores.

A "right to refuse service" is for the same reasons.

Customers-only restrooms make no sense, however. The only exception I can think of would be a sit-down restaurant of 'higher' class than maybe say a Denny's or an IHOP type pancake house. Again, because they would want to maintain an atmosphere and keep out riff-raff. Any other restaurant would probably not mind having extra traffic running through. Stop at the bathroom, smell the food, stay and try it--would be my logic as a restaurant manager. Getting someone to visit your establishment is the first part to making a sell, right?

This story really makes NO sense to me. Demanding a payment of any amount is ridiculous, and getting the sheriff involved is just outrageous.

Some people are just stupid and exercise their stupidity in creative ways. It makes life and ATS interesting though
edit on 1-3-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by NarcolepticBuddha
.

This story really makes NO sense to me. Demanding a payment of any amount is ridiculous, and getting the sheriff involved is just outrageous.

Some people are just stupid and exercise their stupidity in creative ways. It makes life and ATS interesting though
edit on 1-3-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



I am glad you got the real point of the thread. Some pressure should be put on the state level to at the very least a public arm twist with this sheriff.

Makes me ask, I wonder if he supports the 2nd amendment in full?



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:50 AM
link   
I would go back to said restaurant drop my drawers and crap on one of their tables!

Obviously i would leave a $5 tip! LoL

1984 is now!!!!!!!
edit on 1-3-2013 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:54 AM
link   
The owner backed off when they realized what they had did would not settle well.


Barnes said she wasn’t angry about the bill, which she attempted to pay, twice, and which the Flood Zone owners refused ("I would not take her $5," Lisa told Shine). What did upset her, though, was that the police shared her and husband Randy Edwards’ address with Lisa so she could mail the bill.


Plus the sheriff went into hidding on this one.


When reached by phone, a receptionist for Sheriff Allison told Yahoo! Shine he was not "giving any more comments about this."



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
The sheriff will get more than his share of annoyance from this by having his name and deed all over the press (and ATS for that matter) and be the subject of ridicule. He shall probably rule the day that he ever did this. And hopefully the restaurant will lose a little business because of their attitude. Does anyone know if a case of "Customer's only bathroom" has ever been taken to court? Taxpayers pay for their water lines, street access, etc., so if a public building has a washroom for the public, it seems only natural - in more ways than one - that the public should be free to use it.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aleister
The sheriff will get more than his share of annoyance from this by having his name and deed all over the press (and ATS for that matter) and be the subject of ridicule. He shall probably rule the day that he ever did this.


Do you honestly believe that? Just watch him get away scott-free and become an appointed judge to a small claims court somewhere down the line. I'm wondering if you're not an American. There will be no consequences, I'm almost certain.

He will not "rue" anything.
edit on 1-3-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by j2000
What is wrong with the picture here? How does this seem so bad?


But, countered local state Rep. John C. Tidwell, “The way I interpret it, it would be illegal,” he said, explaining that license plate information is to be used only for law enforcement purposes. “The information should not have ever been given over to the business. That is information that is supposed to be dealt with by the state’s agency or the official.”


Now you can read this story and take it in a direction of right to charge monies for use of a bathroom or not, but there is a bigger picture here to see.

The little favors are not much different then what they do in DC with buddies on bills and contracts. They say if you want to change things to start at the local level and go up. I guess things like this would prove the therory right. If it's that easy on a small basis and you carry that up the ladder, nothing really changes.

I think it would be harsh, but the sheriff in this case should have abuse charges brought against him to make a point, but more important, to start moving in the right direction for once.



Agreed, total abuse of police powers and improper use of police time and equipment, not to mention issues of confidentiality and rights to privacy of a member of the public who had not done anything wrong or illegal.

And strictly speaking, in law, unless the shop owner had a clearly displayed signage over the entrance of the shop, or in another prominent and clearly visible position stating that use of the toilet is dependent on making a purchace or a payment charge of $5 will be made, the owner hasn't a legal leg to stand on.

The real issue though isn't a miserable sod of a store owner, but abuse of police funds, wasting police resources and improper disclosure of private and confidential public information.

The sheriff should be reprimanded and have this on his record.

As far as the idiot shop owner...would he have preferred she simply wet herself (or worse) all over his shop floor or doorstep instead of using the toilet?

Maybe a few dozen people going to his shop who 'can't hold on for a second longer' messing up his shop will provoke a change of heart in the right direction.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by NarcolepticBuddha

Originally posted by Aleister
The sheriff will get more than his share of annoyance from this by having his name and deed all over the press (and ATS for that matter) and be the subject of ridicule. He shall probably rule the day that he ever did this.


Do you honestly believe that? Just watch him get away scott-free and become an appointed judge to a small claims court somewhere down the line. I'm wondering if you're not an American. There will be no consequences, I'm almost certain.

He will not "rue" anything.
edit on 1-3-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)


Yes, I believe that people he knows will look at him a little differently, and he won't like that. He tracked a woman down for using a store's washroom, of course he will be laughed at and lose some of his accumulated goodwill with people. And ATS isn't only accessible in America, you may be surprised to hear. The only ones who don't get it are the North Koreans and Chinese (as far as I know - and is there a non-English language ATS??? Never thought of that before.)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:11 AM
link   
if only she brought her roflcopter along, she could of got away



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:11 AM
link   
My tactic is to fully mentally convince myself i'm going in to buy something but i'm going to use the loo first and then on my way out I suddenly change my mind and just decide to leave. That way my conscience is clean.

That cop abused his power...



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Yes, but my point is, very simply, that he isn't going to learn anything. If he has no qualms about abusing his power in this way over a 5 DOLLAR demand over bathroom usage!...then he's crooked through-and-through. This wasn't just a single, isolated mistake. He's probably used to making dumb decisions, as is said restaurant owner.

That's all I meant about you possibly not being an American--is that you think he will learn something from this. It never happens.
edit on 1-3-2013 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by CrimsonMoon
My tactic is to fully mentally convince myself i'm going in to buy something but i'm going to use the loo first and then on my way out I suddenly change my mind and just decide to leave. That way my conscience is clean.

That cop abused his power...


This is what she did, and that is what happened.
The power abuse in this case is bad enough, but him saying it happens everyday, now this is a very small town around 1000 in the middle of the TN north, middle of not much, then how much and at what levels go on in the city?



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by j2000



Agreed, total abuse of police powers and improper use of police time and equipment, not to mention issues of confidentiality and rights to privacy of a member of the public who had not done anything wrong or illegal.

And strictly speaking, in law, unless the shop owner had a clearly displayed signage over the entrance of the shop, or in another prominent and clearly visible position stating that use of the toilet is dependent on making a purchace or a payment charge of $5 will be made, the owner hasn't a legal leg to stand on.

The sheriff should be reprimanded and have this on his record.

As far as the idiot shop owner...would he have preferred she simply wet herself (or worse) all over his shop floor or doorstep instead of using the toilet?



Agreed! The county in this case, the board, would have to vote to come down on this sheriff.
From local level to the top level they keep "getting by with" all things anymore. If you stand up they try to knock you down. In fact in the public helps them most of the time. Just like the reporter getting threatend from the white house. Abuse of power.

It gets to be a slippery slop going from calling someone you know in a posistion to help, maybe contract or whatever, to breaking the law outright and telling everyone you do it every day. At the very least, I hope these people in this county remember at the polls and vote this bad sheriff out.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 06:39 AM
link   
First, I am a bit surprised the Sheriff doesn't have some explaining to do. Most states have pretty heavy accountability involved for running names and personal details through police computers for pure abuse concerns. Not this kind of abuse, but this sure works for the purpose.

Second.. I've had a few places over my years of trucking give me hell like that and on the spot for pushing to buy something.

Well, thats fine.... There are ways to make sure it costs them a hell of a lot more than $5 to have pissed me off. Buy something? Fine... French Fries sound good. Dontcha know...I just HAVE to have both Ketchup and Mustard ..a whole bottle of each.
Expensive condiments these days,. huh? Goodness... Toilet paper doesn't go near as far as it used to either, does it? Need LOTS of it. At least the whole role they had hanging. (grin)

Business owners who pushed hard to nickle and dime me got themselves stuck for dollars in return. Greed is never a wise thing....especially when the customer has all the power to insure the ratio of cost to profit is blown all to hell.


*BTW... don't make a mess at a place... The owner doesn't give a hoot. It's the low paid workers that have to suffer for THAT particular payback. Chances are, they've got it bad enough already by having to work for the jerk in the first place...no need to make their lives harder. Just the owner.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   
This is a complete misuse of authority by this local Sheriff's office. The bathroom user broke NO LAWS, just a merchant's own policy. It plays out more like creepy stalking to me... The Sheriff had no authority in this case...



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Uhhh. I say sue the restaurant. The Owners of the restaurant. Especially the sheriff. The Sheriff department. Take that two bit town for everything it's worth.

I say she's got a good chance of winning the lawsuit and I say the town deserves to be sued into oblivion for being such asses.





top topics
 
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join