Jump to content
SAU Community

Granville Tuner Matter Resolved. Thanks For All Your Support


Recommended Posts

At 12.47 PM on Monday 3 December 2007 a Default Judgement for liquidated claim was entered at the Parramatta Local Court, Small Claims Division.

In case Number 2410/07:

The judgement entered in favour of the Plaintiff (me) against the defendant (a tuner) for an amount of $3553.19 plus $73.00 court costs.

It's a matter of public record now, you can post the name or to be ultimately safe, post the court transcript.

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

SAU rules prevent naming of a workshop in a negative light, regardless of what a court found in this case.

That seems a little how shall we say.... big brother ish. I fully understand the problems of liable etc and a similar website www.whirlpool.net.au has had many issues such as this. And not to try to sound funny but how you have interpreted this rule seems against the concept of being able to truthfully and fully report a situation.

From the guidelines "No slander to be made towards businesses or individuals......any information that could be classed as slander or is an attempt in anyway to deter business from any individual or business on this website is the responsibility of the owner of the website and all legal liability falls on said owner."

Slander or defamation = "...adverse public statements about legal citizens presented as fact must be proven false to be defamatory or slanderous/libel" taken from Wikipedia but a common definition. The OP has proven in an Australian Court of law that his cause is true, he can not be slandering if sticking to the points of the case as accepted in law. The reproduction of an Australian court verdict can not be taken in anyway as slander if presented as is. It is merely a reproduction of court accepted truth. In either case there is no posibility of slander/defamation.

The second point of the guidelines seems to be related to fear of the possible repercussions for liable but goes further and I can not clearly define what it is trying to say.

1. "an attempt in anyway to deter business from any individual or business on this website" Seems to be giving protection to anyone listing as a business on these forums (website). A commercial agreement for sure, and somewhat understandable, but is it the intent of the forum that nothing ever be said against someone that has paid PranK money? If so that has been broken many times (references available).

In this case the shop does not seem to be a financial supporter of this website and the precedent of naming and placing details has been made many, many times, probably on a weekly basis.

2. "Detering business" is so wide and vague, by this point some of the traders own posts could be considered determinantal.

I note it also says "feel free to post any information about a business or individual that you have had good dealings with." So we can't say anything bad but everything good? What about where Businesses have quoted prices on this website, then end up charging customers more. Yes I have the invoice from the websites biggest financial supporter as proof. I used all the good feedback on said business to base a judgement on my investment of thousands. Perhaps I should sue SAU for not informing ME of the business practices of said business. I know it has cost me $$'s. I am still in discussions with said business about this (if they ever bother to get back to me).

Some rational please in the moderating. A god dam court of law has said what the truth in the matter is.

The process is far from over. These people obviously have no respect for Dominic, the law or anything/anyone else. A default judgment means they didn't show up or put up a fight at all? Which one was it Dom? Now the hard part of getting the money out of them. If they didn't respect the court enough to turn up then it's unlikely they will pay on it's say so.

As for publicly naming, Prank has decided that since any old crank can go and get a lawyer and lodge a suit against him, frivolous, wrong or otherwise, it's still going to cost time and money to defend it so he is playing it as safe as he can to avoid this.

if thats the case then im sure it will still be a long time before you get the money out of them, they will probably fight it every step of the way until the sherifs last warning and they come to collect stuff for auction then they will hand over the money

like we said above, doesn't matter how many of us agree or not, the mods and admins enforce christian's rules. If he changes them, fine....if not - no naming workshops

OK let's move on.

SAU doesn't want to draw any vitriol from angry tuners who get a bad name, deserved or not, on these forums.

If anyone is that keen to know tuner names then settle with a flippin PM.

Goodnight.

all girlfriends remain the property of Ahmed's Backyard Engineering Pty. Ltd. till all accounts are paid. Ahmad's Backyard Engineering Pty. Ltd. is not liable for any costs/damages/pregnancy to girlfriends while in their posession.

Excuse me, but will Ahmad swap one dyno-tune on my bathurst special 3.3 litre GTR for one well worn wife with 25 years experience of wifing. Great Cook, Good Navigator and not too bad for a 47 YO.

Comes with a huge built-in wardrobe full of clothes and shoes but not one outfit to wear for the party on saturday night, so youll have to take her out shopping.

Photo of her here http://www.targa.com.au/Competitors/Entrie...inicVotano.html

Please send sample dyno slip...

didnt u guys know bin laden was in town? yea man hes been here for a few months now working a on a few rawts, he asked for my help but i told him im on probation and have to be home for dinner. next time though :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...