Jump to content

fasteddie

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,743
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fasteddie

  1. 1 hour ago, aroiaroi said:

    I was refering to the intent behind the contact attempts: ill willed and disingenuous.

    There is a big difference between reaching out with the intent of resolving a situation aimicably vs take down requests backed by legal threats & jail time threats.

    The hotel has obviously phrased it this way in order to cover themselves legally and make themselves look reasonable. I suppose it's fooled some - but it's not too difficult (shouldn't be) to read between the lines and get the context.
     

    So you say, I read it differently, as far as I can see they just wanted him to stop the slander but his refusal to respond to their attempts until they used the law speaks for itself.

    • Like 1
  2. 4 hours ago, aroiaroi said:

    "Sort out the matter?" Normal business procedures might try and reach some compromise but there is no no evidence of that intent. based on the charges laid, it's not unreasonable to say the hotel made contact with ill intent. In Other words, "sorting out" the matter = escalating take down threats, legal threats, culminating in charges. 

     

     

    ''but there is no no evidence of that intent'' au contraire, there is plenty of evidence they made numerous attepts to contact him to no avail, he just kept on slandering them. He's had his chance now let the courts decide, after all TiT!

    • Thanks 1
  3. On 10/1/2020 at 3:12 AM, camble said:

    This resort owes the customer a free weekend in their finest suite for having to spend a weekend in jail, and with no corkage fees.

    Not a chance, his fault, the hotel is in the right here, ''The hotel claims they tried to contact the complainant to sort out the matter but he only stopped when police got in touch and took him to jail in Koh Chang.''

×
×
  • Create New...