An article regarding The Battery Store seizing pensioners’ mobility scooters as part of a fallout with the Townsville business operator.
What a disgusting bunch of grubs.
1 Like
A good news ending for the pensioner who had her mobility scooter stolen by The Battery Store.
1 Like
Edit: On re-reading the original report it seems The Battery Store ‘head office’ seems to have been the landlord.
his landlord had seized the shop along with her prized chariot, over a lease dispute.
1 Like
They seized property belonging to innocent customers which had nothing to do with their dispute and refused to return it leaving this pensioner and others in the lurch.
If that is not disgusting, then I don’t know what is.
Did you read my original post above?
'Due to a business dispute with the owners of The Battery Store, Mr Adlard had been locked out of his shop.
“He explained what had happened, that they’d changed the locks on the shop and put everything into storage, including my scooter,” Ms Stephens said.
The owners of The Battery Store ripped down Big Mike’s signage and locked up all his stock in a mystery location, including Ms Stephens’ chariot.
Big Mike said he was “totally dumbfounded”.
“They’re telling me it was because we breached the agreement and to this date, I’ve still got no notification of breach of agreement.”
After Ms Stephens scooter was taken, she was told to talk to The Battery Store State Manager Kishor Kumar, but she says he wouldn’t budge on returning her property.
Ms Stephens has now been without her chariot for six weeks and she is no closer to finding out when she may get it back, or where it even is and she’s not the only one with three other people who have had their scooters locked up.
Sheila and Mr Adlard have also sent The Battery Store legal letters, which to date have been ignored.’
So the owners of The Battery Store are either the property owner or hold the head lease for the premises as a great many franchisors do.
And totally irrespective of who owns or control;s the property, some grub has seen fit to seize private property which has nothing to do with any dispute.
3 Likes
Your post crossed in the night. Apparently while you typed I re-read the original, edited my initial response, and deleted my last.
Well stated but that is what happens with lease disputes and yes it is grubby, but. Sometimes people’s goods get seized for a l.o.n.g time before they can get them back in these kinds of situations. It is even worse if the company goes into administration and all goods on the premises are initially claimed as company assets.
4 Likes
Agree @Fred123, the actions of the owner of the premises are not the way any customer should be treated. Lower than the proverbial snakes belly, to borrow from PK.
The nature of the relationship between the operator of the store and “The Battery Store” and lack of detail on the legal basis of any dispute make it difficult to comment on why customers property had not been released. Although in similar circumstances involving corporates and the return of property to a third party, resolution can be a long drawn out legal process.
We might all ask if it was in the best interests of both businesses, Big Mike’s and The Battery Store, that there was minimal impact from any disagreement on the customers? Customer goodwill and a positive public image would appear to be of little value in this instance.
1 Like
