Get rich quick !!!!

[dinglinga]

well now i have u attention if this case gets through ... get ready with the flood gates



Costly complaints embarrassBy Paul Kent
May 10, 2007 03:00am
Article from: Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
GEE, I hope Waise Yusofzai makes good on his case to sue Sydney bar The Establishment, the trendy watering hole which had the temerity to (Warning: cover the children's eyes here, mums and dads) ... deny him entry.

That's right. Denied entry at the door, Mr Yusofzai claims he has been so embarrassed his life is a shambles and the only way to suitably recover is with a nice fat damages claim.

A real estate agent, he is no longer able to socialise with clients, he claims. Worse, he claims he is "half a person" and also "psychologically damaged".

His confidence is shot, he claims, and he no longer goes to bars because he feels "uncomfortable" walking in. All of which is wonderfully encouraging for the rest of us.

Take me, for example. If Mr Yusofzai is "psychologically damaged" after being denied entry to one nightclub, as he claims, then I must be a total wreck. If he gets even a smidgen of the $50,000 he is seeking in compensation, then I could be sitting on a gold-plated fortune and not even know it.

Maybe it helps to understand if we take a checklist of Mr Yusofzai's claims. He is seeking $20,000 for psychological injury and another $30,000 for lost income. He wants $500 for cab fares to and from the bar and for the round of top-end drinks he bought for clients once he eventually gained entry. And he wants $300 reimbursed for the cost of his leather shoes, which he "more or less" wore out when he was forced to walk from the bar to Central Station to catch a taxi after being refused. Which way did he go? Via Parramatta?

Yet if Mr Yusofzai is making his claim then we all might as well stake our own, right?

Fair's fair. The claim I would probably start with is the night I tried to get into The Establishment myself, with two mates, when we had the little problem, a minor problem really, of a little blood on my shirt.

The blood is a whole other story, and certainly not one for here.

In an inspired piece of thinking, however, I borrowed my mate's leather jacket to cover the incriminating spots and we headed towards the door walking as straight as we could manage, convinced we only had to hold it together for a few moments to make our way past the bouncers and into the promised land.

"Sorry mate," the bouncer said, "You're too drunk." That was cool. We had practised for this. "No I'm not," I said, cheerfully but with a nice even control. "I haven't had that much."

It was a solid effort and we believed nearly a successful one, but the bouncer looked down with those big sorry eyes they sometimes get and gave a small shake of his head. "Mate," he said. "Your jacket's on upside down."

It was a mortal wound. Who could have known, though, without the benefit of Mr Yusofzai's claim, that a fortune awaited? Can anyone accurately calculate the psychological damage from having to turn around and face all those people in line behind, acutely aware that every one of them was looking intently at the jacket that was being worn upside down?

Let me tell you, if Mr Yusofzai's psychological injury is worth $20,000, I could have owned that bar! Unfortunately my recuperative powers seemed to be a little better than Mr Yusofzai's and we simply turned away, fitted the jacket right side up, and then headed into Jackson's On George a short stutter down the road - where I fell asleep at a table. But if only I'd known.

The good news for everybody else is that now we all do know, so we wait to see what will happen if Mr Yusofzai is successful with his claim. If he is, then with a little luck we can fill the courts with our own civil cases, one after the other, all of us wanting our own little earn for the night we got turned away at the door. Oh the embarrassment, we'll wail.

Admittedly, Mr Yusofzai was not drunk like most others are when he attempted to enter the bar, and the reason given to him, he claims, was that there was "too many males" already inside.

The bar claims it was a safety issue. Such claims have formed the legal wrangling that has made up the case, with the decision currently being reserved by the tribunal.

Of course, there is an alternative ending to this impending madness which, in my opinion, is what the tribunal should say to Mr Yusofzai: Get over it.

[Mr66]

"Nah mate ya can't come in...you're a dickhead" is what he'll have to get used to now.
Moron...funny, but nevertheless still a moron.