So even
though LAG’s contract states on Page 8 (i) Additionally, Contractor shall tow,
free of charge, any vehicle owned by any victim of any crime. Chief Duh-Soye believes that if another police agency initiates the tow, then that somehow relieves
LAG of its contract obligation.
When
asked about the Panetta transaction, Glodzik said Jan. 25 he did not improperly
charge Panetta but refused to say anything else.
- Good thinking Leo, keep quiet until the Chief comes up with a good cover.
According
to our dimwitted Chief of Police, Leo would be correct here, as the Panetta’s apparently
were never identified as “Victims of Crime” by the Wilkes Barre Police
Department, so Leo saw no reason to cut these folks any slack!
On
Friday, Duh-Soye said the car was located by an officer with the Luzerne County
sheriff's office, who then asked Wilkes-Barre police to request a tow. Although
LAG Towing transported the car, Duh-Soye said the company's billing is not
subject to its city contract when it is towing cars for other agencies.
- OK now I’m really confused: Luzerne County sheriff's office, asked Wilkes-Barre police to request a tow???
Wouldn’t that make it a city tow, as WBPD requested the tow, of a stolen car, thus making it a "victim of crime" vehicle??? By Duh-Soye's own admission, and his hair splitting interpretation of the LAG contract, the Panetta’s should NOT have been charged, as WBPD requested the tow!!!
Stay tuned for more LAG
excuses, and Duh-Soye spin as it emerges from police headquarters.
Wake Up
Wilkes Barre
Source:
Your not grasping the word SHALL, Get with the program!!!!
ReplyDeleteOh I've got it. It's Duh-Soye that doesn't!!!! LOL
Delete