Tomjames Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 And how is it impractical to cut a woman's hair in a man's style? Do enlighten me. The owner can decide. I'd question whether the woman would have a leg to stand on in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Well...maybe. Would be risky demanding the patron do either (open up their wallet to show a licence or pose for a photo on the basis you thought they were lying about their identity). That's when you'd need your judgement about detaining them. Of course you could ask politely. The proprieter could use CCTV footage for the police if it turns out the details were false. But it might be a pain in the ass finding them. Anecdotally and in my experience people don't like a fuss. They pay for shoddy service but simply never return to the shop or whatever in question. Oh, and nowadays trash the place online when they get home. A court is going to require evidence, if they won't allow the shop owner to collect evidence that the service provided was up to standard and they won't prove their identity and they won't pay or allow the shop owner to put it right, the only course of action for the shop owner is let them off without paying or detain and call the police. Refusal to pay for a service that as already been provided is theft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 You have legal qualifications to support your analysis of the Theft Act, experience of incidents where the Theft Act is used for arrest, interview and charge and prosecution for such circumstances do you ? It is abundantly clear that you do not. Take it from one who does your wrong. Your view of what constitutes in law theft is wrong - has been pointed out to you many times is wrong but you seem to want to repeat yourself time and again as if that will in someway make your view correct, it is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milquetoast1 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 The owner can decide. I'd question whether the woman would have a leg to stand on in court. So in your world the owner can decide if it's 'impractical' to serve women, or gay people, or black people, or disabled people. What nonsense. Actually if a man didn't have a leg to stand on, then I could see how it might be impractical for the owner to serve him, if he couldn't get his wheelchair through the door. Even then, in the real world, the rules of trading stipulate that it is the owner that makes accommodation towards practicality, and away from discrimination. That's how the modern courts would view it, not the Victorian/Islamist way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 If he stated he didn't like her and was therefore refusing to serve her - without any mention of sex or race, job sorted. The price displayed is an offer for a service he doesn't have to provide it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 The owner can decide. I'd question whether the woman would have a leg to stand on in court. Actually it would be for the man to defend himself in court and proof that it was impractical. Impracticality is a defence against the charge of having breached the equalities act, that's easily proven, given what he said. (I was going to say "if he were smart, etc, etc", but clearly he isn't or he wouldn't have been rude to a what would have been a paying customer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milquetoast1 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 If he stated he didn't like her and was therefore refusing to serve her - without any mention of sex or race, job sorted. The price displayed is an offer for a service he doesn't have to provide it. It's not often you meet a bright misogynist though. If you are a misogynist wishing to use that method of evasion though, it can only work to a point. It has been shown in court that repeated refusal to serve gays was in fact because they refused to serve gays, and not for the fact that they didn't like them individually, and they all just happened to be gay. I once went in a barbers on Staniforth Road, and it was immediately obvious that the barber didn't like me because I appear to be white. He wasn't going to serve me because of that, but he wasn't stupid enough to say so. He merely made sure that his only customer was going to have the longest cut ever, until somebody else came in that he could serve before me. Once I twigged what was going on and left, and I could hear the laughter behind me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLAN Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Here's an interesting one: A woman who wanted a haircut at a men's barbers was denied service, (& treated pretty shabbily IMO) even though she had used the same barber shop before to get her hair cut! http://metro.co.uk/2016/05/15/woman-says-she-was-thrown-out-of-barber-shop-for-being-female-5883309/#ixzz4AKX87u6g Not sure why women's hair cuts are hugely more expensive than men's, but at the inflated prices that many women's salons charge I'm not surprised that they choose to go to barber shop instead. Probably if Mr Pizza hadn't have been so rude, this wouldn't have hit the headlines....Anyway, I'd thought he's have been glad of the custom. £56 a hour!! thats more than my Plumber charges.: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 You have experience of incidents where the Theft Act is used for arrest, interview and charge and prosecution for such circumstances do you ? Yes....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olive Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 The man's a fool. If all she wanted was a "man's" haircut, then what was the problem? A customer is a customer. If she wanted a perm with an ombre colour job, or something he wasn't set up to do, then she was in the wrong place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts