For THOMAS WAYNE, everyone read please...

1052 views
Skip to first unread message

Joseph Patrick Briceño

unread,
Jan 27, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/27/99
to
Mr. Thomas Wayne,
I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired. The cue
was an early one of yours that had warped in the forearm. I had talked
to you about it you said that you would repair it. I sent this cue to
you 2 YEARS ago and haven't seen it since. I have spent over $350 of my
money trying to call you to get my cue back. I did miraculously talk to
you once in the past two years and was told that you were going to send
my cue back to me in the following two weeks. My cue has not arrived
and I have serious doubts that it was ever put in the mail to be
returned to me. That was about a year ago that you had told me this. I
still continue to call you often to try and contact you to see if I can
get my cue returned. I find it to be very unprofessional to not return
people's personal property Mr. Wayne. I have talked with other cue
makers and they have urged me to file a grievance with the American Cue
Maker's Association. I have done so for your information. The formal
complaint against you has not returned my cue but hopefully will
persuade you to return this cue promptly.
I WANT MY CUE RETURNED TO ME NOW MR. WAYNE! You have my property
and I want it back. You have no right in the world to keep that pool
cue and I am out patience waiting for it. The pool cue is fully paid
for and is my property. If I do not seen this cue within the next 2
weeks I am seriously considering filing theft charges against you. I do
not mean to bad mouth you sir but I do consider you a thief at this
point. Like I said, you have my property and have no right to keep it
any longer. I am asking that you return my Thomas Wayne Cue to me
within 2 weeks. Please do not make me call you any more since I have
spent hundreds of dollars in long distance calls trying to contact you.
You do not answer my messages that I leave you on your answering machine
at your home. This is why I am posting this email to you in public. I
seriously suggest that you do answer this email or call me at home
seeing how you have my home phone number.

Thank you,
Mr. Bob Moore
Austin, Texas

twc

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:58 -0600, Joseph Patrick
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Brice=F1o?= <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:

>Mr. Thomas Wayne,
> I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired.

Actually, Mr. Moore, I have very carefully examined the cue you sent
me (as you are well aware), and have determined that it is NOT one
that I built. I am unsure of the origin of the cue, but I can tell
you that it is has been highly abused and had suffered great damage.
Even so, I have performed EXTENSIVE repairs on the cue, refinished it,
and it only awaits re-wrapping. However, as you already know, I
refuse to give you the "letter of authenticity" that you are
demanding, because I DID NOT BUILD THIS CUE. No amount of harrassing,
including this lame attempt to smear me in a public forum will change
my position on THAT issue.

>I did miraculously talk to you once {...}

But you seem to have conveniently forgotten the two dozen drunken
cursing phone calls you placed to my house - greatly upsetting my wife
- while I was out of town. And you fail to mention that THAT is the
reason I refuse to take your phone calls.

>The pool cue is fully paid for [...]
You have never paid me a dime for this cue, and you know full well
that I told you I would not be charging you for the repair work,
during the same conversation when I told I didn't believe I had built
this cue (which I think is REALLY what's bothering you).


> If I do not seen this cue within the next 2
>weeks I am seriously considering filing theft charges against you. I do
>not mean to bad mouth you sir but I do consider you a thief at this
>point. Like I said, you have my property and have no right to keep it
>any longer. I am asking that you return my Thomas Wayne Cue to me
>within 2 weeks.

Well, Bob, you DO mean to bad mouth me, that much is obvious. But
this cue is NOT a Thomas Wayne, and I do not intend to help you try to
pass it off as one. Furthermore, you've got me so pissed off now,
there's a very good chance I'm going to go out in the shop and bandsaw
this piece of shit cue into a couple dozen pieces so I can fit it in a
Fed-ex pouch. I'll decide when I get up in the morning.

Sleep tight, Bob.


Thomas Wayne

My cloak

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
Now that's a professional response. When you're dealing with the public in the
selling of merchandise, you have to take a lot of shit. The professional knows
this and is prepared to deal with the situations in a mannner where his/her
integrity remains intact. Learning ways to defuse flamable situations such as
this is a necessity in your line of work. Insulting an obviously upset
customer and/or his property only adds fuel to the fire. Arnot knows this.

Claudia

Marten Hoekstra

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
I think he already sold it... Two years is a very long time:
- for fixing a cue
- before beginning to get suspicous

Good luck Joseph.

--------
Joseph Patrick Briceño wrote in message <36AFE96A...@macol.net>...
>Mr. Thomas Wayne,


> I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired. The cue
>was an early one of yours that had warped in the forearm. I had talked
>to you about it you said that you would repair it. I sent this cue to
>you 2 YEARS ago and haven't seen it since.

cut

Ryan Shea

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
I still don't see the 2 year problem addressed, or the failure to return
phone calls. I have had similar problems with other cuemakers refusing to
return my calls. Why is this so common?

Ryan Shea

twc wrote in message <36afbf1c...@nntp.alaska.net>...


>On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:58 -0600, Joseph Patrick
>=?iso-8859-1?Q?Brice=F1o?= <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:
>

>>Mr. Thomas Wayne,
>> I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired.
>

Steven Hegg

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to

twc wrote in message <36afbf1c...@nntp.alaska.net>...

snippage

>Furthermore, you've got me so pissed off now,
>there's a very good chance I'm going to go out in the shop and bandsaw
>this piece of shit cue into a couple dozen pieces so I can fit it in a
>Fed-ex pouch. I'll decide when I get up in the morning.

>Thomas Wayne

Well, it's morning and we're all waiting. What did you do with your
customer's cue?

Phil Freedenberg

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
It's morning in America. The sun is rising into a cloudless sky. The smell
of new mown hay wafts across the fields. And in the distance, the sound of
a buzz saw is heard. Faintly at first, then louder, then an angry ripping
noice, as the Master Cuemaker makes mincemeat of his so-called customer's
cue. "Damn!" says the Cuemaker as the sparks flew, "I forgot about that
weight pin in there. Guess it's time for a new blade now for sure."
--
O
/\
-\--\---o Phil Freedenberg

Steven Hegg <steve...@right.com> wrote in article
<78qa9l$7s4$1...@news0-alterdial.uu.net>...

Joseph Patrick Briceño

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
Mr. Wayne,
You have admitted to me and the public, great witnesses, that you DO
have my cue. You also admit to not recognizing or replying to messages
that I do send you via telephone. This is a great assett to me legally
speaking.
When I originally talked with you, a great 2 years ago, you told me
that YOU DID think it was a Thomas Wayne cue and that is why you agreed to
work on the cue. This is the first that I have heard of you not thinking
it is a Thomas Wayne Cue. The only reason I wanted a letter of
authenticity is because with your mouth it was said originally that you
thought it was a cue that you had made. I am not trying to pass this cue
off as a Thomas Wayne sir. I am simply going on what you told me
originally.
I find it hard to believe that you think this is not a Thomas Wayne
cue. THE CUE THAT I SENT YOU HAD YOUR SIGNATURE ON IT MR. WAYNE!! How
could you not think that this is a cue that you made?! Try and explain
that one to me and the public. Sir, you can forget the letter of
authenticity, I just want my cue back.
Waiting for two years on any piece of merchandise or property is WAY
too long Mr. Wayne. For me to call you and ask for my pool cue, regardless
of what condition I am in, is totally acceptable to me and most others. I
have run out of patience with you Mr. Wayne. Let me say this again. You

have my property and I want it back. You have no right in the world to
hold this cue nor do you have any right to try and justify your reasons for
holding onto this cue for so long. In my opinion there are no reasons good
enough for you taking this long on the cue.

You have a nice day Mr. Wayne,


Mr. Bob Moore
Austin, Texas


Joseph Patrick Briceño wrote:

> Mr. Thomas Wayne,


> I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired. The cue
> was an early one of yours that had warped in the forearm. I had talked
> to you about it you said that you would repair it. I sent this cue to

> you 2 YEARS ago and haven't seen it since. I have spent over $350 of my
> money trying to call you to get my cue back. I did miraculously talk to
> you once in the past two years and was told that you were going to send
> my cue back to me in the following two weeks. My cue has not arrived
> and I have serious doubts that it was ever put in the mail to be
> returned to me. That was about a year ago that you had told me this. I
> still continue to call you often to try and contact you to see if I can
> get my cue returned. I find it to be very unprofessional to not return
> people's personal property Mr. Wayne. I have talked with other cue
> makers and they have urged me to file a grievance with the American Cue
> Maker's Association. I have done so for your information. The formal
> complaint against you has not returned my cue but hopefully will
> persuade you to return this cue promptly.
> I WANT MY CUE RETURNED TO ME NOW MR. WAYNE! You have my property
> and I want it back. You have no right in the world to keep that pool

> cue and I am out patience waiting for it. The pool cue is fully paid
> for and is my property. If I do not seen this cue within the next 2


> weeks I am seriously considering filing theft charges against you. I do
> not mean to bad mouth you sir but I do consider you a thief at this
> point. Like I said, you have my property and have no right to keep it
> any longer. I am asking that you return my Thomas Wayne Cue to me

> within 2 weeks. Please do not make me call you any more since I have
> spent hundreds of dollars in long distance calls trying to contact you.
> You do not answer my messages that I leave you on your answering machine

> at your home. This is why I am posting this email to you in public. I

POOLSHOTER

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
>I still don't see the 2 year problem addressed, or the failure to return
>phone calls. I have had similar problems with other cuemakers refusing to
>return my calls. Why is this so common?

Could it be that maybe he wasn't really fired up to fix a cue that he didn't
make and that the customer was demanding that he give him a certificate of
authenticity for it? And maybe the dozen drunken phone calls maybe persuaded
him to not want to talk to the guy.

None of my business………but just a theory.


Steven Hegg

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to

Phil Freedenberg wrote in message <01be4aef$7d14b1e0$855120cf@Phil>...

>And in the distance, the sound of
>a buzz saw is heard. Faintly at first, then louder, then an angry ripping
>noice, as the Master Cuemaker makes mincemeat of his so-called customer's
>cue. "Damn!" says the Cuemaker as the sparks flew, "I forgot about that
>weight pin in there. Guess it's time for a new blade now for sure."

Quite possibly so. But I wonder what the marketing and customer service
departments had to say about it.


RACKS BOSS

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
Why would Mr. Wayne put so much work into a cue that isn't his, and not charge
for the work. For better customer relations? Not from what I've read in this
thread . . .

Becky

CSmith4738

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
> I have had similar problems with other cuemakers refusing to
>return my calls. Why is this so common?
>

Clark is out of the office right now, but if you like, I will take your name
and number and ....

Secretary
Clark Custom Cues
Tacoma, WA

CSmith4738

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to

I think he is just living up to his assertion as any honorable man would do.

Clark Smith

CSmith4738

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
>I think he already sold it... Two years is a very long time:
>- for fixing a cue
>- before beginning to get suspicous
>

I HIGHLY DOUBT THOMAS HAS DONE WHAT YOU THINK. I think he DESERVES a little
more credit than that. IMNSHTGO.

CSmith4738

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
> You have admitted to me and the public, great witnesses, that you DO
>have my cue.
You also admit to not recognizing or replying to messages
>that I do send you via telephone. This is a great assett to me legally
>speaking.

A $5 legal advice book purchased at your local swap meet would better serve
your needs than your current source.

Do you actually think this is the forum to persue torts of outrageousness? Do
you think this forum was designed for people *to get even* ? Just what are you
trying to accomplish?

Just Curious in Tacoma.

John Walkup

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
POOLSHOTER wrote:
>
> >I still don't see the 2 year problem addressed, or the failure to return
> >phone calls. I have had similar problems with other cuemakers refusing to

> >return my calls. Why is this so common?
>
> Could it be that maybe he wasn't really fired up to fix a cue that he didn't
> make and that the customer was demanding that he give him a certificate of
> authenticity for it? And maybe the dozen drunken phone calls maybe persuaded
> him to not want to talk to the guy.

So where is the pool cue?


--
John Walkup
The Cue Gallery (http://www.cuegallery.com)

Authorized Dealer:

Verl Horn Custom Cues Russ Espiritu Custom Cues

John Walkup

unread,
Jan 28, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/28/99
to
gide...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> Clearly there is a lot of history to this dispute that we are not getting.
> That being said, if Thomas Wayne DID offer to fix a badly damaged cue that he
> DIDN't make, for free, I am not sure that the customer can complain that he
> didn't do it quickly.

Are you kidding me? Two years?

IMHO, if the customer didn't think it was getting done
> fast enough, his sole remedy is to ask that it be fixed by a certain date, and
> if not, returned in its present state.

According to the caller he couldn't get through to Mr. Wayne. If that
is
true, then it is hard to ask for a return of the cue.

gide...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
Clearly there is a lot of history to this dispute that we are not getting.
That being said, if Thomas Wayne DID offer to fix a badly damaged cue that he
DIDN't make, for free, I am not sure that the customer can complain that he
didn't do it quickly. IMHO, if the customer didn't think it was getting done

fast enough, his sole remedy is to ask that it be fixed by a certain date, and
if not, returned in its present state. Secondly, if in fact the customer did
make a dozen drunking calls to Mr. Wayne's wife, I see nothing wrong with
refusing to discuss the matter by phone, assuming that he made that clear and
was willing to respond by other means (i.e. fax, e-mail, mail).

Gideon

In article <78q01l$g...@portal.gmu.edu>,


"Ryan Shea" <rs...@osf1.gmu.edu> wrote:
> I still don't see the 2 year problem addressed, or the failure to return
> phone calls. I have had similar problems with other cuemakers refusing to
> return my calls. Why is this so common?
>

> Ryan Shea

> twc wrote in message <36afbf1c...@nntp.alaska.net>...

> >On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:58 -0600, Joseph Patrick

> >=?iso-8859-1?Q?Brice=F1o?= <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Mr. Thomas Wayne,
> >> I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired.
> >

> >Actually, Mr. Moore, I have very carefully examined the cue you sent
> >me (as you are well aware), and have determined that it is NOT one
> >that I built. I am unsure of the origin of the cue, but I can tell
> >you that it is has been highly abused and had suffered great damage.
> >Even so, I have performed EXTENSIVE repairs on the cue, refinished it,
> >and it only awaits re-wrapping. However, as you already know, I
> >refuse to give you the "letter of authenticity" that you are
> >demanding, because I DID NOT BUILD THIS CUE. No amount of harrassing,
> >including this lame attempt to smear me in a public forum will change
> >my position on THAT issue.
> >
> >>I did miraculously talk to you once {...}
> >
> >But you seem to have conveniently forgotten the two dozen drunken
> >cursing phone calls you placed to my house - greatly upsetting my wife
> >- while I was out of town. And you fail to mention that THAT is the
> >reason I refuse to take your phone calls.
> >
> >>The pool cue is fully paid for [...]
> >You have never paid me a dime for this cue, and you know full well
> >that I told you I would not be charging you for the repair work,
> >during the same conversation when I told I didn't believe I had built
> >this cue (which I think is REALLY what's bothering you).
> >
> >

> >> If I do not seen this cue within the next 2
> >>weeks I am seriously considering filing theft charges against you. I do
> >>not mean to bad mouth you sir but I do consider you a thief at this
> >>point. Like I said, you have my property and have no right to keep it
> >>any longer. I am asking that you return my Thomas Wayne Cue to me
> >>within 2 weeks.
> >

> >Well, Bob, you DO mean to bad mouth me, that much is obvious. But
> >this cue is NOT a Thomas Wayne, and I do not intend to help you try to

> >pass it off as one. Furthermore, you've got me so pissed off now,


> >there's a very good chance I'm going to go out in the shop and bandsaw
> >this piece of shit cue into a couple dozen pieces so I can fit it in a
> >Fed-ex pouch. I'll decide when I get up in the morning.
> >

> >Sleep tight, Bob.
> >
> >
> >Thomas Wayne
>
>


-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Vaughn Beal

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
Thomas,
You received this cue after an offer to fix it for free, under alleged
fraudulent circumstance. I don't feel that any potential customers
would have held anything against you for promptly returning it FOB
with a note stating; " I did not build this cue, therefor I can not stand
behind it!" I feel that any work you have done to remedy this sorry
piece of lumber is an act of charity. I would send it back now in it's
current state, wrap or no wrap and be done with the matter. As far
as the band saw goes I think this could be construed as wanton
disregard of property. I wonder if the good Samaritan act would
prevail if you failed in your honest attempt to help, and an unforeseen
accident occurred. Of course this could be a bad idea also now that
so many witnesses have read this. Send it back and put the nightmare
behind you.
>

Vaughn

SirG LLC

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
>>I still don't see the 2 year problem addressed, or the failure to return
>>phone calls. I have had similar problems with other cuemakers refusing to
>>return my calls. Why is this so common?
>
>Could it be that maybe he wasn't really fired up to fix a cue that he didn't
>make and that the customer was demanding that he give him a certificate of
>authenticity for it? And maybe the dozen drunken phone calls maybe persuaded
>him to not want to talk to the guy.
>
>None of my business………but just a theory.
>
>

Maybe this customer is a bit of a pain in the neck, but why would TCW offer to
repair a cue for free when it isn't even his? I doubt he's that generous. I
mean, if it's not your cue, then of course you're not going to give anyone a
certificate of authenticity for it. But why offer to repair it free of
charge? What's the rationale?

And what's the deal with holding onto someone else's cue for over 2 years? I
own a high priced custom cue and if I couldn't get it back from a cuemaker I
trusted to repair it I'd be pretty bent out of shape too! If this customer is
such a pain, dump the cue and have nothing more to do with the whole situation.
Don't hang on to the piece of garbage and trade insults with this customer
on-line to inflame him further.

From what I've seen so far (not as much as others in this group, admittedly),
TCW isn't much of a professional (as far as his conduct goes) --regardless of
how nice his cues are.

IMHO...

Marshall

CK

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to

>[snipped]


>But you seem to have conveniently forgotten the two dozen drunken
>cursing phone calls you placed to my house - greatly upsetting my wife
>- while I was out of town.

I might have been tempted to execute the 'bandsaw option'.
CK

Kenneth Koo

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
From reading between the lines, I gather Mr. Joseph Patrick is not the first
owner of the cue.

All points I will say assume the above assumption (so don't fry me too much
for my comments below).

1) Given there is no business relationship of any kind between Mr. Patrick &
Mr. Wayne, I do not see why Mr. Wayne must issue a certifcate of authenticity.
Mr. Patrick can always try to get a statement from someone familiar with Mr.
Wayne's work. This works for paintings by Picaso. :)

2) Mr. Wayne must assume the motivation for the certificate is for financial
gain and as an artist may resent his work being exploited. (especially
considering point #3 & #4)

3) If Mr. Patrick is not the first owner and doesn't know or can prove the
path the cue took before he received it, then Mr. Wayne may correctly assume
that, at some point in time one of the following must of happened

- ended up in a pawn shop
- changed hands as a result of a lost bet or to pay off a debt
- thrown in the garbage or park as a result of the owner missing a shot and
losing a lot of money

If I was a cue maker of Mr. Wayne's calibre (or any self respecting cue
maker), I would be pissed. The cue was crafted with loving care and attention
to detail so the original owner of it would have a life time of enjoyment
playing with it and pride of ownership. (For rough stuff, bartering, go buy a
mass produced cue.)

4) As an artist Mr. Wayne must surely of felt hurt and rage seeing such a nice
cue abused in such a manner, whether it was a Wayne cue or not. Why would Mr.
Wayne provide a certificate or work expediently on a cue that has been so
badly abused. (And for no compensation!)

5) Even in my short time in pool, I've seen some very disrepectful acts some
pool player engage in. I assume most of us has seen these acts. Imagine Mr.
Wayne's reaction as he holds this abused cue in his hands and these acts run
through his mind.

6) If Mr. Wayne has indeed done all the things he said, in repairing the cue,
without charging for it, he is being very generous. Refinishing a butt,
rewrap, new ferrule, tip, refinish a shaft would cost $300 - $500. Remember,
the cue will be perfectly refinished before Mr. Wayne would send it back.
There is nothing less than 100% perfection from Mr. Wayne.

7) Have we all forgotten that Mr. Wayne over the past two years has been busy
creating masterpieces competing with his peers at the "Gallery of American Cue
Art". Besides, these cues, he also has to make and sell cues to feed his
family.

I do sympathize with Mr. Joseph Patrick, but assuming that this work was being
done free, Mr. Joseph Patrick does have to wait (it is a frustrating wait).
Mr. Wayne, if he did do what he said, would not have been able to return the
cue to Joseph Patrick once he started repairing it. (As a self respecting
craftsman, he could not leave a job half done.)

I don't think Mr. Joseph Patrick's cue is in a million pieces, but I do think
its completion will be furthered delayed. Mr. Wayne will eventually return
it.

I've noticed that most of the cue makers mentioned in RSB are honest and
hardworking individuals. They may be eccentric, hot tempered, have egos, and
have no concept of time - but what can we do ? They are artistists. They are
not employees of Fortune 500 companies who can be managed and abused to get an
end result.

Regards ... Kenneth K.


Jim Barr

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to

CSmith4738 <csmit...@aol.com> wrote in article

>
> Do you actually think this is the forum to persue torts of
outrageousness? Do
> you think this forum was designed for people *to get even* ? Just what
are you
> trying to accomplish?
>
> Just Curious in Tacoma.
>

I'm not sure, but I think he's trying to accomplish getting his cue back.
Although I could be mistaken. :-)

Jim Barr

twc

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 13:56:34 -0600, Joseph Patrick
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Brice=F1o?= <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:

>[...]


> When I originally talked with you, a great 2 years ago, you told me
>that YOU DID think it was a Thomas Wayne cue and that is why you agreed to
>work on the cue.

Absolutely not true. I told you IF I made it, it would have been a
long time ago, and that I would have to examine it more closely before
I could tell you for sure.

> This is the first that I have heard of you not thinking
>it is a Thomas Wayne Cue.

Again, this is not true; I've told you on SEVERAL occasions that I had
determined it was not one of mine, and you KNOW it , Bob.


> The only reason I wanted a letter of
>authenticity is because with your mouth it was said originally that you
>thought it was a cue that you had made. I am not trying to pass this cue
>off as a Thomas Wayne sir. I am simply going on what you told me
>originally.

No. Bob, you want a letter of authenticity so you can sell it for many
times what you paid or traded for it; just like your batch of "newly
discovered, like-new Fellini cases. You've told me all about that.
You sent it to me with the claim that it was one of mine, not the
other way around. The very best I ever offered was that it MIGHT be
one of mine, but I wouldn't know until I could examine it closely. I
have done so and, as you are well aware, it's not.


> I find it hard to believe that you think this is not a Thomas Wayne
>cue. THE CUE THAT I SENT YOU HAD YOUR SIGNATURE ON IT MR. WAYNE!!

That is absolutely false. Now you're just plain lying, Bob. This cue
did NOT have my signature on it when I received it from you; It does
not my signature on it now, and - in fact - It NEVER had my signature,
since I did not make this cue.

Bob, this is the second cue you've sent me. The first one actually
WAS one of mine. As you are well aware, I did a great deal of
refurbishing work on the cue and charged you a VERY minimal amount for
the work. You told me how broke you were, and I fell for your act and
took pity on you. You then sent me THIS cue, saying it was one of my
very early ones, and asked if I could authenticate it and repair it.
I told you at that time that I was VERY busy and really didn't have
room in my schedule to work on it. You wanted to send it anyway, and
you told me SEVERAL times that there was no hurry, and to take my
time. Right.

When I first got the cue, I only bothered to take a brief glance at
it. The stainless joint threads and pilot hole were 'buggered' up,
the handle section had a warp, and the finish was in horrible
condition. Also, the shafts were not my taper OR joint collar style,
they had some strange looking extra long ferrules, and the butt bumper
was some kind I had never seen before. I told you all of this, and
you insisted that it was one of my "early" cues. I said I didn't
think it was, but if so, then someoine had done a LOT of modifications
on it. Again, I said I couldn't delve into it further for quite some
time, and you said that was fine.

As I have worked on the cue over time, I've kept you apprised of the
various things I've done to the cue. I rebuilt the handle section,
replaced the damaged joint with one of mine, and refitted the shafts
(including their funky ferrules) with joint collars to match the new
butt joint. I've refinished the butt and will be replacing the linen
wrap within the next few days. Each of these repairs was done while
I was building other cues, to take advantage of the setups as they
occured. And, because I (foolishly) felt sorry for your ongoing
sob-story about believing you had a real Thomas Wayne, I told you I
wouldn't charge you for the fix-up and face-lift. Even though you are
now going to great lengths to try to bad-mouth me here, I'll honor
that promise - made in a moment of sucker's weakness. But I have
determined conclusively that this was NOT a cue that I built, and I've
repeatedly told you so. You've tried every way you can think to
convince or coerce me into saying it is, but it's not. You even went
so far as to suggest that, since I had done so much work on the cue
that it "might as well" be a Thomas Wayne. Well it's not, and I'm not
giving you any letter that says it is, or that I've completely rebuilt
it, so it 'almost is', or, or, or... any of the other wild ideas
you've suggested.

Ya know Bob, you came DAMN close yesterday to getting a bag of sawdust
in the mail, but that would just be sinking down to your level.
You'll have this cue back very soon, and until then you can do all the
lyin' and cryin' you want to. I really don't care.

But I'll tell you what I AM going to do. Ya see, Bob, I get lots of
calls from people when they buy one of my cues from some other private
party. They always want to know when I built it, who owned it first
and so on. So, if I EVER find out that you have sold THIS cue,
misrepresenting it as a Thomas Wayne, I'm going to do whatever I can
to help your latest victim pursue criminal fraud charges against you.
THAT'S a promise, Bob.


Thomas Wayne

twc

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
On 28 Jan 1999 18:45:09 GMT, "Phil Freedenberg" <pfre...@fedeng.com>
wrote:

>It's morning in America. The sun is rising into a cloudless sky. The smell

>of new mown hay wafts across the fields. And in the distance, the sound of


>a buzz saw is heard. Faintly at first, then louder, then an angry ripping
>noice, as the Master Cuemaker makes mincemeat of his so-called customer's
>cue. "Damn!" says the Cuemaker as the sparks flew, "I forgot about that
>weight pin in there. Guess it's time for a new blade now for sure."

Carbide-tipped blade in the bandsaw. Spendy, but I've gone through a
few splice bolts before, and this blade is damn hard to ruin.


TW

Michael Page

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
In article <78rumn$2jv$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Vaughn Beal <qn...@aol.com> wrote:

> Thomas,

-snip- Send it back and put the nightmare
> behind you.
> >

Yeah, then the cue would be Patrick's nightmare.


>
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

--
mike page <--not ready to call the guy a saint, even in a joke.
fargo

Mario Blansjaar

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
IMO
I think this whole story is none of our busines...

Regards,
Mario

DLADAMS49

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to

dear sir

2 years is NOT a long time.....

in april of 93 i ordered 3 pretty Southwest's and just last month i got

the first one.. over 5 and 1/2 years later.. the original agreement

was about 3 years. but there were many problems including the loss of Jerry..

no hard feelings on my part.. and i am delighted with the end product..

i have ordered cues from a living legend ( my term ) and paid a lot

of money up front. His delivery is also long lead time and i am delighted

for the opportunity to even own one of his works.

if i hard large amounts of cash available i would order a pretty cue from

the top 20 or 30 living cuemakers and would think it a wise investment..

and if i was the only one who thought it was a good deal - that is enuff..

so busy people take time.. sometimes a long time.

and if TW is fixing a cue that is not even his work, you have a bargain.

ESPECIALLY if it was repaired for free.!!!!


imho david in middle ga
david l adams

Fred Agnir

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 05:09:41 GMT ke...@numbers-group.com (Kenneth Koo)
wrote:

>
> I do sympathize with Mr. Joseph Patrick, ..

>...Mr. Joseph Patrick does have to wait ...
> return the
> cue to Joseph Patrick ...

> I don't think Mr. Joseph Patrick's cue is in a million pieces, but

Am I just dense, or did I dream that Joseph Patrick was *not* the
owner. It was Bob Moore from Austin, TX (posted via JP).

Confused in Templeton,

Fred Agnir

--
Surf Usenet at home, on the road, and by email -- always at Talkway.
http://www.talkway.com

gide...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
In article <36B13B...@telepath.com>,
cue...@telepath.com wrote:

> gide...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> IMHO, if the customer didn't think it was getting done
> > fast enough, his sole remedy is to ask that it be fixed by a certain date,
and
> > if not, returned in its present state.
>
> According to the caller he couldn't get through to Mr. Wayne. If that
> is
> true, then it is hard to ask for a return of the cue.

He can't write?

Gideon

Vaughn Beal

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to

> Am I just dense, or did I dream that Joseph Patrick was *not* the
> owner. It was Bob Moore from Austin, TX (posted via JP).
>
> Confused in Templeton,
>
> Fred Agnir
>

That was what I thought also, Fred.
I also read into it that Thomas promised free repair before
finding out it was not a cue of his creation. This may have
been an error on my part, if so that would make a big
difference.

Vaughn

Bob Johnson

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
OK, I missed something here. When Mr. Wayne received the cue, and
determined it wasn't one of his, why did he feel obligated to complete the
work they had discussed? Why not just return the cue?
I would think he would have no obligation here until he started the work,
and I would think he could determine it wasn't one of his cues without doing
anything to it other than inspecting it. Even if it were a TWC, from the
description of its' condition, why would he refinish for nothing anyway? I
don't get it.

--
Bob Johnson, Denver, Co.
Home of the World Champion Broncos!
bo...@cris.com
Vaughn Beal wrote in message <78sq4b$qbf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...

Joseph Patrick Briceño

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
Rodney,
This is the 2nd email that I sent to Mr. Wayne. The reply to his reply,
get it?? Probably so...

Pat

Joseph Patrick Briceño wrote:

> Mr. Wayne,


> You have admitted to me and the public, great witnesses, that you DO
> have my cue. You also admit to not recognizing or replying to messages
> that I do send you via telephone. This is a great assett to me legally
> speaking.

> When I originally talked with you, a great 2 years ago, you told me
> that YOU DID think it was a Thomas Wayne cue and that is why you agreed to

> work on the cue. This is the first that I have heard of you not thinking
> it is a Thomas Wayne Cue. The only reason I wanted a letter of


> authenticity is because with your mouth it was said originally that you
> thought it was a cue that you had made. I am not trying to pass this cue
> off as a Thomas Wayne sir. I am simply going on what you told me
> originally.

> I find it hard to believe that you think this is not a Thomas Wayne

> cue. THE CUE THAT I SENT YOU HAD YOUR SIGNATURE ON IT MR. WAYNE!! How
> could you not think that this is a cue that you made?! Try and explain
> that one to me and the public. Sir, you can forget the letter of
> authenticity, I just want my cue back.
> Waiting for two years on any piece of merchandise or property is WAY
> too long Mr. Wayne. For me to call you and ask for my pool cue, regardless
> of what condition I am in, is totally acceptable to me and most others. I
> have run out of patience with you Mr. Wayne. Let me say this again. You
> have my property and I want it back. You have no right in the world to
> hold this cue nor do you have any right to try and justify your reasons for
> holding onto this cue for so long. In my opinion there are no reasons good
> enough for you taking this long on the cue.
>
> You have a nice day Mr. Wayne,
> Mr. Bob Moore
> Austin, Texas
>

> Joseph Patrick Briceño wrote:
>
> > Mr. Thomas Wayne,

> > I sent a $2000 Thomas Wayne Cue back to you to be repaired. The cue
> > was an early one of yours that had warped in the forearm. I had talked
> > to you about it you said that you would repair it. I sent this cue to
> > you 2 YEARS ago and haven't seen it since. I have spent over $350 of my
> > money trying to call you to get my cue back. I did miraculously talk to
> > you once in the past two years and was told that you were going to send
> > my cue back to me in the following two weeks. My cue has not arrived
> > and I have serious doubts that it was ever put in the mail to be
> > returned to me. That was about a year ago that you had told me this. I
> > still continue to call you often to try and contact you to see if I can
> > get my cue returned. I find it to be very unprofessional to not return
> > people's personal property Mr. Wayne. I have talked with other cue
> > makers and they have urged me to file a grievance with the American Cue
> > Maker's Association. I have done so for your information. The formal
> > complaint against you has not returned my cue but hopefully will
> > persuade you to return this cue promptly.
> > I WANT MY CUE RETURNED TO ME NOW MR. WAYNE! You have my property
> > and I want it back. You have no right in the world to keep that pool

> > cue and I am out patience waiting for it. The pool cue is fully paid
> > for and is my property. If I do not seen this cue within the next 2


> > weeks I am seriously considering filing theft charges against you. I do
> > not mean to bad mouth you sir but I do consider you a thief at this
> > point. Like I said, you have my property and have no right to keep it
> > any longer. I am asking that you return my Thomas Wayne Cue to me

John Walkup

unread,
Jan 29, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/29/99
to
The question seems pretty clear: Is the customer going to get
his cue back?

Kenneth Koo

unread,
Jan 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/30/99
to
In article <Fujs2.4862$QU6.49...@c01read10.service.talkway.com>, "Fred Agnir" <fred....@nonypro.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 05:09:41 GMT ke...@numbers-group.com (Kenneth Koo)
>wrote:
>
>>
>> I do sympathize with Mr. Joseph Patrick, ..
>
>>...Mr. Joseph Patrick does have to wait ...
>> return the
>> cue to Joseph Patrick ...
>
>> I don't think Mr. Joseph Patrick's cue is in a million pieces, but
>
>Am I just dense, or did I dream that Joseph Patrick was *not* the
>owner. It was Bob Moore from Austin, TX (posted via JP).
>
>Confused in Templeton,
>
>Fred Agnir
>

Err..seems like composing a note at midnight has its drawbacks.

I thought Mr. Joseph Patrick was the originator of the complaint to Mr. Wayne.
But you are correct it was signed Bob Moore at the bottom.

This is why I am not a lawyer :)

Regards ... Kenneth K.

MULLY

unread,
Jan 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/30/99
to
"Damn!" says the Cuemaker as the sparks flew, "I forgot about that
>>weight pin in there. Guess it's time for a new blade now for sure."


And tack the price of a new blade on to the bill. hehe!!
MULLY

twc

unread,
Jan 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/30/99
to
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 22:41:50 -0600, John Walkup <cue...@telepath.com>
wrote:

>The question seems pretty clear: Is the customer going to get
>his cue back?
>

John;

The question seems pretty clearly answered. Have you bothered to even
READ my response(s)? Or has the idea of stirring the shitpot got you
too excited?

Thomas Wayne

twc

unread,
Jan 30, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/30/99
to
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999 01:41:52 +0900, "MULLY" <lis...@thn.ne.jp> wrote:


>I was hoping for the bag of sawdust to get sent. hehe!!


Well, I just knew that wouldn't be right. But my wife talked me out
of it anyway.

TW

MULLY

unread,
Jan 31, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/31/99
to
I can see both sides of this issue. The guy is pissed (sorry, upset) because
TW kept his cue for so long. And rightfully so. But TW is a busy man and I'm
sure repairing a cue that he didn't make, and repairing it for free mind
you, does not get top priority over his other work. Rightfully so again.
MULLY

Jimbo Ct

unread,
Jan 31, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/31/99
to
What kind of a sissy lets his wife talk him out of anything???????


JIM <----Knows TW's wife can Kick his ass.

TW Said>But my wife talked me out<BR>
>of it anyway.<BR>

DLADAMS49

unread,
Jan 31, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/31/99
to

i wish tw had sent 2 pkgs..

1 next day air of sawdust and misc parts partially ground up and destroyed

2 nd day air with the repaired cue

i would have liked to have seen the face at the other end.

DRWilliams

unread,
Feb 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/1/99
to
Joseph Patrick Briceño <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:
>> Mr. Bob Moore
>> Austin, Texas

Does anyone else think it's odd that this guy in Austin, TX, has an
ISP (macol.net) that's located in Madison, AL (according to INTERNIC)?

DRWilliams

Deno J. Andrews

unread,
Feb 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/1/99
to
DRWilliams wrote:
> Does anyone else think it's odd that this guy in Austin, TX, has an
> ISP (macol.net) that's located in Madison, AL (according to INTERNIC)?

Ilive in Chicago, and my ISP is in California somewhere.
Deno J. Andrews

Ron Hudson

unread,
Feb 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/1/99
to
On Mon, 01 Feb 1999 14:06:12 GMT, rx4...@access.mountain.net (DRWilliams) wrote:

>Joseph Patrick Briceño <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:
>>> Mr. Bob Moore
>>> Austin, Texas
>

>Does anyone else think it's odd that this guy in Austin, TX, has an
>ISP (macol.net) that's located in Madison, AL (according to INTERNIC)?
>

> DRWilliams

Do you also think it odd that all AOL subscribers don't actually live in Vienna,
VA?

Ron
-----------------------------------------------------------
What do you want in a pool league?
Take the Survey
http://www.localpool.com
-----------------------------------------------------------

John Walkup

unread,
Feb 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/2/99
to
DRWilliams wrote:
>
> Joseph Patrick Briceño <jpbr...@macol.net> wrote:
> >> Mr. Bob Moore
> >> Austin, Texas
>
> Does anyone else think it's odd that this guy in Austin, TX, has an
> ISP (macol.net) that's located in Madison, AL (according to INTERNIC)?
>
> DRWilliams

I smell an ad hominem attack brewing. :)

Ron Hudson

unread,
Feb 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/2/99
to
On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 07:01:37 -0600, John Walkup <cue...@telepath.com> wrote:

>I smell an ad hominem attack brewing. :)

I had some hominy once. Tasted a lot like corn.

ron

Tom Bellhouse

unread,
Feb 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/2/99
to
Ad hominem? We don't need no steenkin' ads on this newsgroup.

Tom
---------------

Robert Shaffer

unread,
Feb 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM2/3/99