I explained the voucher terms were Thursday or Friday lunch so even if we had been open it wasn't valid for a Monday, she continued to abuse me and I kept my cool and told her even though it had expired we would extend it so she could use it on a Thursday or Friday this week.
Today, this person came to our cafe and hostilely presented the voucher to me.
I explained we were happy to take it even though it had expired but that I felt she could have been less aggressive on the phone as I was actually not required to do so.
The family dined but the woman was hostile through the whole meal.
On approaching the bar, I was again abused.
The woman called me many things, one being "a whitey" which I was very offended by as I am a New Zealander (part Maori in fact) and very proud to be.
Other customers heard the whole dramatised show that she was obviously performing for their entertainment and she left ranting that the papers would be hearing from her, which is why I feel it is necessary to write to you promptly.
We own a reputable cafe where anyone of our many customers would, I'm sure, agree, we go the extra mile.
Even validating this expired voucher was not our obligation, but the way we do business.
It is so sad that people like this threaten to use the newspaper to hurt others and I felt you needed to hear our side of the story also.
Marianne Poszeluk, Manager/owner
JARKs Licensed Surfside Cafe
Waimarama
Disregard for rules
Why did my family and I apply to migrate here and put our lives on hold for more than 12 months while we waited for news. My mother already lived here and was a New Zealand citizen, yet 34 years ago, respectful of this country's sovereignty and laws, we made application in the correct way.
That's why the word "overstayer" makes me very angry.
What a nerve some people have, not only break the laws of this land but when caught out attempt to raise "public consciousness". If Mr and Mrs Kumar had consciousness, they would have not brought about this situation and gone home when their visas expired.
But no, they had access to medical services they were not entitled to, stayed and stayed, not just a year but seven years. And why did they have children when they knew that deportation was the price of overstaying, possibly because the very situation that has arisen would put them in with a chance of preying on Kiwi softies to overlook their apparent disregard for the rules.
Seems like it is a family trait as relatives, the Rams, are in exactly the same situation, funny that. How many more are there?
Should these families stay and become citizens, they will have to take an oath of allegiance, one part of which reads: "I will faithfully observe the laws of New Zealand." Well that would be a waste of time, there is already proof that the laws of the land mean diddly to these people.
As for the local MP, vicar and school principal supporting law breakers, I am horrified. Four adults have chosen a course of action, the result of which they were well aware of.
To try and shame the Prime Minister and all New Zealanders in front of the world as if they are being wrongfully punished is a darn nerve.
There are a lot of people in India and other countries who would love to live here. If overstayers use children as a way of forcing outcomes then it's way past time when all areas of society, including the medical fraternity need to inform authorities when those who should not be here come to light. How do people manage to stay here for seven years or more?
Where does their money come from, do they pay tax, if so how come?
If they are working, who employs them illegally? Funny the name Tuariki Delamere comes up, he was Immigration Minister once. Is he on an inside track when it comes to finding any grey areas in legislation?Jackie PattersonHavelock North
Listen to the peopleJust what will it take for the council to listen to its people? R Simmons writes in regarding the leasehold land as have I and many others. I, too, have emailed Barbara Arnott and Neil Taylor (NCC CEO) and spoken with Bryan Faulknor (NCC property manager), others have presented submissions to the annual draft plan to no avail.
I can't understand what the problem is here; the leasehold land portfolio has been underperforming for years.
The land could be sold and the money reinvested into a more lucrative venture at a much higher rate of return that benefits all of Napier citizens thus still "containing" the rates for all.
This is not rocket science, this is simple economics so why are the council being so bloody minded? Have a look around at the For lease signs abundant in Napier industrial areas. How can empty buildings be creating a reduction in rent for the Napier citizens? Remind me again what the mandate of a city council is?
Claudette O'Brien, Napier
