Friday, August 23, 2013


Congratulations, Falzone's Towing, you made my blog. This is not a good thing.
(continued below...)

WB TRUTH      Your source for the real truth… the raw truth.
No ass kissing here. I am beholden to nobody.    
the most followed BLOG IN NEPA.

Apparently Falzone’s Towing doesn’t make enough money from their towing empire. Additional revenue source? CRIME VICTIMS! On command from the King, Leighton now forces city crime victims to pay double jeopardy. They suffer the horror of experiencing whatever crime occurred (sideswiped, stolen car etc) as well as:

1)    Paying Falzones approximately $200 and a

2)    $45 dollar storage fee which starts on day zero (3 minutes = $45)

And Leighton expects these people to pay their property taxes on time. What a guy.

Based on many sources… from tow truck drivers to e mail tips… LEIGTON and FALZONE’S are a MATCH MADE IN HELL. I have too much information to share publicly… but let’s just say that Falzone’s may be just a slight upgrade from LAG

When LAG was fired (suspended)

Leighton handed the contract to Falzone’s. No city council vote.

Weeks have become months. No bids? Is this fair to Ayers Towing and others?

I understand King Baby (Leighton) may have “fiat” power in a crisis (say, a flood), but there is no emergency here.

Statements made by Falzone’s in relation to the W-B contract:

"Falzone tows cars for Hanover Township and also does not charge victims of a crime.
"The victim just has to show up with proof of ownership," Falzone said. "Once the vehicle is released pending processing, the vehicle is returned to the rightful owner"

I studied Business Law in graduate school. I do recall that such oral statements are binding, especially made in a public fashion addressing a specific facet of the contract. They are not dismissed as idle chatter.

So how is Leighton able to send a memo to the police that all victims are to be charged? Obviously he sent a memo as a change to what exists. Where is the council vote?

Silver Lining    Some council members whom I have butted heads with in the past are as upset as the rest of us. The other members I know have a concern for the people.

The question ultimately becomes… How can anybody be so insanely greedy that they have to add crime victims as a revenue source when they already loads of cash coming in – both legal and otherwise (can’t say more).

And how can Leighton’s character be so tragically flawed that he would try and privately and sneakily institute this wretched order. This man is spiritually and morally sick and is not fit to lead.

If council won’t vote to have him fired… can you at least try and get him sober?