• Letter from Fed's and "Grand Jury Investigation": Litigation Video Update #13, Part 15
• Outrageous Conduct Exhibited by Park West Attorneys: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 14
• Park West enters into a game of "Dirty Pool": Litigation Video Update #13, Part 13
• Park West files Another Motion to Silence Fine Art Registry: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 12
• Fine Art Registry responds to Limine 12, Part 2: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 11
• Fine Art Registry responds to Limine 12: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 10
• Peeling the Onion: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 9
• It's An Eye Opener: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 8
• Oh the Drama: Litigation Video Update #13, Part 7
• Park West's Motion in Limine 11-17: Video Update #13, Part 6

FAR Newsletter Sign-Up

PARK WEST GALLERY LIES:

Dispelling the Myths and Fabrications Created by the Park West Propaganda Machine

Dispelling the Myths and Fabrications Created by the Wild Imagination of the Park West Gallery Propaganda Machine

There seems to be no end to the machinations of Albert Scaglione, Park West Gallery and its hired public relations spin doctors.

And while it is not unusual to see the truth twisted and bruised in the unscrupulous world of propaganda, it is dangerous indeed to rape and pervert the facts to the degree exercised by Park West Gallery and its henchpeople.

Park West Gallery has been unused to continued criticism. In the case of RipOff Report, for example, a source inside Park West informed us that they simply bought them off. Indeed, Fine Art Registry® received two phone calls from Al Molina, a Park West executive, seeking a meeting with Fine Art Registry with the stated purpose of "discussing" the issues and working out what Fine Art Registry wanted, with a view, presumably, to having the thorn in their side go away quietly so that they could continue with their business practices, practices which Fine Art Registry has had the temerity to question, and to question publicly and persistently.

Fearing at worst for her life, and at best for an attempt to be bought off in the same way that RipoffReport had been bought off, Fine Art Registry declined the invitation, making it clear that Fine Art Registry was not willing to be bullied, threatened or bought into silence.

Perhaps unable to comprehend that anyone's motivation could be anything other than greed, false enrichment or fear and self-interest, Park West Gallery has had to invent a motive for Fine Art Registry continuing to report accurately the truth about the gallery’s practices as reported by the growing number of dissatisfied customers who have asked for help, and to provide advocacy in dealing with any fraudulent practices in the art world brought to its attention.

In this case, the story invented by Park West Gallery and repeated by its owner, Albert Scaglione to the media, and by Park West customer services representatives to its customers, is that Fine Art Registry approached Park West with a business proposal and that this proposal was rejected by Park West Gallery and that ever since this fictitious proposal, Fine Art Registry has been engaged in a smear campaign, presumably out of revenge or spite or, in an attempt (like RipoffReport's) to blackmail Park West.

The allegation by Park West has existed in various forms for some time but a plain statement was made of it recently in a sponsored Google listing which illegally uses a Fine Art Registry trademark and domain name (FineArtAdvocacy) to deliberately mislead and confuse the public. In the web page which this paid ad leads to, Park West states the following:

BUT PARK WEST GALLERY HAS NEVER PRODUCED ANY EVIDENCE OF SUCH A PROPOSAL. It has merely mouthed the fiction, not backed up by any evidence. Why? Because there never was any such proposal. FINE ART REGISTRY HAS NEVER APPROACHED PARK WEST WITH ANY KIND OF BUSINESS PROPOSAL. There is no basis whatsoever for the allegation. And while Park West can get away with uttering the lie to their own staff, to the media, in their own generated propaganda and in conversations with their dissatisfied customers, they have no evidence of any sort to produce in a court of law and their lie will recoil heavily as it is defamation.

Additional lies proliferate the Park West Gallery statement. Not only is it a complete fabrication to say that Fine Art Registry "approached Park West to buy the website's art registry services", Fine Art Registry has never sponsored any legal case in California. Another bald-faced lie.

The only contact Fine Art Registry has had with Park West Gallery principals has taken the form of three phone conversations, and none of these ever mentioned any kind of business proposal. Out of a mere practical consideration, Fine Art Registry stands for integrity and fairness in the art world and is founded on principles of honesty and transparency in art for the protection of artists and collectors. Association with a company embroiled in so much controversy regarding the authenticity of its art and its highly questionable practices would only harm the Fine Art Registry name. No, the fact is Fine Art Registry would refuse any offer from Park West Gallery and would not accept the company as a member or user of its services, no matter how much money was offered.

The only direct dealings Fine Art Registry has had with Park West principals are, as stated, three phone conversations. Two of these conversations were recorded by Fine Art Registry and undoubtedly all three were recorded by Park West. One of these conversations, held on 9 September 2007, was between writer David Phillips, who was writing an article for Fine Art Registry and was seeking input and answers from Park West, and Kristen Berry, then PR Coordinator for Park West Gallery (she has since left the company). The call was initiated by David Phillips at the invitation of the Park West public relations coordinator and sought information and answers from Park West and its principals to allegations received by Fine Art Registry from a number of Park West Gallery customers who felt they had been ripped off by the company. Answers and access to company principals and auctioneers were promised but, in fact, nobody from Park West Gallery ever got back to David Phillips or Fine Art Registry on the subject and the silence was taken to be an admission of guilt. This conversation was recorded with the full knowledge and assent of the Park West PR Coordinator.

The two other conversations, also on record, were initiated by Albert Molina, a Park West Gallery principal, to Fine Art Registry CEO Theresa Franks. In these conversations, Molina sought to arrange a meeting with Fine Art Registry, suggesting that the CEO and her husband come and meet with Park West principals. There were veiled offers. But Fine Art Registry made it clear that it would only be satisfied if Park West Gallery were to reform its practices and cease to engage in price gouging and selling fake art and that all that Fine Art Registry sought was such reform. No business proposals were discussed by either party and certainly Fine Art Registry made no business proposals of any sort to Park West – just an insistence that any dishonest practices should cease.

THOSE ARE THE ONLY DIRECT COMMUNICATIONS THERE HAVE EVER BEEN BETWEEN FINE ART REGISTRY AND PARK WEST PRINCIPALS.

So, if Park West Gallery continue to claim that Fine Art Registry made some business proposal which they rejected which then led to a smear campaign, LET THEM PRODUCE SOME EVIDENCE OF SUCH. They will have to do so in court. In the meantime, their actions of perpetrating this lie on the public is defamation and they will have to answer for it.

Don't be fooled by the spin doctors. Demand evidence of alleged facts!

— by Fine Art Registry®  |  January 31, 2009

Discuss on FAR® Forum   |   Print   |  

   

back to top