Perry vs Army Museum Archives

This may turn out to be a rant so I would strongly advise that you don't read it. On the other hand sometimes you feel when you have been poorly served that the more people who know, the better. Take your choice - you have been warned.

In December last year I visited the Kippenberger Archives at the Army Museum, Waiouru. The Army treated me well on the whole but there was one issue that I found unacceptable and have been pursuing since.

In a year of correspondence leading up to my trip, on their website (since updated) and even while there (with one important exception which I will discuss later) no mention of charges was made. No other Archive that I have used (and that is now quite a number, but include PRO, NARA, NZNA, ATL, Hocken, and more) has there been a charge for what is called reading room services (that is, work done while on site). Charges are made for "remote research requests" and quite reasonably. Part way through my visit it was announced that the museum would close a day early. At the end of this shortened visit a $500 bill was presented, halved to $250 for whatever reasons.

I paid the bill (foolishly, but I was in shock) and later wrote complaining that the fee was unreasonable as unexpected. The Army has persistently focussed on their right to charge while willfully ignoring that I concede they have a right to charge, but that they gave no expectation of a charge and therefore it was unreasonable, and should be refunded.

The correspondence has continued since December last year, and for various reasons has passed through three Army officers' hands. After the last one failed to write I sent this email:

"Hello
Col. Reynolds presumably passed on my remaining concerns to you to deal with but I have not heard anything from you in over a month so wondered whether you had had an opportunity to review my complaint?
Perry Rowe
Dunedin"

to which he responded

"Mr Rowe.
I do not know you and nor have you ever communicated with me but naturally as the Director of the Army Museum I have read a lot about you and your persistent behaviour. Be advised that I have no intention of communicating with you by this medium nor by telephone once I have released this email. However I look forward to meeting you in the Tribunal Court if ever you wish to purue your issue. I do not wish to see you waste your time and resources but have the distinct impression from your vindictive behaviour that you not interested in my free advice. As I indicated I am not going to open any further communication with you. Your solicitor can deal with the museum's solicitor a mr cunninghame of luke cunninghame and clere.
And one other point Mr Rowe. Whilst I read your churlish comment about not being welcome back into the Army Museum - and I wonder how on earth you could have come up with that conclusion - are you feeling ashamed at your relationship with us? But seeing you have sown a seed in my mind, I will now most definitely consider a Trespass Order. But in the meantime, you should note that since I have come on board as the Director, there have been some rule changes. No one will get accommodation within the military camp. No one will get rationed in the military camp. No one will get public or private transport to uplift them from the bus drop-off point to their destination and no one will ever be permitted to take their cellphone into the archives. Oh, yes, there is one other point. When everyone who uses the archives and sign the document pertaining to the costs and the rules of the organisation, as I see you did, they will find that ALL the charges have increased dramatically to keep up with inflation. There will be no exceptions!
You can congratulate yourself for raising the issue of our charges which have prompted the revision upwards of our fees.
And to conclude Mr Rowe I will reiterate what I said in my first paragraph. Any further communication via email from you will be deleted, unless it is through your Solicitor to our Solicitor. I have too many important things to deal with and many appreciative researchers to accommodate in our Archives than to put up with your childish behaviour.
R.J.Seymour
Colonel
Director

Now, I am prepared to accept "persistent" but I view that as a virtue, as my right. "Vindictive" hurts and I leave you to judge just who might be so from the letters above.

So...

J thinks I should drop it. I think their attitude outrageous and wish to carry on until I get an apology and a refund.

Now I'm going to throw it open to you, dear readers, so add a comment explaining why I'm a dick and should let it go, or alternatively why I should continue. Any lawyers reading? 8-)

PS. I have promised J that if the CAB decide it is not worth following up then I will drop it.