A gym in the Netherlands tried to sell me a $35,000 shirt and asked for my personal information.
The shirt is an item of clothing and has a price tag of €45,000, the company told me, before saying it would pay €30,000 to cover the printing of a special order print for me.
In an interview with Dutch TV show The News, the owner of the gym, who asked to be identified only as Jens, said he had not been told about the shirt before he was contacted.
He told the Dutch television station that he had been working for the gym for five years and that he wanted to promote the gym.
He said he was not familiar with the shirt’s price tag and was not aware of the possible legal ramifications if he did not pay the full amount.
He told The News that the shirt was a custom order.
The shirt will be printed by a printing company and sent to Jens.
He said that if he was unable to reach Jens for an explanation, he would not pay any more.
The gym told the TV station that the price tag was based on an item that had been printed.
It said that it had never been contacted by the customer.
The shopkeeper said he would pay the extra amount if Jens would take the shirt off and not wear it.
He did not want to comment further on the story.
The owner of an Australian gym told The Australian newspaper that he received a phone call from a customer who had asked him for a $50,000-a-year shirt.
The Australian also spoke to a British gym in which the shirt cost £75,000.
The owner of a British Gym told The Guardian that he was unaware of the shirt being sold on eBay.
The customer, who spoke to the newspaper anonymously, said that he bought the shirt after seeing a photo of the T-shirt.
A spokesman for the UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission said that the commission was aware of an eBay listing that suggested the shirt had been sold for a much lower price.
He did not know whether the buyer was aware the item was a trademark.
In response to the story, the British Gym’s chairman, Peter Gollop, told The Sydney Morning Herald that he did have a contract with the company that included the shirt and that it was “absolutely not an item we would be selling on eBay”.
Gollop said that, if the shirt did not fit the contract, he had asked the gym to change the wording in the contract so that it referred to the shirt as a “custom item”.
The company did not respond to a request for comment from The Guardian.