Olivia's Class 76 LE (inc earlier Blue Pullman content)

[vac_basher]

The big question for me is will they be as good as DP1?

 

Martin, in one word: No.

I think it will be absolutely impossible that any of these models will be as good as the Bachmann Deltic (prototype).

Simply because Bachmann laser scanned DP1 at the NRM, York.

There aren't any Blue Pullmans left that can be scanned and even if there was I doubt (although I may be wrong, but I don't think so) I doubt Heljan have the necessary equipment to laser scan a locomotive.

[Bob Reid]

There aren't any Blue Pullmans left that can be scanned and even if there was I doubt (although I may be wrong, but I don't think so) I doubt Heljan have the necessary equipment to laser scan a locomotive.

 

Neither do Bachmann - they sub-contract it out to specialists (all a bit academic anyhow as you say)!

[kiwitrains]

I would love an up to date Blue Pullman and a Woodhead electric I have the Hornby and Tri ang versions, but after my experience with the very poor paint finish and dodgy pantograph on the Class 86 I bought and returned I would have to see it first.

[edcayton]

I just find it surprising that Olivia's Trains either don't know about this thread or have chosen not to respond to it.

 

Ed

[S.A.C Martin]

I'm just wondering if my semi-wishful thinking of building my own one might be a better and cheaper prospect at this stage of the OT commission.

 

If done to the spec of the class 15/Hymek - then Heljan will have a winner. If not - it doesn't bear thinking about, if I'm honest!

[Gulliver]

The Blue Pullman does show an expected date of "Late 2011" in fairness.

 

How realistic this is though is another matter. As Andy says, they have no track record of delivering this sort of project. Just taking the Kernow D600 as an example, this has to be done entirely from drawings and this has taken about three years so far. I note from their website they have an announcement about liveries and prices in June, presumably they have finished development work but that is a guess from me. I would think the D600 is far simpler than a Blue Pullman and yet OT think they can have it in Late 2011? While also developing the EM1 and EM2? With Heljan also working on Baby Deltics, Class 28s for Hattons, Railbuses etc. Seems like a lot on a plate to me.

[Bernard Lamb]

First find a lawyer who understands all the regulaions about selling things via the internet.

Then get them to draw up a suitably brief and understandable set of T & C.

Then find an expert who is able to vet the various drawings and samples in an unbiased manner, taking into account the perceived needs of the potential customer and the requirements of the manufacturing process.

Then start to think about how you are going to set about getting the actual thing designed and made.

Then talk to the man at FIA Trains and ask him if all the effort is realy worth while.

Don't of course mention a word about the project to any body until you have all question answered and are able to produce a slick presentation.

Then take up knitting or turn to drink.

This idea sounds a bit too dodgy for me to risk any of my pennies.

Bernard

[vac_basher]

OT have the Terms & Conditions up (bottem right hand corner).

All seems legitimate to me.

[Andy Y]

All seems legitimate to me.

 

Legitimate maybe but loaded in favour of the seller apart from statutory obligations.

 

 

 

[Adrian Wintle]

This one isn't required, we know LE's sell, they will also sell BP's if they do it right, theres a precedent with Rapido.

 

http://www.rapidotrains.com/turbo.html

 

Rapido as a manufacturer, came up with the unit, asked for deposits IIRC, through the dealer network or direct, announced which units/ liveries will be done, what coach packs would be available (simultaneous release). They sold out and they now attract a premium price for a premium product.

 

They sold out at Rapido, which doesn't mean they sold out to customers, only that they were all shipped to retailers. There are still examples available in some of the liveries available at retailers that I frequent.

 

This is a good example to compare with the BP, though - similar length trainsets, limited livery variations, limited appeal (but with a significant 'must have it' factor). I considered a CN one (I used to see them passing by), but a combination of factors (including, but not limited to, the fact that I'm not modelling in HO) mitigated against a purchase.

 

Adrian

[ebbwdent]

Goods must be returned to the Seller in the same condition they were in at the time of delivery to the Buyer and in their original packaging or similar.

 

Without this descending into pedants corner, I would have thought that this referred to the cardboard post box/parcel that the train was delivered in. You don't have to use the same box that it was delivered in to return it so long as the retail packaging is intact and in good condition. I think thats pretty reasonable.

[Gulliver]

Reasonable, but illegal. Quoted from the Consumer Direct website: -

 

Packaging

Under a distance selling contract, a supplier cannot make refunds subject to the goods being returned unopened in their original packaging. One of the principles of the distance selling regulations is to give you a chance to examine the goods at home, not having had a chance to do so in the shop. It would be impossible for you to do this without opening the packaging and trying the product out. Having said this, you will still be under a duty to take reasonable care of the goods while in your possession, and may be subject to certain instructions such as not to wear shoes outdoors, or remove hygiene seals. But you can never be penalised simply because you did not return the goods in their original packaging.

 

available here

 

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/buying-online/

 

I doubt many people would deliberately get a model, ditch the box and then send it back, but the OT conditions at present suggest they will charge you for doing this. "Refunds will be issued within 30 days of receipt of goods and after we have inspected them for damage. We reserve the right to withhold all or part of your refund if items are returned damaged."

 

Wondering if I was being a bit unfair to OT I have checked Hattons, Rails and Kernows websites in a totally non scientific exercise, but found that all three have just a couple of lines on this and all three are very similar, probably because they are simply complying with the law and not making lots of specific conditions to protect themselves. The Hattons page was actually blank! Although the relevant information can be found in the relevant sub headings with no problem.

[ebbwdent]

Reasonable, but illegal. Quoted from the Consumer Direct website: -

 

Packaging

Under a distance selling contract, a supplier cannot make refunds subject to the goods being returned unopened in their original packaging. One of the principles of the distance selling regulations is to give you a chance to examine the goods at home, not having had a chance to do so in the shop. It would be impossible for you to do this without opening the packaging and trying the product out. Having said this, you will still be under a duty to take reasonable care of the goods while in your possession, and may be subject to certain instructions such as not to wear shoes outdoors, or remove hygiene seals. But you can never be penalised simply because you did not return the goods in their original packaging.

 

available here

 

http://whatconsumer..../buying-online/

 

 

 

If you re-read my post, that was exactly the point i made; you've perhaps confused what i meant by 'post box/parcel'. In this sense it was referring to the packaging around the purchased item and not the inevitable box and polystyrene that will encompass the locomotive model. You seem to be confusing "Goods" and "Packaging"

 

I'd be quite sure that OT would deliver the (boxed) train packaged in a (another) box/bag/sack/whatever. This is what i would recognise by the term packaging. You'd have to open that to see what the train is like. OT's request that you return it in a SIMILAR box/bag/sack/whatever ("packaging"), which is both reasonable and lawful.

 

There is nothing in 6.9 that states that the packaging must be returned opened.

 

All of which perhaps serves to demonstrate why OT's felt the need to make their T&C so comprehensive.

[Andy Y]

All of which perhaps serves to demonstrate why OT's felt the need to make their T&C so comprehensive.

 

A more comprehensive set of information as to what the product is that people are buying (especially in the case of the BP) would be fundamentally more useful.

 

I don't actually have anything against the BP despite some thinking I do; it's just one of those things that seems to attract more hare brained speculators with stuff all commercial acumen than anything else (and that is not aimed at the cottage industry sector that have legitimately been looking at the BP over the years).

 

 

 

[frobisher]

All of which perhaps serves to demonstrate why OT's felt the need to make their T&C so comprehensive.

 

Not just them - local trading standards generally advise any retailers dealing with distance selling to have a comprehensive set of T&Cs like this. They protect both the seller and buyer, even if the latter may feel "hard done by" by being told upfront what their obligations are in the case of returns etc.

[The Stationmaster]

This one isn't required, we know LE's sell, they will also sell BP's if they do it right, theres a precedent with Rapido.

 

http://www.rapidotrains.com/turbo.html

 

Rapido as a manufacturer, came up with the unit, asked for deposits IIRC, through the dealer network or direct, announced which units/ liveries will be done, what coach packs would be available (simultaneous release). They sold out and they now attract a premium price for a premium product.

They're doing it again here, lead time, note price, its not cheap, consist/livery details per train, and which trains/liveries they're doing.

http://www.rapidotrains.com/canadian.html

Perhaps OT/Mr Williams should read it and learn something about how to market an LE train? As Hugh Williams said, 'Can't get much simpler than that, can it?'

 

 

And Rapido also make it clear that if they don't get enough pre-orders they will not produce the items(s). They have in the past cancelled development on at least one occasion due to lack of interest/orders, and they make that clear in their ads. I would have thought that any commissioner seeking a deposit should - as a minimum - adopt a similar approach.

 

I don't want a Blue Pullman but if I did I know exactly which version it would be. And I also know that unless it was exactly specified as the one which I would be interested in I wouldn't pay a deposit. As I've said before, it's a bit akin to ordering something which we're told in advance is going to be 'a BR Standard pacific', wiythouit being told which one it will be.

[ebbwdent]

I quite agree.

 

The drip drip drip of information added to their website only makes me want to hang on, not that it makes me less sure, but to see what else might be on the way.

 

For instance, i want a pair of heavily weathered EM1's in rail blue. Do i put my deposit down on an EM1 (2 of) and get them weathered afterwards, or hang fire and see what batch two brings?

 

I wouldn't mind putting down a deposit, or a long wait, so long as there was some surety to it.

[frobisher]

I'm also intrigued as to why I'm not a consumer under section 9 of the contract, why OT may assume I have creditors, or could be about to be luiqidated, and in section 11, why I might employ servants, agents, or employees.

 

Those clauses are covering business to business transactions which can also occur.

[Ian J.]

It looks to me like OT have taken a 'generic' set of terms and conditions intended for businesses, and haven't properly worked through them to make them appropriate to these specific items in relation to private buyers.

[Pennine MC]

It looks to me like OT have taken a 'generic' set of terms and conditions intended for businesses, and haven't properly worked through them to make them appropriate to these specific items in relation to private buyers.

 

Whatever. Olivia's may think they need these T&Cs (and they do seem to be in fairly typical legal-ese, probably not as 'heavy' as they first appear), but to the average punter in this hobby - who doesnt want to engage a legal advisor just to buy a model train - I think it all just adds to the general air of obfuscation around the project(s). I'm just glad that most of the D&E 'missing links' have been filled by more straightforward initiatives, and I hope they never go near anything that I might actually be interested in

[frobisher]

I know

 

Actually, that's not the impression you gave. The particular clause does not apply to you if you're a consumer (reading comprehension FTW...) and clearly enough states that if you don't read it in isolation.

 

The point being, this is a toy train, and these are not 'normal' T&C's for a toy train and yet another two postings occur not actually discussing the proposed

 

Which you are equally as guilty of as those are OT's standard T&Cs, not those applied specifically to this "toy train". As it stands, people in this thread are trying to portray the T&Cs as some attempt to mislead the consumer over this project and getting "suprised" that T&Cs cover stuff you wouldn't expect as an end consumer.

 

Bringing this back on topic clearly there is some concern over what the final prices will be, what the models to be produced will be, whether the deposits are driving the projects' viability and bringing the T&Cs into it is just spreading irrelevant FUD.

 

The simplest thing would be a statement that it'll be a Western or Midland (or both) Pullman set, an anticpated price (which may be subject to change) for all the LEs and a reassurance that the deposit guarentees you a model when they become available (which has to be the assumed case).

[Ian J.]

...and bringing the T&Cs into it is just spreading irrelevant FUD.

Not sure I agree with that. The T&Cs are normally the place where any clauses in the agreement/contract between the buyer and seller are laid out. I would expect the case of a failure by the seller to produce the stated product (if they produce any product at all) and how that affects the buyers' claims for their deposit back to be detailed in the T&Cs.

[Pete Piszczek]

I don't believe it has been mentioned, but the specs on the Class 76/77 are up now.

 

http://www.oliviastrains.com/pages/1477/

 

It does say at the bottom that BP details to follow.

 

This whole effort has gotten off to a rocky start, I can't help but think if they had stayed mum for another month, and finalized their details, there would be a lot less concern...

 

That said, it wouldn't hurt to be patient with them. I'm in no hurry to make a deposit, don't see any reason anyone else should be either.

 

If, and when, you are comfortable, put some money down, if not don't.

 

If you have specific concerns, Email them, they'll probably get around to an answer at some point...

[Accurascale Fran]

According to the piece in the current Model Rail they will be doing both the Midland and Western Pullman.

[Pixie]

According to the piece in the current Model Rail they will be doing both the Midland and Western Pullman.

 

I'd be interested to hear how active the work on the BP is or whether it's more a statment of intentions. Whilst I know very little on comissioning models, I'd of thought that the two Woodhead locos alone will be taking up a lot of capital/rescources, let alone the five (I think it's five) different vehicles that would be needed to model both types of BP.

 

Big bite? Yes. Chewable? I hope so, but my gut feeling is still unsure about the whole affair.

 

Pix