Pendennis Posted December 22, 2017 Share Posted December 22, 2017 When this brouhaha started the collective assessment of Paul Dunn was that he was someone well out of his depth, which I concurred with. After reading most of post on this and other threads, and seeing him a few times at shows, I have seen nothing that leads me to change that assessment. The old adage of not ascribing to malice what can be explained by incompetence applies -- in spades. Let me first say I have had no dealings with Mr Dunn or Mr Bedford. However I must say that find Mr Bedford's attitude throughout these posts very disappointing; I have no reason to believe he is a not a good and upstanding trader. However in Mr Dunn's case incompetance is no excuse for his alleged dishonesty; his behavior is totally unacceptable and does no favours for other small traders, Mr Bedford included. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted December 22, 2017 Share Posted December 22, 2017 Hi, I am grateful to those who are taking action on this. I too placed a small order some time ago. Mr Dunn owes me the princely sum of £15 and did not refund when requested (over a year ago) this I feel enables me to tell any potential customer that he has taken payment, not supplied goods, not refunded and indeed not replied to my request (or even to my offer of help get the range working again) and since this is an entirely true statement (and provable) is not in any way actionable. You were warned that this was likely to happen to choose to ignore the warnings. I do not care who has more or less money, that is totally irrelevant. There are correct business practices and incorrect business practices. There is right and wrong. Accepting payment for goods that you do not have and which you are unable to produce in a reasonable time is certainly a bad business practice and undoubtedly wrong. If done knowingly it could be construed as fraud. You are making assumptions here. I do not know whether he is still taking money, or what his financial situation is, and neither do you and neither do any of the others who have been pontificating on this thread. Bill, I am a little surprised at your seeming support for Mr Dunn. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your last postings. Consider this though: Imagine you were retired and Bill Bedford Models had ended up with Mr Dunn and you heard that he was unable to produce the goods yet was taking money for them and refusing to refund payments. What would you think then? I think that if I were to have any concerns about the future reputation of a business that bore my name, I wouldn't sell it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Kirk Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) Bill, To answer your points: 1. I placed the order as something of an experiment. It had been pointed out to me that by searching for my old LNER range you could be directed to the relevant pages of the Coopercraft website without passing the front page which has the red instruction. Several people had done this and told me about it. I merely proved this to myself and also had confirmed to me the fact that a refund was not forthcoming. I can therefore categorically state that at that time money was taken ,no goods were forthcoming and no refund has ever taken place. Over a year later the website is unaltered so this is still a trap for the unwary. 2. The second quote is merely a statement of fact regarding good business practice. I do indeed not know if any payments subsequent to mine have been taken but until the website has unavailable items deleted or clearly marked as unavailable on each page then there is the potential for orders to be placed which have no hope of being fulfilled. I can understand someone being "out of their depth" in not being able to manufacture something but that is surely not an excuse for not refunding payments received for goods you can not deliver. 3. I passed the range on to Colin Ashby who later passed it on to Tony Brown. Both of these ran their businesses as they should be run. Twenty five years ago I had no idea that it could end up with someone whose business practices would have left something to be desired. Finally I am not attacking Mr Dunn. I did offer over a year ago to help him get the range back into production but did not get a reply. My only argument is that un available kits are still displayed and priced on active pages of his website which then allows orders to be taken and card payments to be made. Good business practice would be to make changing this a priority. best wishes, Ian Edited December 23, 2017 by Ian Kirk 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Let me first say I have had no dealings with Mr Dunn or Mr Bedford. However I must say that find Mr Bedford's attitude throughout these posts very disappointing; I have no reason to believe he is a not a good and upstanding trader. However in Mr Dunn's case incompetance is no excuse for his alleged dishonesty; his behavior is totally unacceptable and does no favours for other small traders, Mr Bedford included. Alleged being the operative word here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kandc_au Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 That's the point isn't it? a few people making lots of noise about losing a small amount of money to someone who, by all accounts, has less than they have. Bill, I haven't read past this statement which leaves me in awe! Is it for YOU to decide whether anyone losing any money to this man to be regarded as a small amount! What may be a small amount to you can be another's monthly modelling monies, and as such a large amount. How about trying to consider this from everyone's perspective. This is NOT a one or two off incident, it is theft and fraud, no matter what way you cut the cake! Khris 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kandc_au Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 When this brouhaha started the collective assessment of Paul Dunn was that he was someone well out of his depth, which I concurred with. After reading most of post on this and other threads, and seeing him a few times at shows, I have seen nothing that leads me to change that assessment. The old adage of not ascribing to malice what can be explained by incompetence applies -- in spades. And in the earlier days I would have agreed with you, but this has dragged on that long now with NO effort of Dunns part to even rectify or withdraw his site that, that excuse is well and truly down the drain. He knows what he is doing and continues to do it without any effort on his part to rectify the issue by even haveing his website undated....that is now fraud at the very least! Khris 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Is he still taking money?... Is the Pope a Catholic? Allegedly? I think there are quite a few reports on this thread alone which show that he is taking money. Small-ish sums, but still money. ....have you seen his accounts? Not really a fair question, since such accounts are unlikely to be published online if he is a sole trader. If, however, he is a company officer, then you have about 185,000 variations of "Paul Dunn" to search through.... Um, do you publish your accounts for the general modelling public to see, Bill? 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 23, 2017 Um, do you publish your accounts for the general modelling public to see, Bill? You'd see the (approx) £927.50p taken as deposits for the 96 kits 'in preparation'.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 You'd see the (approx) £927.50p taken as deposits for the 96 kits 'in preparation'.. I see what you're getting at. I meant annual accounts and things like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTurfBurner Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Brief update. Had an e-mail from Action Fraud late yesterday afternoon which basically says “we are very busy at the moment, but will let you know what action we are taking (if any) as soon as possible”. Unless there are development with World Pay, that is probably it until the New Year. So, I wish all who have supported me over the past year or so (and even those who think I am a wealthy, heartless j**k) a very Merry Christmas and a Happy 2018. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Bucoops Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 23, 2017 Happy Christmas to you too I fully believe you - and still don't understand why he hasn't refunded you. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 23, 2017 You'd see the (approx) £927.50p taken as deposits for the 96 kits 'in preparation'.. Including several pounds of mine - which I am perfectly happy with. It obviously helps Bill to make sensible commercial decisions if he has some evidence of demand that is more than just words but a deposit representing a commitment to buy. I'm taking a small risk with a reasonable probability of eventually receiving an item that would otherwise be highly unlikely to become available. I'm making a small payment for an item that is clearly advertised as not yet available, knowing that there is a risk it might never see the light of day, not paying the full price up front for an item that is advertised as available but isn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 23, 2017 Including several pounds of mine - which I am perfectly happy with. It obviously helps Bill to make sensible commercial decisions if he has some evidence of demand that is more than just words but a deposit representing a commitment to buy. I'm taking a small risk with a reasonable probability of eventually receiving an item that would otherwise be highly unlikely to become available. I'm making a small payment for an item that is clearly advertised as not yet available, knowing that there is a risk it might never see the light of day, not paying the full price up front for an item that is advertised as available but isn't. I agree to a certain extent with you that to produce something it's good to know the demand, but I noted in a previous comment by Bill that he hadn't chased small amounts but might think again if it was a £1000. With near 100 kits 'in preparation' and some never to be produced the £1000 Bill said "would make him think differently" is here, but the other way round as he holds it. There hasn't been a year that I've been in business that I haven't written off some money because someone had decided not to pay me. For small amounts e.g. 20, 30 even 50 quid the amount of time and hassle it takes to get people to pay is just not worth the effort. Maybe if the sum involved was nearer a thousand I would think differently, but I very much doubt that anyone here has invested that sort of money in some obsolete plastic kits. For clarity I have not ordered from BB and won't, I was going to make a deposit on a couple of kits but an email response made it clear that although deposits were able to be taken (and still are 15 months on) the item(s) in question were unlikely to ever be made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 There is currently on Television an advertisment, by Barclays Bank I believe, warning about fraudulent websites that take money with no intention of supplying that goods. Given the length of time this has been going on I agree with Turk Burners view, and find it disturbing that Officialdom can not apparently stop Coopercraft or their web site. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 23, 2017 Is he still taking money? have you seen his accounts? No. And I've never managed to go into orbit to verify that the world isn't flat either. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 When this brouhaha started the collective assessment of Paul Dunn was that he was someone well out of his depth, which I concurred with. After reading most of post on this and other threads, and seeing him a few times at shows, I have seen nothing that leads me to change that assessment. The old adage of not ascribing to malice what can be explained by incompetence applies -- in spades. Bill I have met the chap at shows and came to the same conclusion as you have, which is unable to make the things work and perhaps due to this having cash flow problems. Neither of which are either a crime or unusual for some small businesses However what is wrong is that he has kept taking money and refuses to return it, he clearly know there is an issue and has put up a statement not to send money, but seemingly happy to accept it I guess he falls between criminal and civil law and with the police so busy with more serious crimes, I guess they will be happy to say its a civil matter. It seems that Mr Dunn has no problems racking up court judgements and knows how to avoid any action. However he needs to be stopped taking money from customers if he either has no intention or not the means to supply the goods. I guess the last recourse is trading standards, who I guess will not do anything unless it can be proved this is a large deception. In my opinion the last resort is for someone to take time collating all the information of losses, then give it to trading standards hopefully they will be able to take action 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 23, 2017 Alleged being the operative word here. Guys and gals. Why is anyone wasting keyboard time here? Mr Bedford's posts are just a distraction from the real culprit of this thread. I won't describe him as a troll as so far as I know he has "not got a criminal conviction" for that. Any way given the season that's in it I wish you all a Happy Christmas, including Messrs Bedford and Dunn.. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Is the Pope a Catholic? Allegedly? I think there are quite a few reports on this thread alone which show that he is taking money. Small-ish sums, but still money. Not really a fair question, since such accounts are unlikely to be published online if he is a sole trader. If, however, he is a company officer, then you have about 185,000 variations of "Paul Dunn" to search through.... Um, do you publish your accounts for the general modelling public to see, Bill? Ivan Is this a case that everyone should just shrug their shoulders and walk away, or is there a course of action a group could take at least to stop him trading, at best receive a refund Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted December 23, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) Would it be wrong to hope that a hacker could make a certain website inoperative? PS. I know nothing about hacking Edited December 23, 2017 by Colin_McLeod 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 If it helps anyone who may be thinking that Paul Dunn has any lack of awareness about the problem it's probably pertinent for me to say that I have substantial reason to believe that he registered another account in early November under an identifiable email address which completed the authentication process and was used to read this and other allied topics. In the vain hope that he may return to this topic I would make a request, from me, to him, that he takes positive action to resolve any and all complaints for the return of monies requested, positive action to directly contact anyone who has paid money but not received their goods (but have not yet complained) and advise them of problems in fulfilling their orders and offer to return payments and to take action to remove the possibility of anyone else submitting payment for goods which cannot be supplied. If unable to do the latter he should take action to remove his trading site altogether. A copy of this post is being sent to his email addresses too. 17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 If it helps anyone who may be thinking that Paul Dunn has any lack of awareness about the problem it's probably pertinent for me to say that I have substantial reason to believe that he registered another account in early November under an identifiable email address which completed the authentication process and was used to read this and other allied topics. In the vain hope that he may return to this topic I would make a request, from me, to him, that he takes positive action to resolve any and all complaints for the return of monies requested, positive action to directly contact anyone who has paid money but not received their goods (but have not yet complained) and advise them of problems in fulfilling their orders and offer to return payments and to take action to remove the possibility of anyone else submitting payment for goods which cannot be supplied. If unable to do the latter he should take action to remove his trading site altogether. A copy of this post is being sent to his email addresses too. In the spirit of goodwill and charity at this season, I am assuming that Bill is bored and is attempting to stir up an amusing little furore by way of killing time. However, he should remember that modellers are aware of his own trading interests, and reflect that his postings may well influence his own reputation. When making a decision whether or not to purchase, many prospective customers will be influenced by their perception of the character of the vendor. Having said which, I would like to wish all members a peaceful Christmas and a prosperous New Year, and to thank customers of Cambridge Custom Transfers for their support during 2017. Regards, John Isherwood. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Is the Pope a Catholic? Allegedly? I think there are quite a few reports on this thread alone which show that he is taking money. Small-ish sums, but still money. He is not the only trader to have a zombie website that, allegedly, can't be updated. So the line that 'he is still taking money so it must be fraud' does not necessarily hold up. Not really a fair question, since such accounts are unlikely to be published online if he is a sole trader. If, however, he is a company officer, then you have about 185,000 variations of "Paul Dunn" to search through.... That's the point. No-one here knows the state of his finances, nor even that he is receiving monies from the website. People are just making wild guesses based on how aggrieved they feel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 You'd see the (approx) £927.50p taken as deposits for the 96 kits 'in preparation'.. The represents about half his yearly bill for his website. He's not likely to be retiring to the Caribbean anytime soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 He is not the only trader to have a zombie website that, allegedly, can't be updated. So the line that 'he is still taking money so it must be fraud' does not necessarily hold up. That's the point. No-one here knows the state of his finances, nor even that he is receiving monies from the website. People are just making wild guesses based on how aggrieved they feel. You may be strictly correct (or not) - but denying bailiffs access to execute a court order doesn't suggest that he is anxious to fulfil his obligations to those who he may 'unwittingly' have induced to make payments to him. Bill - you really aren't convincing anyone, but you are attracting antagonism that can do your own business no good whatsoever. Why not just have a wee dram and a snooze - you may wake up feeling less provocative? Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cctransuk Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) DELETED Edited December 23, 2017 by cctransuk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts