RAILS ANNOUNCE CALEY 812 CLASS 0-6-0s

[Butler Henderson]

27 minutes ago, micklner said:

Personally I believe Rails saying they will not return £30 deposits is totally wrong , is it even legal ? I personally dont know the answer , but I do wonder.

Seems they are in their rights

https://www.herrington-carmichael.com/is-a-deposit-always-non-refundable/

"If a payment constitutes a deposit, then the general rule is that the deposit is non-refundable upon breach of contract. As such, if the buyer fails to perform the contract or pulls out of the purchase, the buyer has no right to the return of the deposit if the seller terminates for the buyer’s repudiatory conduct. This is because the deposit payment was made as security for performance."

[Butler Henderson]

6 minutes ago, amdaley said:

I contacted Rails about the questionable details which showed up in the photos & below is the reply I received.

 

"Thank you for your email, this is only snap shots from the youtube video and not actual footage. We are hoping to release some images ourselves fairly soon.

You are welcome to cancel the preorder but as stated on the website in the terms and conditions deposits are non refundable, please let me know if you wish to go ahead with the cancellation?"

Better would have been "We are aware of the issue and Bachmann are correcting the matter - we will supply replacement tender bodies in due course"

[micklner]

For anyone concerned about Rails refusal to return deposits .

 

Read page 2 halfway down  from "Oliver Rails" re deposits will be returned if the price goes up, which in this case it has.

Edited November 2, 2021 by micklner

[E100]

I feel it's pretty short sighted for them not to return deposits given in good will and cancelled for the only reason of them not, in the eyes of those cancelling which isn't me, fulfilling their side of the contract by producing an accurate 812. They will likely put off many customers from pre-ordering / shopping there at all, despite them almost certainly selling their full stock in quick measure anyway.

 

Personally, I would encourage them to consider a revised tender. It is quite noticeable. Stupid question time but I assume there wasn't a Caledonian tender design that did have that even if not on the preserved 812? I can live with the the cab supports quite happily.

[Black 5 Bear]

1 hour ago, micklner said:

Personally I believe Rails saying they will not return £30 deposits is totally wrong , is it even legal ? I personally dont know the answer , but I do wonder.

 

If the item is sold not as advertised (which I presume is covered on the intial listing/advertising? ) then below applies

 

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/what-do-i-do-if-i-have-a-faulty-product-aTTEK2g0YuEy#how-long-do-i-have-to-return-a-faulty-product

 

Rails have had my £30 for about 3 years for the NER railcar, I will wait and see what eventually is offered for sale. I know already that the preview photos of the LNER version the model is  wrong,  as they do not have a very prominent exhaust system fitted onto the Roof, as in the photos shown by Rails on the intial listing/advertising when annnounced. Rails have also ignored the same question on the NER railcar thread and cancellation emails from me after seeing the version shown.

 

I do know, I will not pre order anything again, certainly not from Rails, ever again.

Rather than cancel and forfeit the deposit, Isn't it UK Consumer Law that if you take delivery of the item as an online purchase, you have the right to reject it if it doesn't meet expectations as to quality, performance, fitness for purpose?

You might have to swallow the postage costs which is fair, but you would be lawfully entitled to receive a refund in full from the supplier

 

The Consumer Contracts Regulations

When you buy goods online you have additional rights to return them.

This is because your decision may be based on a brief description or a photograph – so what you receive isn't always quite what you’d expected.

Under the Consumer Contracts Regulations, you are allowed to return an item if you simply change your mind.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Black 5 Bear

[Northmoor MPD]

I’m not usually one to moan on forums about models but I must admit after 3 years of waiting I am a little disappointed with the finished product, not only with the hand rails, cab and tender that has been well documented in this thread already but with the overall look. It just looks to be very toy like rather than a finely detailed model.

I will keep my preorder of 828 until I’ve seen the official photographs from Rails but I’m starting to think there are much more Impressive models that I could buy for £200.

It looks like Bachmann have missed the goal entirely with this one.

[AlfaZagato]

Does anyone have a Bachman "Donald" or "Douglas" to hand?   Might want to see if the coarse details we're seeing here are present on the  T&F jobs.   That might be a sign.

 

My original thought to have an 812 was to buy one the above, and (literally) deface it.   Now I'm concerned we're paying a premium for a detailed Thomas model.

[E100]

 This will give a good view of them. I think it's safe to say they are totally new toolings.

[scots region]

56 minutes ago, AlfaZagato said:

Does anyone have a Bachman "Donald" or "Douglas" to hand?   Might want to see if the coarse details we're seeing here are present on the  T&F jobs.   That might be a sign.

 

My original thought to have an 812 was to buy one the above, and (literally) deface it.   Now I'm concerned we're paying a premium for a detailed Thomas model.

As someone who’s owned a Bachmann ‘Donald’ I can tell you that your worrying too much. A Thomas line 812 wold be instantly noticeable as far cruder. This models do for the moment seem to have flaws, flaws that may behoove some to wait out for an alternative. But dressed up Thomas machines they are not.   

[curlypaws]

It would be sad if a significant level of cancellations lead Bachmann/Rails of Sheffield to conclude that the market isn't there for Scottish locomotives.

 

The model may not be perfect in every aspect, but it is hard to see a better ready to run model of the 812 appearing anytime soon. Despite the criticisms here, my interest was piqued by Jennifer Kirk's review - since the BR versions would fit nicely for me. It wasn't a model which I had previously intended purchasing, but I'm now seriously considering it. I guess that at least there may be more stock available now...

[AlfaZagato]

It was just a thought I had had in response to the comments on the reveal.

[GeoffW]

On 02/11/2021 at 18:41, Butler Henderson said:

Seems they are in their rights

https://www.herrington-carmichael.com/is-a-deposit-always-non-refundable/

"If a payment constitutes a deposit, then the general rule is that the deposit is non-refundable upon breach of contract. As such, if the buyer fails to perform the contract or pulls out of the purchase, the buyer has no right to the return of the deposit if the seller terminates for the buyer’s repudiatory conduct. This is because the deposit payment was made as security for performance."

I am also waiting impatiently for the N.E. Railcar, they have had my £30 deposit for some years now and refuse to refund it.

 

I hope this behaviour is widely disseminated so other folks are not left in the same situation.

 

Two questions spring to mind, did they ever intend to produce the model and how much money are they hanging on to indefinitely.

 

I consider it sharp practice and will not use Rails again even if it cost more from a more reputable dealer.

 

Geoff

[Les1952]

I'm interested in one or two models that Rails are doing-

 

BUT

 

I'm no longer prepared to pre order from any dealer who requires a deposit without the option to pay in full at a guaranteed price at the time of placing the order (largely as I have three N-gauge Society Hunslets coming "sometime" over a year since I sold the layout I ordered them for....)

 

In this case I'm extremely glad.  I'll probably have a Precedent and a Sonic A5 but will buy after they have appeared in the shop (likewise a TMC G5).  However, I'm passing on this one. The thick cab stanchions have put me off.....

 

Les

 

 

[No Decorum]

8 hours ago, curlypaws said:

It would be sad if a significant level of cancellations lead Bachmann/Rails of Sheffield to conclude that the market isn't there for Scottish locomotives.

 

The model may not be perfect in every aspect, but it is hard to see a better ready to run model of the 812 appearing anytime soon. Despite the criticisms here, my interest was piqued by Jennifer Kirk's review - since the BR versions would fit nicely for me. It wasn't a model which I had previously intended purchasing, but I'm now seriously considering it. I guess that at least there may be more stock available now...

The number of deposits paid would indicate that there is a market for Scottish locomotives; the number of cancellations would indicate that people are unsatisfied with this particular model. For what it’s worth, I’m not cancelling my order for a sound one. Sadly, there isn’t cash enough to spare for an LMS version as well.

[AlfaZagato]

Were the thickness issues present on tooling samples?   I find it odd that the pendants here and in the press wouldn't have caught something like that earlier.   I don't think this is the first time we've seen the models in the flesh.

[scottystitch]

1 hour ago, AlfaZagato said:

Were the thickness issues present on tooling samples?   I find it odd that the pendants here and in the press wouldn't have caught something like that earlier.   I don't think this is the first time we've seen the models in the flesh.

 

Most (all?) the samples were photographed from a low angle I think, but there was this:

 

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by scottystitch

[AlfaZagato]

Thanks for linking that.   Looking back on the EP and deco samples, both issues being brought up now look fairly evident.   We've had time to say something sooner.   Doesn't look like anybody did, not at least here.

[cessna152towser]

I pre-ordered a BR black version and still looking forward to receiving it despite the inaccuracies.   Though if I had known in February 2018 when I pre-ordered that I would still be waiting for the model almost four years later and after I had in the meantime retired,  I would not have placed a pre-order, and would have waited till the model was released and then taken a decision based on the quality and availability of the model, and on my own available funds at the time.    Due to the long lead times for production, and bearing in mind I am now 70, I no longer pre-order  model trains.  My only other pre-order still to be fulfilled is for Accurascale HYA/IIA wagons, paid for in full over a year ago, though I have since gone lukewarm on whether I still want those.  Anyway, back on topic, the BR Black 812 will go nicely with my old Caley Jumbo 0-6-0 which I bought second hand around thirty years ago ready assembled from a DJH kit.  Considering the Jumbo cost me 75 pounds back in the day, and inflation, the 812 represents fair value.

Edited November 4, 2021 by cessna152towser

[Ben Alder]

9 hours ago, AlfaZagato said:

Were the thickness issues present on tooling samples?   I find it odd that the pendants here and in the press wouldn't have caught something like that earlier.   I don't think this is the first time we've seen the models in the flesh.

As the pedant who raised the tender issue recently, I can only comment on my own circumstance. Despite an initial interest, I  decided that the cost of the loco was too high and I would rather Hornby had tackled it as their recent 0-6-0 chassis have been superb runners, along with the quality of body mouldings. I have been waiting for decades for RTR pre group ScR locos in vain so resorted to a mix of kit builds and RTR conversions, including a DJH 812 and two 700 conversions which give a fairly accurate representation of this type, so am aware of the characteristics of this class of engine, but haven't been following its extended gestation here at all closely. It was only out of curiosity that I watched the video to see  how it turned out that brought its apparent shortcomings to my attention. As a result I have skimmed through this thread and found very little visual progress compared to some other models  planned releases which might have triggered awareness of any problems. No Decorum raised the thick cab handrails last year in a post but seemingly got no response to this. The press are perhaps not the best to rely on for checking WIP for various reasons, but several other  models have benefited from the group knowledge here, and it seems a pity that  some more input from the commissioner  here might have flagged up any shortcomings in the tooling.

 

Horses for courses, it seems - for some it is a deal breaker; others will be happy running it around as a pretty engine, and the blue livery is stunning, but to my mind it has a look of the old Triang 3F with its thick cab  mouldings and solid tender flares, and doesn't compare favourably to other recent similar types as currently seen. Perhaps seeing one in the flesh might change some opinions, but it does seem that this is a bit of a curates egg as it stands.

Edited November 4, 2021 by Ben Alder

[farren]

Sorry I have to disagree with you Ben up to a point. The producers of the model  shouldn’t need to told the tender top and cab sides are wrong.  
How many models have they produce over the years. The idea that cab sides are not made out of 8” plate (even in Scotland) should have dawned on them

along with tender top not being the same as the drawings and  photographic evidence they must have used to design the cad work.

 

Have I placed a order, no as the model is out of my modelling location. Though I did think about one as who doesn’t like a 0-6-0 tender engine.
If however the images shown are not of the production model and we are all worrying about nothing. A LMS one will be acquired. Otherwise sorry not at that price with those mistakes. 

[No Decorum]

14 hours ago, Ben Alder said:

No Decorum raised the thick cab handrails last year in a post but seemingly got no response to this.

 

So I did. I had forgotten. No-one pays any attention to me. Including, it seems, me.

[daltonparva]

5 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

So I did. I had forgotten. No-one pays any attention to me. Including, it seems, me.

Who's that? Somebody say something?

[Flying Pig]

13 hours ago, farren said:

Sorry I have to disagree with you Ben up to a point. The producers of the model  shouldn’t need to told the tender top and cab sides are wrong.  
How many models have they produce over the years. The idea that cab sides are not made out of 8” plate (even in Scotland) should have dawned on them

along with tender top not being the same as the drawings and  photographic evidence they must have used to design the cad work.

 

I very much doubt that either the manufacturer or the commissioner is unaware of these features.  They will have been determined by design decisions for reasons that are unlikely to be shared with us, but don't necessarily involve evil cackling and rubbing of hands .

[JohnR]

On 02/11/2021 at 18:44, Butler Henderson said:

Better would have been "We are aware of the issue and Bachmann are correcting the matter - we will supply replacement tender bodies in due course"

 

Why would they do that, if the problem is more of a screenshot of a youtube video not providing an accurate view of the thickness of the tender side? 

[Butler Henderson]

16 minutes ago, JohnR said:

 

Why would they do that, if the problem is more of a screenshot of a youtube video not providing an accurate view of the thickness of the tender side? 

Something very strange then with video to completely change the tender top to the extent shown if it is correct.