New crowdfunded project from Lococraft - LMS diesels 10000/10001

[Matt C]

Resurrected because it had the new 'naughty word' in the title ?   and other threads are temporarily locked ?

[Colin_McLeod]

Looks like a burst of enthusiasm followed by realisation that it was a non runner. Webpage appears to have gone. Nothing on Facebook page since April 2018, and Jeff has not visited RMweb since October 2018

Edited June 5, 2019 by Colin_McLeod

[Hal Nail]

I do hope no one here is implying “I told you so” 

[muddys-blues]

I even text him and rang "the" mobile number, unobtainable !!!!

 

I wander if I'll get my first instalment bank transfer back ? 

 

Craig

[markjj]

Isn't it time everyone learnt a lesson from this !!!! Stick to your kit manufacturer who's already done the work........

[RobjUK]

Their domain "lococraft.co.uk" was registered for a year and expired in April 2019.

 

I never saw the original posts re. this, but for information any web site selling anything in England / the UK must by law give a street address for the business (not a PO box or similar) plus phone number / email.

The same applies in Europe and quite a few other countries.

 

Any site that does not give a real street address should always be assumed to be a scam of some sort.

 

[chris p bacon]

1 hour ago, RobjUK said:

 but for information any web site selling anything in England / the UK must by law give a street address for the business (not a PO box or similar) plus phone number / email.

The same applies in Europe and quite a few other countries.

 

 You mean like this....

 

https://krmodels.co.uk/contact-us.html

 

[rue_d_etropal]

14 hours ago, markjj said:

Isn't it time everyone learnt a lesson from this !!!! Stick to your kit manufacturer who's already done the work........

Even this has risks, as kits have to be produced before any are sold, unless they are going to also use some type of crowdfunding. There are plety of examples of failed kit manufacturing companies, various reasons including noone being able to take over when original owner wants to retire.

The relatively safe way to produce models is 3D printing, where models are only actually created on request. Some might not like it but with suitable drawings I can design most body shells. Kits are also not for everyone, and many are willing to finish off a model, rather than risk building something that does not look right .

[chris p bacon]

2 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

Even this has risks, as kits have to be produced before any are sold, unless they are going to also use some type of crowdfunding. There are plety of examples of failed kit manufacturing companies, various reasons including noone being able to take over when original owner wants to retire.

 

 Kit companies that have ceased at retirement are not the same as a company/person that wants money upfront from multiple funders to produce something without them having any risk.

 

The upfront cost of producing kits is small and able to be funded by an individual rather than crowdfunding.

 

2 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

The relatively safe way to produce models is 3D printing, where models are only actually created on request

 

If they are a proven design and print.

 

2 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

Some might not like it but with suitable drawings I can design most body shells

 

How accurately ? working from a diagram is not the same as a working drawing.

2 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

Kits are also not for everyone, and many are willing to finish off a model, rather than risk building something that does not look right .

This isn't crowdfunding, it's an advert and is off topic.

 

As for the Bold...that certainly applies to a lot of 3D designs that are available.

 

Edited June 8, 2019 by chris p bacon
typo

[markjj]

45 minutes ago, rue_d_etropal said:

Even this has risks, as kits have to be produced before any are sold, unless they are going to also use some type of crowdfunding. There are plety of examples of failed kit manufacturing companies, various reasons including noone being able to take over when original owner wants to retire.

The relatively safe way to produce models is 3D printing, where models are only actually created on request. Some might not like it but with suitable drawings I can design most body shells. Kits are also not for everyone, and many are willing to finish off a model, rather than risk building something that does not look right .

 

My point is although I didn't make it very clear was that most of the locos that have failed due to crowdfunding already existed as kits. The LMS twins and the Class 22 to mention a few of them in particular existed in the JLTRT range. Luckily they have been resurrected in the new MM1 company.

Had everyone spent their possibly now lost money on them it may have been enough to keep JLTRT going. They never once asked for deposits or money up front.....  I'm sure that Pete lost a great deal of his own money giving us the wonderful range that he did.

Ps I have no connection to any of the above mentioned companies just a grateful previous customer and glad they ride again..   

Edited June 8, 2019 by markjj
Update

[RobjUK]

9 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

 You mean like this....

 

https://krmodels.co.uk/contact-us.html

 

 

That would breach UK / EU law, unless they have a geographic address on another page of the site.

(But I have no idea of the laws in Canada).

 

It's part of the "E-Commerce Regulations" from 2002.

 

extract:

Quote

Minimum information to be provided

 

Service providers, whether involved in e-commerce or not, should provide the following minimum information, which must be easily, directly and permanently accessible:

 

The name of the service provider must be given somewhere easily accessible on the site. This might differ from the trading name and any such difference should be explained – e.g. "XYZ.com is the trading name of XYZ Enterprises Limited";

 

The geographic address of the service provider must be given;

 

The details of the service provider including his or her email address, so long as it allows rapid contact and direct and effective communication. The CJEU in Bundesverband v Deutsche Internet Versicherung (2008) confirmed that in order to be able to respond to consumers promptly, a company may need to provide other methods of communication beyond its postal and email address. A 'contact us' form without also providing an email address in not sufficient;  

 

 

And a link to the full regs & info:

https://www.out-law.com/page-431

 

Edited June 8, 2019 by RobjUK
formatting

[muddys-blues]

On 08/06/2019 at 12:45, markjj said:

 

My point is although I didn't make it very clear was that most of the locos that have failed due to crowdfunding already existed as kits. The LMS twins and the Class 22 to mention a few of them in particular existed in the JLTRT range. Luckily they have been resurrected in the new MM1 company.

Had everyone spent their possibly now lost money on them it may have been enough to keep JLTRT going. They never once asked for deposits or money up front.....  I'm sure that Pete lost a great deal of his own money giving us the wonderful range that he did.

Ps I have no connection to any of the above mentioned companies just a grateful previous customer and glad they ride again..   

 

Better not mention the first run of Class 47's then ! A few people lost out on pre-order payments when JLTRT when kerboom

[markjj]

26 minutes ago, muddys-blues said:

 

Better not mention the first run of Class 47's then ! A few people lost out on pre-order payments when JLTRT when kerboom

I didn't know JLTRT ever took payments up front I stand corrected then. None the less it's a shame they ended up like they did. Back when they first started they used to send stuff with an invoice to pay after you got it. 

 

[muddys-blues]

2 hours ago, markjj said:

I didn't know JLTRT ever took payments up front I stand corrected then. None the less it's a shame they ended up like they did. Back when they first started they used to send stuff with an invoice to pay after you got it. 

 

 

Hi Mark, there was a bit of a kerfuffle when it happened, and a good few had paid up pre-orders for the 47 kit.

 

Best regards

Craig.

[Lord Flashheart]

I pre ordered a class 47 kit from the first batch and at no point was i asked for money up front,I simply got a call from Laurie to say it was ready and did i still want it,money paid and it came a few days later.

 

Rob

[meil]

On 08/06/2019 at 10:08, chris p bacon said:

 You mean like this....

 

https://krmodels.co.uk/contact-us.html

 

This is more applicable to the UK http://www.modellers-mecca.co.uk/ 

 

Find the address!

[chris p bacon]

1 hour ago, meil said:

This is more applicable to the UK http://www.modellers-mecca.co.uk/ 

 

Find the address!

 

Apart from them having a shop in Wall Heath which closed in 2017 I have no idea!

[Jack Wright]

Hello,
I know this is a bit late but after a little bit of searching (Litter picking really) - I came across this thread. So I'm the developer behind the website, (not one of my finest designs, but it mimicked the design I was given) - 

I should clear a few unanswered questions up.

I spoke with Jeff very often during this project and did offer my pieces of advice in terms of business structure (as a business owner myself). All of his intentions were completely genuine, this was put forward as a means to fill a gap in the market and to provide a somewhat affordable RTR kit. It should be noted his pseudo name was also legitimate, we all have our reasons and sometimes, professionalism has to come second.

 

In regards to 'the demise' I never received any payment or hint towards a payment in regards to continuing hosting so I guess I'm partially to blame for the death of this project, but, equally, I have a business to run and food to buy. It's a shame this didn't work out, as it was a genuine idea being followed up, by a gentleman who works a fulltime job and wanted to provide a solution for those who may not want to shed lots of money on something they may not get in their standard Hornby kit, but alas, was not to be.

 

So 'Litter Picking' - Well I am trying to remove any loose ends that may link back to me, this project was genuine, however, I was not involved in the admin. I am trying to keep my reputation (which I am sure you all can understand) So I would request that this thread is closed.

Also for those of you who wandered, there was a deal in place with a manufacturing firm which required a downpayment which Jeff couldn't afford and felt that this was the best solution. 

 

I will leave it with this sentiment, It takes a lot of confidence to follow your dreams and a lot more to face the question, it's a shame it didn't work in this case, but if you do have a good idea, try it, who knows you could be the 1% the other 99% work for?

Cheers folks,

 

Jack
 

[chris p bacon]

52 minutes ago, Jack Wright said:

So 'Litter Picking' - Well I am trying to remove any loose ends that may link back to me, this project was genuine, however, I was not involved in the admin. I am trying to keep my reputation (which I am sure you all can understand) So I would request that this thread is closed.

 

I'll report the post so the mods can make a decision.

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, Jack Wright said:

So I would request that this thread is closed.

 

It's a shame the project originator couldn't be bothered to come back and communicate in the way that you have taken the time to do.