Jump to content

DJModels - Companies House strike-off notification content


Recommended Posts

The problem isn't so much stirring up (which I'm not seeing) as making people aware I'd say. There have been (rightly or wrongly) a number of concerns about DJM previously, and this is a worrying development. As he's put his hands up and said it's his fault for failing to submit his accounts on time (again) that has obviously assuaged a number of people, who have instantly reverted to calling the business a "safe pair of hands". However that's still a big worry IMO. It's not a trivial thing, and this isn't a "warning shot" or anything to that effect, there would have been correspondence before the action from Companies House, which clearly went ignored, and that is a concern, whether folk like it or not.

 

I've not backed Dave for an APT, I'm still waiting for confirmation on a cheaper less feature packed N gauge variant, but if I'm wholly honest this makes me very, very twitchy about backing DJM. Not because I think they're at risk of being struck off (I don't), but if such fundamental processes are not only forgotten, but the consequences are dismissed too, then what else is being overlooked!? The PayPal thing is very odd - if Dave's using a business account then surely they're used to large sums going in and out of the accounts, that's how businesses run, and if he's not then I'd wonder a) why not and b) why that wasn't PayPal's proposed resolution. I'm sure Dave has the ability to deliver great models, but I'd sooner wait until they're in the shops as this makes me nervous.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Reading the postings here over the last few days I'm amazed at the number of posters crawling out of the woodwork discussing not the ATP but seemingly trying, as much as possible, to stir up a hornets nest.

 

Life is full of risks. I can be crossing the road and a car being driven by somebody sending a text can run me down, I can buy some shares on the stock market and the value of those shares can fall, I can enter into a crowd funding and lose what I put in - these are all risks that can be faced every day by anyone. Nobody is forced or coerced into taking these risks. It's what's called life.

 

May I suggest that those interested in company law or the risks of crowd funding create a thread somewhere else and discuss these matters there so that the progress of the ATP model can be discussed here.

 

Keith

 

A thread about the risks of crowdfunding was established quite a while back -  by me; it makes interesting reading with lots of information added by various posters about consumer law and other relevant matters.  The subject was also covered in a recent issue of BRM so there is already plenty of information out there.  More recently I have questioned in that thread what the situation might be for crowd funders if a company is dissolved etc and it happens to owe any money in respect of a project they are funding.

 

I agree entirely that discussion of the gazette notice (which is of course a matter of public record so can quite legitimately be discussed) should be in a separate thread but it started off on this one and has remained here - it would probably be reasonably straightforward, should Dave ask, for it to be placed in a separate thread in the DJM area of the site as all posts recently seem to have been confined to this subject.  As such the discussion seems to centre around it and potential implications so it is not entirely - in my view - something to do with crowd funding.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the postings here over the last few days I'm amazed at the number of posters crawling out of the woodwork discussing not the ATP but seemingly trying, as much as possible, to stir up a hornets nest.

 

Life is full of risks. I can be crossing the road and a car being driven by somebody sending a text can run me down, I can buy some shares on the stock market and the value of those shares can fall, I can enter into a crowd funding and lose what I put in - these are all risks that can be faced every day by anyone. Nobody is forced or coerced into taking these risks. It's what's called life.

 

May I suggest that those interested in company law or the risks of crowd funding create a thread somewhere else and discuss these matters there so that the progress of the ATP model can be discussed here.

 

Keith

 

 

Not really, I think a few people are of the mindset of 'if you ignore it it will go away'. Theres a lot more to a model railway business than playing with trains, informing the media of the next release and combing resources for photos.

 

You need capital at the end of the day to run a business of any type and preferably your own and not anyone elses.

 

Given one of the top rated programmes on UK TV at present is about Bailiffs seizing assets, a lot of people will be keen to see what comes of this. The Bailiffs dont come immediately, there are plenty of registered letters etc sent beforehand. We are at that point now, letters sent and you have a set period to resolve these issues, otherwise things get worse.

 

Seems to be a lot of naivety on this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Reading the postings here over the last few days I'm amazed at the number of posters crawling out of the woodwork discussing not the ATP but seemingly trying, as much as possible, to stir up a hornets nest.

 

 

 

I don't think its about stirring up a hornets nest, i think it's because we are in new territory here.

Companies come and go, it's usually the investors that took the risk that feel the consequences.

When they go bump it's all over bar the shouting and the bargain hunting.

 

Here the risk is not about an APT, but the company managing it, presumably every crowd funded model in the portfolio could be impacted if the over arching company ends up dissolved and the toolings/CADS become possession of the crown together with the contents of the companies bank accounts, which presumably holds all the subscriber payments made for the models to be commissioned..

That is where Companies house is indicating it is heading.

 

One really hopes it doesnt come to that and the seriousness is recognised and handled, but equally one hopes lessons will be learned, business plans put together, accountancy tightened to ensure the obvious risks are avoided in the future. (I do think this was an easy risk to avoid).

 

Rather than this as a purely negative experience, this could be a positive sign that DJ has currently out grown itself. Right now DJ models is a limited company of one person, who's carrying all the weight of responsibility, perhaps theres a good opportunity to expand that and take on a partner that gives wider business experience and allow the man himself to focus on what he does best ? After all, If it was only 1000 APTs* then it would be a £1mn business, and I'd assume theres plans for more models beyond the APT to consider down the road.

 

 


 

Life is full of risks. I can be crossing the road and a car being driven by somebody sending a text can run me down

Some risks can easily be mitigated, using your analogy pavements are a direct example of risk mitigation...the texting driver hitting the raised kerbside provides a mechanism of last resort to warn the motorist. And for the pedestrian the pavement provides a less risky way of road use.

 

It wouldnt be normal to walk on the road where a pavement exists, unless there was a greater risk of not doing so, equally

I dont think it's normal to have a showdown with companies house and for not filing accounts, unless there was a greater risk of not doing so.

 

 

*No idea the actual total.

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I love it when you try and point out that a company is not carrying out the most basic of administrative tasks, and people call it a witch hunt.  :scratchhead:

 

To invest a sizeable amount of money in a project you should be aware of the facts of the company, if people wish to ignore the facts that's up to them, personally it's not the company return I find an issue,  as that looks more like disorganisation.  It is that Paypal have frozen the company account and made it refund only,  quite why after several years trading they would choose to do this only DJM knows.

Having had similar myself ( a similar email address registered and looked like I was running 2 accounts, easily rectified with documentation) I'd question what it is that Paypal don't like about the account,  or whether it is easier to get a refund from Paypal than it is from Lloyds hence the change.  But then I am a cynic.

 

https://www.paypal.com/us/brc/article/understanding-account-limitations

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

This thread has become polarised and unfortunately inevitably so and as Stationmaster Mike has posted above business affairs and model supply have become intertwined,whether you like it or not.Some quite clearly do not,because they are eager for DJM to produce a replica of an iconic prototype and a symbol of now lost UK rail engineering.Who can argue with that?

 

This is a tough call but to label some who have raised concerns as creatures who crawl ot of the woodwork is bluntly wrong.Many of us know that amongst their number are experienced and knowledgeable modellers and professionals who wouldn't stir things just to make trouble and who have legitimate concerns.

 

When Dave started his venture in 2013 it was with the open support and encouragement of this forum.Indeed he has used and does still use it as a conduit for that same business and as both a resource and PR channel.Thus it is,if you will excuse the expression,"Open Season" for members if things are not going according to plan and you put your head up over the firing line.In this case,they are not. We all sincerely hope that they soon will.

 

But if matters are plainly out in the open,then it's in the nature of things that they will stay that way.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has more twists and turns than the history of the original APT.

Hopefully a better outcome

 

Considering the difficult recent private circumstances for Dave, which he neverthless shared on this thread, we can give him support with patience and our confidence in what he does best to help him see the project through.

 

Behind you 100% power and full tilt Xx

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it when you try and point out that a company is not carrying out the most basic of administrative tasks, and people call it a witch hunt.  :scratchhead:

 

To invest a sizeable amount of money in a project you should be aware of the facts of the company, if people wish to ignore the facts that's up to them, personally it's not the company return I find an issue,  as that looks more like disorganisation.  It is that Paypal have frozen the company account and made it refund only,  quite why after several years trading they would choose to do this only DJM knows.

Having had similar myself ( a similar email address registered and looked like I was running 2 accounts, easily rectified with documentation) I'd question what it is that Paypal don't like about the account,  or whether it is easier to get a refund from Paypal than it is from Lloyds hence the change.  But then I am a cynic.

 

https://www.paypal.com/us/brc/article/understanding-account-limitations

 

I would only speculate that maybe the APT-P is the biggest project  to date going through Paypal (the 92 and King, the next biggest and probably not getting anywhere near 6 figures). My guess they needed 1000 people to sign on. Maybe 500 minimum. 1000 * 250 = 250K or with 500 units 125K which must be considerable jump in money passing through Paypal in a short hit which MAY have triggered alarms and blocked further transfers.

Of course there could be other reasons, some dark, some IT bugs etc...

 

One reason why some people did not sign was that there was not a proper credit card process. At least the buyer would have had protection in case the company went bankrupt. With Paypal, I'm not sure what protection you have (other than the right to dispute payment within X number of days) but if equal to card protection then doubtless they "might" well be protecting themselves too.

 

Dave took a lot of personal risk starting this company in 2013. He is getting a big kick up the rear with these issues and really learning things the hard way. I think all comments are made. I wish him well, hope he learns and comes back better than ever. And I hope he learns to address concerns people raise. Not just crowdfunding but even seemingly small things like not getting replies to e-mails (how many threads have posts like that here?). I don't think people are being nasty per-se, just a strong message as 1st Earl Beatty once said "there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today".

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no witch hunt. And as the Stationmaster say's it is not a crowdfunding issue. The reason crowdfunding is somewhat more pertinent than it might be in such a discussion is that unlike a normal scenario where is a business goes down it is that business and its creditors who lose and not normally consumers (yes, I know it isn't that simple as people pay deposits for stuff, staggered payments, partially delivered projects etc), in the case of crowdfunding anybody buying into a project does have an immediate stake. If a company has been gazetted for dissolution and Paypal have pulled a plug then those are relevant facts that people should be aware of if considering joining a crowdfunding project promoted by that company. That is nothing more than a statement of the obvious, to pretend otherwise and to start using words like witch hunt is silly (I don't think people would have the same reluctance to call Hornby or Dapol out, for example, if they were ever to be in a similar position). I'm with others, the thing that'd worry me isn't so much the dissolution notice (that can presumably be addressed if things are on a good footing) but what it reveals about the approach to managing a business (ignoring or not acting upon official letters from company house, filing accounts on time etc) and whether or not I'd be happy extending money to such a business. Then there is the Paypal issue on top. Sorry, if this is all negative then so be it, and if people ignore it and go ahead crowdfunding anyway then that is their business but to try and sweep it under the table and dismiss it all as a witch hunt is inappropriate as people have a right to take an informed decision.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

After working as a consultant engineer for a large practice I went self-employed just over 8 years ago.  Before doing so I sought advice from a neighbour of my Dad's who had been a self-employed consultant for over 10 years.  Essentially his advice was:-

 

- Always pay the VAT on time - without fail.

- Keep good records of the company finances.

- Keep personal and company finances totally separate.

 

Failure to keep on top of the above leads to much grief and ultimately disaster I was told.

 

What I am reading on this thread about the PayPal issue and the information on the Companies House website makes me nervous.   I know that Crowdfunding is inherently risky but this adds a worrying new dimension.

 

Darius

 

 

PS - the large practice that I worked for was owned by Carillion.   Nuff said.

Edited by Darius43
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

With all due respect to the posters above - is this discussion actually getting us anywhere? The situation is not very good, I think we all know that. We are now playing a waiting game to see what the future brings - endless comments about running / how to run a business are pointless.

 

Roy (who has a 14 car APT on order and runs a small business).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it when you try and point out that a company is not carrying out the most basic of administrative tasks, and people call it a witch hunt.  :scratchhead:

 

 

When 95% of posts on this subject seem to be saying 'I know much more than you about this subject and this is how it should be done' that's JUST what constitutes a witch hunt! Everyone in the world isn't perfect, or most of aren't anyway......................... 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

When 95% of posts on this subject seem to be saying 'I know much more than you about this subject and this is how it should be done' that's JUST what constitutes a witch hunt! Everyone in the world isn't perfect, or most of aren't anyway......................... 

 

 

With respect,  If a company can't fill out or supply the most basic information required to run the said company but requests payment in advance for a yet to be produced product, then it is not a 'Witch Hunt'.  It is informing those who want the said product that the company is somewhat disorganised or has a lais sez faire attitude towards regulation and company protocol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Respectfully that isn't what's happening, actually if anything I'd say it's the exact opposite.

 

Something(s) serious has happened, even if it ultimately is totally innocent and essentially a series of admin cock-ups, but what you've got is a number of people basically saying "I don't care, I've got faith in DJM". That's all well and good, but that doesn't mean anyone whose blind faith wavers is conducting a witch hunt.

I agree contributions saying "I've done it for the last x years" in isolation doesn't add anything aside from rubbing salt into wounds which is unnecessary, but I'm not seeing an issue with discussing a factual set of circumstances, and I'm not sure that "It's really bad" is any worse than "who cares", which ultimately seem to be the two camps.

 

Edit: beaten by Dave by seconds dammit!

Edited by njee20
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the overall that the point about the seriousness of the situation has been made. People who have crowdfunded here are advised and can deal with this as they see fit or not.

 

I think we can now allow time to decide the conclusion of this saga and pray it is resolved accordingly and does not repeat again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well put.

 

u

 

Dave Jones left Dapol 5 years ago.To suggest that he is somehow tainted by association with them is wildly fanciful and does neither DJM nor Dapol any favours. Apart from which,Dapol are highly sensitive to some of the innuendo that has been posted on this forum to the extent that they no longer post here and have themselves on one occasion stated their intention to take legal action against any person who in their opinion issues material they consider malicious or damaging.

 

 

The world is a different place five years on.Dapol are producing excellent models in all three scales.If Dave is suffering a hopefully temporary sticky patch it has nothing whatsoever to do with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can now allow time to decide the conclusion of this saga and pray it is resolved accordingly and does not repeat again.

I'm not sure prayer is called for. There is ultimately one person who can avoid a recurrence, and I'm not sure he's influenced by prayers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure prayer is called for. There is ultimately one person who can avoid a recurrence, and I'm not sure he's influenced by prayers!

 

It depends on your definition of prayer. But time will tell if he is influenced by them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Unless you are purchasing an APT or 92 which are crowd funded ie you have a vested interest, isn't this thread little more than trolling of DJM?

It has been open season on that chap for a very long time. And on any thread that involves discussion about external subjects and expertises, there will always be plenty of knowledge aired, irrespective of the vested interests - or otherwise - of the contributors.

 

I believe Dave has a thick skin. Survival is likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.