DJM, the end.

[Roy Langridge]

4 minutes ago, Richard E said:

Let's keep this on topic please - it is sad to see how this has ended.

 

 

I am no longer sure what is on-topic. The title is "Is this the end". Yes.

 

This thread may as well be locked and I would suggest a new one that is purely focused on financial recovery for those of us affected.

 

Edit - just to clarify, I don't mean that those affected are the only ones allowed to post in.

Roy

Edited June 7, 2019 by Roy Langridge

[Widnes Model Centre]

Ah indeed poor Dave.

Let down by many investors who took the opportunity to withdraw from his projects. Poor behaviour by those who made an expression of interest and failed to pay when it was quite obvious that an EOI was actually a firm commitment. Let down by accountants, web designers, PayPal, Lloyds Bank, Chinese factories, other retailers, other manufacturers the list is endless. Even assaulted outside his own home.  Having to endure lots of foreign travel and endless queues in airports.

Must be a broken man and l hope he takes some time out to recuperate. 

Poor Dave. 

 

 

 

[truffy]

1 minute ago, Roy Langridge said:

I would suggest a new one that is purely focused on financial recovery for those of us affected.

 

[Roy Langridge]

Just now, truffy said:

 

 

I know that thread exists, but it has already wandered off down paths based on conjecture. What we now need is facts and, hopefully, some advice / statement from the Liquidators.

 

Roy

[Phil Parker]

3 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

I know that thread exists, but it has already wandered off down paths based on conjecture. What we now need is facts and, hopefully, some advice / statement from the Liquidators.

 

To be honest, unless every single post is moderated, something I don't have time to do, then every thread will wander. I suspect the credit card thread wandered partly because people were determined to have their say and this thread was locked awaiting facts. Now it's open again, hopefully, we'll keep conjecture and recriminations here, allowing the other thread to be more useful.

 

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

30 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

So I have every hope that other folk who want to launch new models will turn to him to help them. 

 

 

Lordy, I hope not.  As the historical record shows, he's single handedly bu66ered up several models for other folk already....

 

It seems that other folk he's worked with have moved him out as soon as possible, followed shortly by delayed projects suddenly getting back on track...

 

Caveat Emptor - a couple of hours internet research would have yielded all the relevant information necessary to decide whether to throw your money at this individual.  There was a long and inglorious prior history.    Not so much 'I told you so' as, 'you should have found out for yourself'.

[brittannia]

It would have courteous of David Jones to have contacted his Crowdfunders of his dilemma, he was quick enough to send out payment requests, but there again it took him time to acknowledge these payments.

[Roy Langridge]

1 minute ago, brittannia said:

It would have courteous of David Jones to have contacted his Crowdfunders of his dilemma, he was quick enough to send out payment requests, but there again it took him time to acknowledge these payments.

 

That is one thing I don't think he can be accused of! He was forever promising invoices that never arrived.

Roy

[Edwardian]

16 minutes ago, Darius43 said:

 

Methinks Lord Percy would think you were gloating.

 

Darius

 

Well, of course, the problem of ascribing motivation to people is that they are apt to disagree.

 

It is unfortunate that you and Roy adopt a pejorative mischaracterisation of just some of what I said, ignoring the rest.  

 

Despite this, I remain very concerned by, and sympathetic to, the human cost of this unfortunate debacle, whether it be the impact upon crowd-funder, the proprietor or those in China or the home industry unfairly criticised as things unravelled.  It's a bit of a sick suggestion, to be frank, that anyone takes pleasure in any of this.

 

So, I wonder, should I be hypocritical and shed crocodile tears for a business with an indifferent record in design and delivery that ultimately could not maintain its position in a crowded market, just to avoid the charge of "gloating"?   

 

I prefer Richard E's suggestion; let's, please, keep on topic rather than indulge in subjective criticism of another's perceived intentions. Alternatively, if the conversation is not going the way you want, you could ask the Mods to close it down.  Or, you could let others speak and ignore them as you wish.  

[Edge]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Indeed, Section 75 claims are resisted, especially in a case like this.

 

Threaten them with a referral to the Financial Services Ombudsman. That will cost them far more so they will then usually pay up.

 

Touching on this, I have been involved in investigating and resolving s.75 claims for multiple companies and at the FOS itself.  I can assure you that the FOS holds no fear for them even if it will cost money to resolve - financial institutions are now more concerned with precedent and principle rather than immediate cost. What’s more, whenever I was threatened with this myself, it was time to smile warmly, hand over a FOS information leaflet and usher them to the door. You will get considerably more help by being polite and friendly.

 

It it seems unlikely to me that s.75 will work in this case unfortunately - the rule of thumb for my investigations has always been that the actual money spent must be over £100.01 to be valid. Having said that, by all means, try with your various financial institutions- I haven’t worked at every single provider so maybe some will be more willing than others and if you did spend over £100.01 then that does change things.

 

very sorry to hear about this whole situation, for all concerned. Dave has lost more than his business here (as if that wasn’t enough) and of course others have also lost financially too. A bad situation all over 

[Roy Langridge]

3 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

It is unfortunate that you and Roy adopt a pejorative mischaracterisation of just some of what I said, ignoring the rest.  

 

 

It is not that, your posts seems to contravene this request:

 

Roy

[Edwardian]

Just now, Roy Langridge said:

 

It is not that, your posts seems to contravene this request:

 

Roy

 

I repeat "not gloating". 

 

Clearly, Roy, you are unwilling or unable to switch the focus from me to the topic and just give it a rest.

 

Fine, that is you prerogative, but I have other plans for my morning.  The last word is yours; fill your boots.

[Ryde-on-time]

12 minutes ago, Edge said:

It it seems unlikely to me that s.75 will work in this case unfortunately - the rule of thumb for my investigations has always been that the actual money spent must be over £100.01 to be valid. Having said that, by all means, try with your various financial institutions- I haven’t worked at every single provider so maybe some will be more willing than others and if you did spend over £100.01 then that does change things.

 

Sorry, but that is not correct. For s75 protection the full price of the item must be over £100 (and under £30K) but you only have to pay 1p of that on a credit card to get protection. The DJModels website clearly showed yesterday that monies paid were deposits and the full price was over £100

 

An example is that you pay £50 deposit on a credit card for a £10K car with the rest paid in cash. S75 covers you for the full £10K

 

Info can be found here:

 

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases/

Edited June 7, 2019 by Ryde-on-time

[MarshLane]

I was intending to stay quiet on this subject, as it has all the potential to fall into the usual pit of assumption, guesswork and opinionated rubbish, but given that I am privy to some inside information, I feel that some things need to be said in order to create a ’straight record’.  In saying that, please note I am not breaking any confidences with this post.  I appreciate that everyone will have their own views some of which will be right, and some which will be wrong, some will take the following on board, others will dismiss or try to pick-it apart, but I would make it clear, that in no way, will I expand on, or reply further to anything contained within this response, so please do not ask.

 

It is now in the public domain that DJ Models has been placed in insolvency, this was not a Dave's wish, but it has been forced on him in recent weeks by a third party in the UK.  There have been other serious issues that are not in the public domain, which were outside of Dave’s control, and in my honest opinion, could not generally have been anticipated.  I will not expand on that, except to say, that they had a major effect on things, especially when a couple of projects were past the point of no return.  Be aware, that whatever people think, Dave has done a lot behind the scenes to try and prevent this situation.  I am not for one second saying that as MD of the company he is blameless, purely saying there is more than one side to every story.  Dave had already commenced proceedings in recent weeks to recover money from the China factory after they failed to produce tooling and stopped responding to contact.

 

Many on here, have talked about communication, and yes I would agree, that in all things communication is key.  But there are only 24 hours in every day, as a one-man band trying to run a business, support his family and handle the development of ever more complicated models and on-board electronics, which takes far more time than people would think, something has to go as you simply run out of hours, and in that situation its a case of looking at priorities.  Dave took the decision to pull out of rmWeb because in some peoples view he was in the wrong regardless, and again posting on forums takes up time, as much as everyone would have liked them to continue.

 

Some people have been very kind and supportive to him on here, and commented on the negative effect this has had on Dave.  His current situation is far from good, and there is certainly no aspect of him walking away with money.  In his own words, he has been a modeller for 46 of his 54 years, but this whole saga has brought that to an end.  Like many people who decide to fund a business, there is risk, but it is calculated risk.  There are ways of raising capital through remortgaging and personal loans etc, and in this case these have been done.  The negative effect of this, when brought together with the outcome, will be obvious to anyone reading.  Dave has said that he is keen for the liquidator to attempt to get hold of the tooling, which a third party could take forward, but is very definitive, that the latter will be with no involvement from himself.

 

From my point of view, it is a sad end, that really did not need to be reached if two organisations had kept their word. Nobody has benefitted from the situation.  So to anyone who is in any doubt, any crowdfunding deal can go wrong, and nobody should ever put up (invest) money they cannot afford to lose, and while it is of little comfort I appreciate, but to all of us, the amount of money we as modellers may have lost is sheer pennies compared to what has been lost for those involved, let alone the task ahead.

[Colin_McLeod]

19 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

That is one thing I don't think he can be accused of! He was forever promising invoices that never arrived.

Roy

Perhaps if he had sent out invoices it would have brought in sufficient funds to keep the projects going.  Or perhaps it would have only delayed the end.  We will never know now.

[Edge]

4 minutes ago, Ryde-on-time said:

Sorry, but that is not correct. For s75 protection the full price of the item must be over £100 (and under £30K) but you only have to pay 1p of that on a credit card to get protection. The DJModels website clearly showed yesterday that monies paid were deposits and the full price was over £100

 

An example is that you pay £50 deposit on a credit card for a £10K car with the rest paid in cash. S75 covers you for the full £10K

 

Info can be found here:

 

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases/

 

I did say that I didn’t think that it would be covered, nobody would be more delighted than me to be proved wrong on this one, truly. And it’s certainly worth trying it.

 

As an aside, beware of this website - they don’t half talk nonsense about some things. In this case, the article seems alright, but i’d also want a corroboratory source of information for practically anything this site says - the number of people I have dealt with who have been misinformed by it is quite staggering .

[woodenhead]

35 minutes ago, Richard E said:

Let's keep this on topic please - it is sad to see how this has ended. So much promised and many people, including myself, let down.

 

The biggest loser will be Dave himself, I doubt that any borrowing from the banks will have been possible without a directors guarantee and, as such, he stands to lose his house and all his personal assets. Indeed he could well come out of this as a bankrupt. Very nasty for him and I feel that we, despite any anger or upset folk feel, should have some sympathy for him in this.

 

DJ Models was a limited company therefore Dave's personal liabilities were limited - correct we don't know what banking guarantees he may have had to make for some borrowing but much of his delivered work was for Kernow and Hattons who would have provided the finance.  The J94 and some wagons were not crowdfunded so may have been based on company borrowing to fund.  But the majority of his money probably came from lots of individual investors in the company in the form of deposits for the APT, the 92 and the King - the purpose of all monies paid on crowdfunded models is to pay for each stage - in this case the CADs.  For Dave to make no profit (but also no loss) all the development and trips to China would have had to come out of the deposits on those models, if the deposits dried up then quickly the funds to develop the models would dry up just as quick leading to where the company is now.

[chris p bacon]

6 minutes ago, MarshLane said:

It is now in the public domain that DJ Models has been placed in insolvency, this was not a Dave's wish, but it has been forced on him in recent weeks by a third party in the UK.

 

That will come out in due course as the liquidators wind the company up.

 

7 minutes ago, MarshLane said:

From my point of view, it is a sad end, that really did not need to be reached if two organisations had kept their word

 

Sorry but you can't blame 'other' organisations, any blame for a company folding lays squarely at the feet of those whose company it is.  If there were unforeseen problems then there was inadequate contingency within the company to deal with them.

 

[Roy Langridge]

6 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Perhaps if he had sent out invoices it would have brought in sufficient funds to keep the projects going.  Or perhaps it would have only delayed the end.  We will never know now.

 

I nearly said that in my post, but decided it may possibly have been a red rag to a few bulls!

 

As I said before, this is a very sad end. Yes there is lots of focus here on money lost. My £250 was spent a long time ago and I will not miss it, what I will miss is never having a 14-car APT, something DJ gave us all hope for.

 

I hope he recovers from this as an individual. I think there are few people on here who have no idea how hard I is running a business. I run one which has a few customers at a time (3 or 4) with high-value contracts. Keeping communications going even then can be hard at times when they introduce delay to their projects and then all expect their work to be picked up again and completed at the drop of a hat - of course all at the same time.

 

Roy

Edited June 7, 2019 by Roy Langridge

[wellseasoned]

I'd like to ask this question again.

Has anyone managed to make phone contact with either Dave Jones or the Insolvency company appointed. Personally I would not relish contacting D.J. at this time, but my C.C. company have asked I try to do this before they open up a case for a refund under section 75.

I feel my question is highly relevant at this point, and an answer may help many of us that will be seeking a similar refund. The why and wherefore of I.P. etc etc will surelly unfold at a later stage of the insolvency investigation.

Here and now there will be people, fellow modellers, seeking a refund of deposits paid.  I think helping each other wherever we can would be the best thing for many at this stage.

[Stuart A]

12 hours ago, Ouroborus said:

He has been in a similar position before with N-thusiast and he got it all back together then, so maybe he can do it again, although I guess that any investors in MK3 will be very wary.  Whatever way he goes, I hope he takes a hard luck at how this panned out from start to finish.  Maybe running your own business just isn't for him

 

Interesting that you say that.  I didn't have a great experience back in the the pre-internet days with N-thusiast, when I ordered a 59/1 from him.  Had to chase and chase, got stories that it was stolen from a show, eventually  I got a model, but missing handrails, etched nameplate but transfer number plate.  Probably was too young and naive back then (and just glad I'd got a model that I'd fully paid for up front with a very small inheritance I'd got from my Grandmother) to do anything about it - and it was a case of phoning or writing one of those letters with a pen and everything.

 

Since then I've steered clear  - I almost signed up for the N APT, but I think subconsciously my previous experience  stopped me!

 

Sad for those who have lost money, however I think the volume of models announced was clearly too much for one man to manage alone.  I think crowdfunding will not be damaged, as long as they are well managed, which Revolution is a great example of (and the reason I've got a 92 ordered, Sturgeon, KFA, IPAs ordered)

[woodenhead]

19 minutes ago, MarshLane said:

I was intending to stay quiet on this subject, as it has all the potential to fall into the usual pit of assumption, guesswork and opinionated rubbish, but given that I am privy to some inside information, I feel that some things need to be said in order to create a ’straight record’.  In saying that, please note I am not breaking any confidences with this post.  I appreciate that everyone will have their own views some of which will be right, and some which will be wrong, some will take the following on board, others will dismiss or try to pick-it apart, but I would make it clear, that in no way, will I expand on, or reply further to anything contained within this response, so please do not ask.

 

It is now in the public domain that DJ Models has been placed in insolvency, this was not a Dave's wish, but it has been forced on him in recent weeks by a third party in the UK.  There have been other serious issues that are not in the public domain, which were outside of Dave’s control, and in my honest opinion, could not generally have been anticipated.  

 

 

So what we get here is 'It's not my fault guys' through an intermediary.

 

Clearly the 7pm update on the site was going to be Dave explaining this but perhaps he was blocked or thought better of it so now he has to find another way to tell us.

 

I understand why we won't get the details and I'm not really interested, really the whole saga that led to this should be left to lie, it's the creditors who matter now.

 

If a 'third party' had forced his hand to go to insolvency then he clearly owed enough to them with little chance of paying and that is a purely business matter.

[Colin_McLeod]

8 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

I nearly said that in my post, but decided it may possibly have been a red rag to a few bulls!

 

As I said before, this is a very sad end. Yes there is lots of focus here on money lost. My £250 was spent a long time ago and I will not miss it, what I will miss is never having a 14-car APT, something DJ gave us all hope for.

 

I hope he recovers from this as an individual. I think there are few people on here who have no idea how hard I is running a business. I run one which has a few customers at a time (3 or 4) with high-value contracts. Keeping communications going even then can be hard at times when they introduce delay to their projects and then all expect their work to be picked up again and completed at the drop of a hat - of course all at the same time.

 

Roy

 

About the £250 none of us ever expected it back so none of us is short of planned cash.  What we expected was to have to pay another £750 and then get a model train in return.

 

Substitute appropriate figures for the King and the 92.

 

The model train will not now appear but our cash box is £750 better off.

 

The point I am making is that none of us have suffered a cash problem because of the collapse of DJmodels, unlike Dave who presumably had reckoned on getting back the much larger sums of money he invested in the company.

 

Just saying this to put relative "losses" in perspective.

[Ryde-on-time]

36 minutes ago, Edge said:

 

I did say that I didn’t think that it would be covered, nobody would be more delighted than me to be proved wrong on this one, truly. And it’s certainly worth trying it.

 

As an aside, beware of this website - they don’t half talk nonsense about some things. In this case, the article seems alright, but i’d also want a corroboratory source of information for practically anything this site says - the number of people I have dealt with who have been misinformed by it is quite staggering .

There are plenty of other consumer websites giving info on this such as Which, I agree that Money saving Expert is not perfect 

 

Where I disagree is about approaching a CC company saying "it’s certainly worth trying it". I would say it is definitely worth trying because by using a credit card directly (but not through an intermediary like Paypal) the purchaser has rights laid out clearly in Law in the Consumer Rights Act. A friendly approach is always best, and it might require firm persistence, but if people have a legitimate claim they should persevere. 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Ryde-on-time
to add a caveat

[DavidH]

12 minutes ago, wellseasoned said:

Has anyone managed to make phone contact with either Dave Jones or the Insolvency company appointed. Personally I would not relish contacting D.J. at this time, but my C.C. company have asked I try to do this before they open up a case for a refund under section 75.

 

I sent an email seeking clarification to Dave's business inbox in the morning of the 4th. I've had no answer.

 

Here, I believe Phil Parker has had communication with the insolvency company.

 

On the N gauge forum, "Snowwolflair" contacted and had a reply from the insolvency company, and apparently follow up messages.