DJM, the end.

[Colin_McLeod]

A limited liability company must have the word Limited in its name.  It can also trade under a different name. Two examples:

 

DJModels Limited trading as DJModels

 

CG Recovery Limited trading as CG & Co

[JSpencer]

13 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

 

Anything else I’ve missed ?

 

 

 

 

Yes, if they were lucky, they got an update newsletter that was to be held secret for a few weeks prior to publshing on his website.  And - those who took part - a scanning party on the APT.

[Roy L S]

Not only that but the Liqui

9 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

As mentioned the 71 was all via Kernow.

 

The king, 92 and APT were crowdfunded via DJ.

The 17 was crowd funded and refunded.

 

What did crowd funders get for their money..

as far as I can see...

 

Scan of a class 92

Scan of an APT

2x CADs of a class 92

2x CADs of an APT (2 cars)

1x CAD of a king

1x CAD of a 17

1x EP tooling of a class 17

A lot of registered IP designs

Presumably legal advice and fees to guide the events leading up to May 1st.

The fees of liquidators from the remains.

 

Anything else I’ve missed ?

 

Now if DJ had got access back to the J94 / 17/ 71 tooling, would it have changed the situation.. ?  without cash he’s only got access to lumps of metal that need none-crowdfunded cash to use.

 

 

 

Just a quick correction. 

 

The N Gauge Class 17 was not "crowdfunded and refunded". Up to the production of the first EP no crowdfunding was involved. Cash was then needed to finish the tooling and get the model into production which Dave did not have. To overcome this he invited people who wanted the model to pay up front for it in exchange for which (if memory serves - I may be wrong on this point) price would be held at the original RRP and not increased. However at around the same time he then became unable to access the tooling and the matter could not be progressed. As he could not say when or even if the position would change payments up front for finished Class 17s was refunded. 

 

Roy

[Edwardian]

12 minutes ago, Roy L S said:

 

Woodenhead helpfully posted this a couple of pages previously: -

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

What are the Duties of an Liquidator?

Once appointed, the liquidator is responsible for:

Realising the assets of the insolvent company and achieving the best possible price;

Address outstanding claims against the limited company and satisfy the claims as set-out by law;

Distributing the returns to the company’s creditors in order of priority;

Acting in the best interests of the creditors (not the directors).

Maximising the return for creditors

Maximising the return for creditors is the liquidator’s primary responsibility.

As part of this duty, they may apply to the court to restore property that has been disposed of in an unfair way. For example, assets may have been sold to a connected business for less than their market value.

 

Investigating the Possibility of Wrongful or Fraudulent Trading

A liquidator can also take action against current or previous company directors who did not act in the best interests of creditors (Section 214). For example, if the company continued to trade and make further losses after becoming insolvent, the directors can be made personally liable for the debts.

 

https://www.companydebt.com/liquidation/what-is-the-role-of-a-liquidator-in-company-liquidation/

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Of course the caveat to all of this is that their investigation can only be as good as the information they are able to obtain and the available man hours that they are able to cover via the liquidation for it.

 

Regards

 

Roy

 

 

A director owes fiduciary duties to to the company act in the best interests of the company.  When the company is solvent, this equates to acting in the best interests of the members (shareholders).  Once the company is insolvent, or pending insolvent, this shifts to acting in the best interests of the company's creditors. Wrongful trading occurs when there is no reasonable prospect of returning to profit so that trading merely exposes the creditors to further loss.  That is why it is a breach of duty (and a statutory offence) and why it can render a director personally liable to make a contribution to the company's assets.

 

I anticipate this will prompt people to wonder whether, if deposit monies were taken to fund the wider business with no realistic prospect of making the models they were supposed to fund, as I have seen suggested, there is anything that can be done.  However, I would caution thus: (i) Only the liquidator is likely to be in possession of the facts to determine such matters, so it's rather pointless to speculate concerning them; and, (ii) the liquidator is in practice likely to have zero interest in investigating this unless it's pretty clear that there was wrongdoing or a creditor foots the bill of digging deeper. 

 

So, while I can entirely see why people might be hacked off and suspicions, it is likely that in this, as in most cases, no actual legally culpable wrong-doing will be established.  

[Phil Parker]

8 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Here we go again.  Locking a thread is a decision for the Mods. 

 

As Colin said, locking threads is a decision for Mods. The whole point of RMweb is to facilitate discussion, which is why we only lock a thread in extreme circumstances.  If you are bored of a topic stop reading the thread, don't grandly announce, as has happened 4 or 5 times in this one, that you think the thread should be locked.  Others are still enjoying the discussion and Mods will do their best to let them carry on. 

 

We will clear out posts containing potential libel, racism or ranting, but again, we've got better things to do. 

 

FWIW, I suspect this has largely run its course for the moment. The process is in the hands of professionals. They will work their way through it in the same way they have done many times before. The information available to someone with access to the DJM books and person who runs the company is likely to be more relevant to them than chattering on the web. The main thing we can do is register our losses if we handed over any money, and I've already explained how to do this a couple of pages back.

 

Now play nicely. I've got to go out in the rain to a show in a marquee. If I'm modding from a car stuck in a muddy car park, I might not be feeling so generous.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

If I'm modding from a car stuck in a muddy car park, I might not be feeling so generous.

 

 

[CUCKOO LINE]

As someone without a claim I have been reading with Interest, a lot of emotion but it seems to me someone needs to sit back and think of a logical, business like set of questions such as,

!) Was it proper crowdfunding or not

2) if it was crowdfunding where was the separate account

     a) within DJ Models

     b) outside DJ Models

3) Can I get my money back through other means ?

4) ……..

 and then fire into appropriate place to try and get the answers.

[Widnes Model Centre]

52 minutes ago, CUCKOO LINE said:

As someone without a claim I have been reading with Interest, a lot of emotion but it seems to me someone needs to sit back and think of a logical, business like set of questions such as,

!) Was it proper crowdfunding or not

2) if it was crowdfunding where was the separate account

     a) within DJ Models

     b) outside DJ Models

3) Can I get my money back through other means ?

4) ……..

 and then fire into appropriate place to try and get the answers.

 

As someone who has lost £250, I know that I will never see that money again. I doubt very much if anyone on here will receive anything, unless through a successful S.75 or via Paypal.

 

I asked the question earlier as to what had been produced using Crowdfunders money. The answer was nothing except the 71 which was confirmed as having been paid direct to Kernow. Thankfully they took this on but I am sure at a cost to themselves with having to give refunds later on. Honest people doing the right thing.

 

I am 100% certain that DJ is reading these posts. If you need to speak to me Dave, you know where I am.

 

Inept is one thing, but for no one to end up with anything, questionable.

 

Speaking to my colleagues in the trade. We believe this has done damage to the industry as a whole. How many on here would have bought any product from other manufactures, save for the fact you had used you money to invest in a DJM product?

 

Some years ago I had what I described at the time as "My business stolen from me" by someone I trusted. He was even a friend who I had helped set up his own business. Seven years later the company filed for liquidation. The investigating recovery specialists never even wrote to me. I was unaware that a voluntary liquidation was in progess. That business continues to trade today. But has no debts, how does that work????

 

If and I don't know for certain, there is any money left it will go to DJM. It only takes a minute to fill in the debt recovery form kindly supplied by Colin McLeod.

 

Still angry, will it ever go away?

[Joseph_Pestell]

12 hours ago, meil said:

Limited liability companies are required to show Limited after their name for good reason. It is there as a warning to all who deal with then that their liability is limited.

 

The company's liability is limited. But, in some circumstances, and I think this may well be one of them, the directors become personally liable.

[meil]

20 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

The company's liability is limited. But, in some circumstances, and I think this may well be one of them, the directors become personally liable.

Yes that is correct, in so far as my statement was made on the basis that the Directors have acted properly.

[Simon Lee]

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

Now play nicely. I've got to go out in the rain to a show in a marquee. If I'm modding from a car stuck in a muddy car park, I might not be feeling so generous.

 

I'm visiting tomorrow if you want a brolly or dry socks :)).....

[GeoffAlan]

I suspect Dave has now been kicked enough to last several lifetimes. Perhaps time to close the thread?

[RedgateModels]

2 minutes ago, GeoffAlan said:

I suspect Dave has now been kicked enough to last several lifetimes. Perhaps time to close the thread?

 

It's not even on a different page ........

 

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

As Colin said, locking threads is a decision for Mods. The whole point of RMweb is to facilitate discussion, which is why we only lock a thread in extreme circumstances.  If you are bored of a topic stop reading the thread, don't grandly announce, as has happened 4 or 5 times in this one, that you think the thread should be locked.  Others are still enjoying the discussion and Mods will do their best to let them carry on. 

 

We will clear out posts containing potential libel, racism or ranting, but again, we've got better things to do. 

 

FWIW, I suspect this has largely run its course for the moment. The process is in the hands of professionals. They will work their way through it in the same way they have done many times before. The information available to someone with access to the DJM books and person who runs the company is likely to be more relevant to them than chattering on the web. The main thing we can do is register our losses if we handed over any money, and I've already explained how to do this a couple of pages back.

 

Now play nicely. I've got to go out in the rain to a show in a marquee. If I'm modding from a car stuck in a muddy car park, I might not be feeling so generous.

 

 

[pete_mcfarlane]

13 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The only way to follow it is from the thread I'm afraid.  At some time in the build up the reference to Kickstarter vanished and it was then presented as crowdfunded although quite how that was arranged I don't know offhand.

 

12 hours ago, JSpencer said:

Edit: he did consider Kickstarter at first but that imposes a time constraint too short for this industry. And I had the impression at the time that he could not figure out how to use it.

 

One of the requirements of Kickstarter is to have a working prototype: https://www.kickstarter.com/honest

 

That's not going to support the railway modelling (and not just DJM) approach of showing a photo of the real thing and asking for cash to fund the entire development cycle. It requires an amount of investment to already have taken place.

 

Now if DJM had used Kickstarter and followed this rule, there would have probably been fewer crowdfunded models announced, and more actually delivered. 

Edited June 14, 2019 by pete_mcfarlane

[jjb1970]

1 hour ago, CUCKOO LINE said:

As someone without a claim I have been reading with Interest, a lot of emotion but it seems to me someone needs to sit back and think of a logical, business like set of questions such as,

!) Was it proper crowdfunding or not

2) if it was crowdfunding where was the separate account

     a) within DJ Models

     b) outside DJ Models

3) Can I get my money back through other means ?

4) ……..

 and then fire into appropriate place to try and get the answers.

 

Very pertinent questions.

 

Yes, it was crowd funding, but it was not crowd funding of the sort promoted by platforms such as kickstarter. I think the sort of platforms many associated with crowd funding have certain requirements such as requiring money is committed within a certain time period and also generally expect the promoter to have a reasonably mature design or prototype to demonstrate real intent. Such platforms are not without risk but they do weed out the complete dreamers and no hopers and require a certain degree of up front commitment from whoever is asking for money.

 

The sort of crowd funding practised by DJM was little more than a wish list with money attached in my opinion and seemed to be an alternative to a business plan. The OO APT is a good case in point, an N gauge model was announced by DJM and DToS as a crowd funded effort, suddenly in response to a few suggestions it'd be splendid if a OO model was made DJM announced a OO project. It was all very extemporized and ad hoc and just seemed to be little more than a case of "capital idea, I'll do it" followed by asking for £250 and hoping it'd all work somehow.

 

In the early days of DJM Kernow acted as the DJM "banker" and imposed some discipline I think, and gave purchasers some confidence. When Kernow pulled the plug and walked away from DJM (and that in itself was a huge red flag) I suspect any semblance of order and discipline left the building of DJM at the same time.

Edited June 14, 2019 by jjb1970

[njee20]

Kickstarter has quite a lot of rules like that, to weed out projects that are out and out scams! I've backed 3 projects on Kickstarter, I got one, I doubt I'll ever see another one, it's now 2 years late and even if it shows up is now wholly obsolete, and the third has gone very quiet in the last few months, probably never to be seen. I'm fine with that, happy to chuck some money in for stuff.

 

If you want to crowdfund for an out and out scam then Indiegogo is your friend, absolutely no stipulations about working prototypes or any such rigour!

 

I don't get why people assume crowdfunding = Kickstarter. It's purely a platform to host projects and bring them to the attention of a market that may not know it exists. For a hobby like ours it's not all that useful, as it's easy to reach a large part of the audience effectively (ie on here and other forums), and those who aren't on the forums probably aren't trawling Kickstarter looking for niche projects to back.

So:

1) yes, it was proper crowdfunding insofar as the buyers funded the project

2a) Dave said the funds were ringfinced, so to all intents and purposes, yes

2b) Doubtful, but also unnecessary - at some point you have to release the funds, so if there was a legitimate reason/excuse to release the funds where they were held is immaterial

3) that's been done extensively - through S75 if you used a credit card, or potentially via a chargeback, but that's less likely to work, there's a separate thread on this

 

[jjb1970]

1 hour ago, Widnes Model Centre said:

 

Speaking to my colleagues in the trade. We believe this has done damage to the industry as a whole. How many on here would have bought any product from other manufactures, save for the fact you had used you money to invest in a DJM product?

 

 

I think it must have had some effect, how big that effect might be is debatable but particularly in the case of the APT crowd funder many modellers would not be able to hand over £250 up front and commit to a £1000+ model without adjusting other potential plans for what they might want to buy. The other schemes which were asking for deposits of £30 I'd imagine have had less impact directly but even there it is not so much the initial £30 but accepting a commitment to buy a £100+ model and in some cases it appears people have committed for multiple models. One reason I don't do crowd funding is I'm uncomfortable with having such commitments hanging over my head.

[njee20]

I agree that I think the damage in that respect will be limited. Some people will have a strict modelling budget, a proportion of which has gone onto DJM deposits, but equally those people must have psychologically budgeted for the balance payments, which are now free to be spent elsewhere. Others will just buy things they want - if you wanted an APT the fact you could have bought a couple of Hatton's 66s, an Accurascale Deltic and some Bachmann mk2s is pretty irrelevant!

 

I don't think it's a good thing for the hobby, but IMO the 'damage' will be people's reticence to back crowdfunded projects, and I'm not sure that's is a bad thing, people asking more questions is good. The risk is more that legitimate entities don't get funding because people become risk averse. 

[RedgateModels]

Anyone who does get a refund on their APT deposit - this is as near to new as you can get

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hornby-R543-APT-Advanced-Passenger-Train-Set-1980s-OO-Gauge-Looks-To-Be-Unused/223550393948?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160908105057%26meid%3D9c1f4a00f0f64a7bbd7f4fcf5dad5871%26pid%3D100675%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D15%26sd%3D293064003217%26itm%3D223550393948&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236&_trkparms=pageci%3A4fa46f4e-8e8d-11e9-ad55-74dbd180cf30|parentrq%3A557c024416b0aa13f5ab036bffe45cdd|iid%3A1

[truffy]

15 minutes ago, njee20 said:

I don't think it's a good thing for the hobby, but IMO the 'damage' will be people's reticence to back crowdfunded projects, and I'm not sure that's is a bad thing, people asking more questions is good. The risk is more that legitimate entities don't get funding because people become risk averse. 

It's certainly made me sceptical of pie-in-the-sky projects. One is potentially of interest, but I'm not going in until there's something more tangible.

[woodenhead]

3 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

I was going to get the train to loughborough but maybe I will drive and park in the muddiest spot I can find and await rescue.

[spikey]

4 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

 

A neighbour's child has just looked over my shoulder and pointed out with delight that she "can see one of that lady's bottoms!"

Edited June 14, 2019 by spikey

[AY Mod]

3 hours ago, GeoffAlan said:

I suspect Dave has now been kicked enough to last several lifetimes. Perhaps time to close the thread?

 

If you had taken less time to read Phil's earlier post https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/145052-djm-the-end/&do=findComment&comment=3584367

than it took to make that post you would have been better off.

[GeoffAlan]

2 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

If you had taken less time to read Phil's earlier post https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/145052-djm-the-end/&do=findComment&comment=3584367

than it took to make that post you would have been better off.

I did indeed read it. However the thread is reading more like abuse than discussion. And I'm surely allowed to voice an opinion. Or is disagreeing with the moderators no longer allowed?

[RedgateModels]

2 minutes ago, GeoffAlan said:

I did indeed read it. However the thread is reading more like abuse than discussion. And I'm surely allowed to voice an opinion. Or is disagreeing with the moderators no longer allowed?

 

I would suggest that is is fine to disagree with anyone in charge, going against a direct instruction from said person however is the path to trouble IMHO

 

The normal route if you have a problem with any post is to use the "Report Post" option, this alerts the post to the Mods who will see what, if any action is needed.