Rapido/Locomotion Models GNR Stirling Single

[10000]

GDPR is simply the latest Millennium Bug; a thing the ignorant delight in unnecessarily panicking over.

 

Those who actually understand this, well done. Everyone else; for God's sake take a Chill Pill.

 

Not quite. The bug was just doom mongering.

 

Having worked in I.T. during that time and having been trained in Corporate Data Protection, UK/EU Data Protection (not up to speed on the GDPR though) and the Human Rights Act I would compare the over reaction to GDPR to the same as the frequently miss used and misquoted Human Rights Act.

 

Based on the letter I received from Locomotion Model but not on the labelling of model because I've still not got mine a quick risk assessment.

 

No card information  included. 

Data that may have been breached Name and address. Telephone number and E-mail address. 

Therefore risk factor very low.

[Edwardian]

Not quite. The bug was just doom mongering.

 

Having worked in I.T. during that time and having been trained in Corporate Data Protection, UK/EU Data Protection (not up to speed on the GDPR though) and the Human Rights Act I would compare the over reaction to GDPR to the same as the frequently miss used and misquoted Human Rights Act.

 

Based on the letter I received from Locomotion Model but not on the labelling of model because I've still not got mine a quick risk assessment.

 

No card information  included. 

Data that may have been breached Name and address. Telephone number and E-mail address. 

Therefore risk factor very low.

 

I'm somewhat jaundiced, having just spent 3 months advising on the wretched thing and drafting endless GDPR-compliant documents.

 

Sadly, these days you cannot earn a living wage as a wet paint monitor, as this would have been less dull. 

[Jol Wilkinson]

We have become a culture of blame and demanding compensation for the smallest problem, a stone cracked my windscreen yesterday but I'm not ordering a solicitor to sue the car in front, the council and the contractor that resurfaced the road. It happened, I got over it.

I (like most) don't see any point in trying to damage the NRM, quite the opposite, why try to take money that's best used preserving the national collection?

They're making the best of a bad situation. Does this have to be a blame game?

 

We know live in a  "somebody else's fault" culture. That promotes seeking to apply blame and get compensation, even where it is of little benefit.

 

Unfortunately the "bad situation" is partly if not wholly of  NRM's doing, as they failed to ensure that APC could provide the service needed and correctly handle the data files provided. As others have said, the GDPR issue is something of a red herring, but in trying to ensure all customers got their new model as quickly as possible - and perhaps in response to some of the earlier posts here on RMweb - the NRM took a course of action which led to this outcome.

[PaulRhB]

Unfortunately the "bad situation" is partly if not wholly of NRM's doing, as they failed to ensure that APC could provide the service needed and correctly handle the data files provided. - .

Are they really supposed to check that a national logistics company required by law to abide by data protection is going to do it??

How is that the NRM's fault in any way.

If they'd employed Bert Cheese and his van because he was a mate of Kath in the shop then they might want to ask but not APC, Parcelforce, Yodel etc. The whole point is they are supposed to provide the service. How do you check? Ask do you have more than one van? Does your labelling dept read each label in depth to check if multiple people live at one address?

NRM is only responsible for making sure they pick up the goods and have given the correct addresses in that respect. Now they are trying to sort out the mess which appears to be of APC's making so far.

Looks like a system glitch that no one paid bare minimum wage looked for, and the wages are similar in all the big couriers. I'm currently having a three week, and counting, farce with DHL and their 'partner' Parcelforce.

That's not the shippers fault either.

 

Their communication hasn't been great in the lead up to release and during this confusion but I think that's more there's really just one person trying to do it all plus their normal day job. Employing someone to do this would destroy the funds they are trying to raise with the model so it's Catch22.

Edited August 4, 2018 by PaulRhB

[10000]

I'm somewhat jaundiced, having just spent 3 months advising on the wretched thing and drafting endless GDPR-compliant documents.

 

Sadly, these days you cannot earn a living wage as a wet paint monitor, as this would have been less dull. 

 

My commiserations.

 

From what I have read of it I would say its a European Commission big stick designed to increase the possibility of fines and especially aimed at non EU organisations. 

[Jol Wilkinson]

Are they really supposed to check that a national logistics company required by law to abide by data protection is going to do it??

How is that the NRM's fault in any way.

If they'd employed Bert Cheese and his van because he was a mate of Kath in the shop then they might want to ask but not APC, Parcelforce, Yodel etc. The whole point is they are supposed to provide the service. How do you check? Ask do you have more than one van? Does your labelling dept read each label in depth to check if multiple people live at one address?

NRM is only responsible for making sure they pick up the goods and have given the correct addresses in that respect. Now they are trying to sort out the mess which appears to be of APC's making so far.

Looks like a system glitch that no one paid bare minimum wage looked for, and the wages are similar in all the big couriers. I'm currently having a three week, and counting, farce with DHL and their 'partner' Parcelforce.

That's not the shippers fault either.

 

Their communication hasn't been great in the lead up to release and during this confusion but I think that's more there's really just one person trying to do it all plus their normal day job. Employing someone to do this would destroy the funds they are trying to raise with the model so it's Catch22.

 

Excusing the NRM for using a contractor who has failed to provide an acceptable standard of service, which I doubt you tolerate from Hattons or a.n.other, seems rather odd. They were applauded for teaming up with Rapido to produce what many have hailed as the best model of a British locomotive, but then failing to understand the logistics of delivering the quantity pre-ordered in a very short time scale seems like a problem at management level.

 

I'd suggest that taking due diligence to ensure that the data files with customer details would integrate with APC's was a responsible action, which they have failed to take. Or did they and APC were misleading with the answer? That items were incorrectly addressed and incorrect quantities supplied does look like APC's fault, but as the customers contract is with the NRM, the management team at Locomotion should have taken care to ensure Mr Cockup wasn't invited to the party. Equally, are they seeking compensation for the damage done to the NRM/Locomotion's reputation?

 

While supporting the NRM through commissioning and retailing RTR models is understandable, they should at least provide a service on a par with what their competitors do. Remember that they have the advantage of free access to many of the UK's most railway historic stock as well as research documents and can also rely upon a large volume of visitors to their retail outlets. Trying to run a high profile business without sufficient staff - full or part time - to handle the peaks and troughs doesn't seem like a good idea.

[WD0-6-0]

We know live in a  "somebody else's fault" culture. That promotes seeking to apply blame and get compensation, even where it is of little benefit.

Exactly my point, it is entirely unnecessary but it now seems to be the way. I would prefer that not to be the case and I'm not even old enough to remember when it wasn't.

 

Yes mistakes have been made but they've been acknowledged and they're trying to fix them, all the while the very small team are trying to run a day to day business. I'm struggling with some people's desire for blind revenge against the NRM when seemingly the larger problem lies with APC

[it's-er]

Hey folks - we seem to have moved off the topic of the GNR Stirling Single. I'd love to see more photographs of the model on our layouts, please!

 

John Storey

[PaulRhB]

Jol, they didn't invite Mr Cockup to the party, this might have been expected with Yodel or Hermes who have a reputation already but that's probably exactly why they chose a bigger more established entity.

I'm sure APC assured them they could do it much like DHL assured KFC that they would deliver chicken and incidentally my parcel. I can't see how you ensure due diligence without having someone inside the system and it's just not viable financially.

When you post a parcel with Royal Mail do you ask for assurances of full process and monitor it or accept the little bit of paper they hand you back?

Like so said they went for a reputable national firm and you have to expect that they will abide by the rules and alert you to any issues they notice.

Everyone seems to think you can micromanage the whole system and they are trying to do something a bit special to raise funds not become a full time manufacturer.

It's unfortunate this has gone wrong but they are trying to sort it out and I'm sure the cutbacks that saw Sandra lose her job haven't helped as they are trying to run the Museum shop and deal with all this which is a peak in sales which cannot justify a dedicated member of staff all year round.

Like I said before they have boobed and need to look at communications in future but unless they made the mistake in the data sent to APC then it's the third party fault although they are responsible for sorting it out.

[Clearwater]

Well, my chains and invoice arrived. Correctly addressed. To me. As was the invoice. No dramas

 

David

[10000]

Excusing the NRM for using a contractor who has failed to provide an acceptable standard of service, which I doubt you tolerate from Hattons or a.n.other, seems rather odd. They were applauded for teaming up with Rapido to produce what many have hailed as the best model of a British locomotive, but then failing to understand the logistics of delivering the quantity pre-ordered in a very short time scale seems like a problem at management level.

 

I'd suggest that taking due diligence to ensure that the data files with customer details would integrate with APC's was a responsible action, which they have failed to take. Or did they and APC were misleading with the answer? That items were incorrectly addressed and incorrect quantities supplied does look like APC's fault, but as the customers contract is with the NRM, the management team at Locomotion should have taken care to ensure Mr Cockup wasn't invited to the party. Equally, are they seeking compensation for the damage done to the NRM/Locomotion's reputation?

 

While supporting the NRM through commissioning and retailing RTR models is understandable, they should at least provide a service on a par with what their competitors do. Remember that they have the advantage of free access to many of the UK's most railway historic stock as well as research documents and can also rely upon a large volume of visitors to their retail outlets. Trying to run a high profile business without sufficient staff - full or part time - to handle the peaks and troughs doesn't seem like a good idea.

 

Your post has some merit but my understanding is that Locomotion Models its basically a one man band. If there is any blame it is with the parent organisation (Science Museum group) for not providing adequate training and support etc.

[Paul Cram]

With parcel force you pack and address the parcel. With APC they were given that responsibility. NRM provided the data and should have tested to see that it uploaded correctly on APC's system. Failure to do so rests with NRM.

[coachmann]

I wouldn't be surprised if someone decides it cannot be arsed with the toy train market after all this drama. 

Edited August 4, 2018 by coachmann

[31A]

Hey folks - we seem to have moved off the topic of the GNR Stirling Single. I'd love to see more photographs of the model on our layouts, please!

 

John Storey

 

Quite agree, and in the spirit of which here are a few more I took while I had the old coaches out the other day:

 

 

 

[New Haven Neil]

I bet Sandra's laughing her socks off.

[Andy Y]

Yes mistakes have been made but they've been acknowledged and they're trying to fix them, all the while the very small team are trying to run a day to day business. I'm struggling with some people's desire for blind revenge against the NRM when seemingly the larger problem lies with APC

Absolutely, they are sorting everything out and over-analysis of a one off issue in such a public domain must be quite depressing to those who we should be supportive of in this case. No-one's lost out and they're doing a good job of resolving it.

 

Let's leave that issue now please.

[tetsudofan]

Well, my chains and invoice arrived. Correctly addressed. To me. As was the invoice. No dramas

 

David

 

….and my paperwork etc. arrived yesterday, all present and correct ….. as was the Stirling Single when it arrived last Monday.

 

Keith

[Andy Hayter]

Excusing the NRM for using a contractor who has failed to provide an acceptable standard of service, which I doubt you tolerate from Hattons or a.n.other, seems rather odd. They were applauded for teaming up with Rapido to produce what many have hailed as the best model of a British locomotive, but then failing to understand the logistics of delivering the quantity pre-ordered in a very short time scale seems like a problem at management level.

 

 

 

 

Sorry Jol but I have to disagree to some extent.

 

If this had been a second or subsequent event of this kind, then I would agree with you, but as a first experience then I cannot.

 

NRM are accountable in as far as they have chosen their logistics partner (which for all we know might previously have been used by the Science Museum group without problems.).   They are not (as far as we know) to blame for the actual delivery problems.

 

As for talk of due diligence:  How many of you who take a car to the garage for service, check if he has the latest software updates from the manufacturer for the diagnostics, or the correct tools to do all of the jobs?  No, I thought not. 

If you want an expert to do a job, you go to an expert.  You do some research on their historic performance (which might well include references) but if they say they can do the job, you let them get on with it.   AFAIK APC have a very good reputation so why would  you doubt their ability to do the same for you?

[10000]

Sorry Jol but I have to disagree to some extent.

 

If this had been a second or subsequent event of this kind, then I would agree with you, but as a first experience then I cannot.

 

NRM are accountable in as far as they have chosen their logistics partner (which for all we know might previously have been used by the Science Museum group without problems.).   They are not (as far as we know) to blame for the actual delivery problems.

 

As for talk of due diligence:  How many of you who take a car to the garage for service, check if he has the latest software updates from the manufacturer for the diagnostics, or the correct tools to do all of the jobs?  No, I thought not. 

If you want an expert to do a job, you go to an expert.  You do some research on their historic performance (which might well include references) but if they say they can do the job, you let them get on with it.   AFAIK APC have a very good reputation so why would  you doubt their ability to do the same for you?

 

Enough!!!

 

I only came back in because a friend who reads but refuses to sign up spotted the GDPR issue and he knew I was in data  protection so asked my opinion. I want to get back to ignoring the photos because I still haven't got mine and have not heard when.

 

By the way Andy do you have any idea when we are likely to receive them? I would like to get my hands on it before ordering a Hudson from Rapido and the order deadline for that is running out.

[flapland]

GDPR, Great Dinting and Pennistone Railway. Isn't that some grand failed preservation scheme. 

[Martin S-C]

<sup>I thought it was the Grand Dribbling and Pedantic Railroad?

Anyway, I have a Stirling Single, some safety chains arrived with a letter addressed correctly came yesterday, so I am now off to attach the one to t'other and play trains. See all you fine gents later.</sup>
 

[Jeff Smith]

Steve 31A, looks very at home on your layout. The chains look a bit oversized but with some judicious weathering would look ok however I'm sure that the original was kept pretty clean in service.

[ossy5190]

I had a look at fitting the front bogie splashes this morning but the screws seem to be missing. The drawing in the instruction show the 4 screws and implies that they should already be fitted but mine does have any. I've looked in the bags of bits but can't find them there either. Any suggestions?

 

Ross

[rapidorepairsuk]

I had a look at fitting the front bogie splashes this morning but the screws seem to be missing. The drawing in the instruction show the 4 screws and implies that they should already be fitted but mine does have any. I've looked in the bags of bits but can't find them there either. Any suggestions?

 

Ross

Hi Ross,

 

Send an email to the email address in the back of the booklet along with a photo of the area and I will be able to deal with it.

 

Guys,

 

I’m not trying to be funny here but if you have a problem or missing parts please follow the instructions in the booklet as I don’t always login to see what’s happening on here.

 

Thanks

Edited August 4, 2018 by rapidorepairsuk

[ossy5190]

Thanks Simon, I'll send off an email.