John Wood Audio, a tale of woe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gordon Steadman

If John has offered a full refund after return of the amp I don't think such an offer should be refused no matter what has gone on before.

I was greatly surprised that anyone would accept copies of emails as proof of anything. Those and indeed, official looking court papers, could be produced very easily indeed these days. I could do it easily. Eastbourne court records are not available on line so it would be hard to double check the whole thing. Again, this is not to doubt anyone's word, just making the point.

Strange about the remote control which seems to be highlighted as a complaint when the man has never made such a thing.

I reckon it would be best to write this whole thing off as a misunderstanding. Allow the amp to be collected and accept the refund. The time comes when you just have to trust someone.

---

Gordon, I don't trust Mr Wood at all, if I were to return the amplifier to him he would have my money and the amplifier and I would be left with nothing. I just cannot place any trust in a person who tells a pack of lies so easily.

Not sure such a plan is now an option as the court has made a decision. Another court appearance is going to have to happen I'd assume for that to work.(assuming the court case happened, and mr wood has not denied it)

If so, then he would need to pay said court appointed official and then the goods would be available to be returned.

Hi Geoff,

I thought you were going to respond to John’s points one by one, and ‘correct’ them accordingly? That was why I posted them.

Marco.

Geoff, let's tackle a couple of Mr Woods points...

Is it your intention to keep the amplifier regardless?

Assuming this is not the case (and why would it be?), are you willing to share the cost of return shipping to resolve this?

I was not going to chip in on this thread , however some time ago I purchased a Sony TT and the seller had this very same amp in his high end system

It looked good , It sounded good ( I stayed for 2 hours listening to his system ) and the owner was a happy man , So was I when I loaded the PS 6750 in the car :D

Well for what it's worth I don't think we'll ever get to the bottom of this story.

More importantly, the witch hunting has died right off. So my vote is to stick the boot into the OP and then when that has run it's course....let's get stuck in to Marco :punch:

:popcorn:

That wouldn’t work. I like pain :D

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

That wouldn’t work. I like pain :D

Marco.

---

:scratch: you sure you have the wording correct , I think one word is missing :- Being ( insert between like and pain ) :)

I also was not going to comment here but!

I think that trust and truth seems to be absent between the two protagonists in this sorry saga.

My suggestion is that a middle man be chosen (Marco perhaps). The amp is then despatched from Geoff to that man. The money is at the same time sent to the same man. Both items then forwarded to the correct recipient.

Geoff, to resolve this you need to accept a cost.
John, to resolve this you need to accept a cost.

I really don't think that we will ever know the full and truthful story, but at the moment both are huge losers and some sanity must be brought to the table.

Anyway that's my two penny worth.

Clive

Err 'a use me but Geoff has no need to accept a cost, Wood was found at fault by a crown court FFS, Geoff has a legal right to ditrain on his goods to the awarded figure. Legally he does not have to pay for shipping or even return the faulty, mis described goods at all. This was the decision of a highly qualified COUNTY COURT JUDGE, not a bunch of blokes on the internet. Wood has now got a CCJ against him so has ruined his credit rating and reputation. Pay the bailiffs and try and get the CCJ resolved, or you make yourself out to be a crook. It's called obeying the law, generally a good idea.