Hi,Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Ian
These are the the amps. The pre amp was £1500 and the power amp was £2995.
http://forum.moorgateacoustics.co.uk...=204&mode=view
http://forum.moorgateacoustics.co.uk...=203&mode=view
Printable View
Hi,Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Ian
These are the the amps. The pre amp was £1500 and the power amp was £2995.
http://forum.moorgateacoustics.co.uk...=204&mode=view
http://forum.moorgateacoustics.co.uk...=203&mode=view
Chinese Dynaco copy valve amp. The transformers look rather similar to me. Not that I'd suggest they are the same.
The Chinese sourced and British marketed VAA 70 EL34 amp which I owned had very similar transformers too.
http://i62.tinypic.com/4h6suu.jpg
Hear, hear, Marco's help is very much appreciated by me. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick E
Thanks, guys - we aim to please and like to see that fair play is carried out, and if not justice done. In that respect, it’ll be interesting hearing what John has to say.
Btw, just to clarify, is the amp still in your possession, and so you’re essentially waiting on him arranging a courier to collect it, and also him refunding your money?
Marco.
Not that I know either way, but even if you wind transformers in house, they will be wound on stock bobbins with standard size laminations and use standard end caps. Making your own transformer is one thing. Building a steel mill to manufacture laminations is another :-)Quote:
The transformers look rather similar to me.
Yes Marco, I still have the amplifier in my possession. If Mr Wood wishes to put things right he should do it through the bailiff as the case has been to court. If he pays £1,480.00 (The current amount owing) to the bailiff I will make the amplifier available for collection by or on behalf of Mr Wood in line with the Judge's ruling for a period of 28 days once the money is in my bank account.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Okay dokes :)
Marco.
Seconded! Nice one Marco, it's a real help to know that someone in your position is there to mediate, try to ensure fair play or allow the reporting of rogue traders.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick E
:clap:
Well, I’ve tried numerous times today to get hold of John, both via phone and email, but with no joy. Hopefully, when he’s less busy, he’ll answer my messages….
Marco.
Ok, John’s just phoned me. I shall comment more later!
Marco.
(Brian Blessed voice) GOOD GOD MAN! WE CAN'T WAIT THIS LONG........GET ON WITH IT!
Indeed. This is nearly as good as Judge Judy.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Puffin
"I don't give a rat's behind."Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick E
:popcorn:
:popcorn:
:If you can't beat them, join them.:popcorn:Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulStewart
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive197
:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popc orn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:: popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:
Oi! l am the emocicon correspondant round these parts.:yesbruv:Quote:
Originally Posted by fatmarley
:popcorn:
Lol....!! Sorry for the delay, chaps, but moi is a busy boy, you know!
Ok, I had a long chat yesterday with John, as indeed I have had today with Geoff. Unfortunately, in terms of attempting to solve their dispute, I now don't know who to believe, as they both come across as very plausible and nice people! :doh:
However, obviously one of them is not being entirely honest.....
After I spoke yesterday with John, and he put his side of the story to me, I asked him to collate in an email, in the form of 'bullet points', what we'd discussed on the phone, which he duly did, and I enclose this below so that you can attempt to make up your own minds who's at fault, and also so that Geoff can reply to John's remarks and defend his side of the story.
From John yesterday:
What I would add is that John has now offered to pay for a courier to collect the amp from Geoff, and once he receives the amp back in the same condition as it left him, he has promised to refund Geoff in full.Quote:
Originally Posted by J Wood
I shall comment more later, but right now it's over to you guys (and Geoff) :)
Marco.
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.
Originally Posted by J Wood
Hi Marco re out telephone conversation here s just a few points that we discussed on the phone to day I know there are many more but here is a few to start with and can I just say thanks for the call it was nice to chat to you .
1 what was asked for by email was later changed by phone so emails don't reflect the full story.
2 I don't and have never made remote volume power amps which was his first enquiry .
3 Emails are very easy to alter I would never offer them as proof if it were me.
4 I think it was his intention in the first place to get the money back no matter what, and keep the amp that's why he was saying one thing by email then making changes by phone he never sent any mail reflecting what was said in the phone calls
5 At first he was going to collect the amp from me and then insisted I send it, If he had collected it like every one else most of his points would not have been relevant ! and I think he was well aware of that.
6 He never paid me for the shipping witch cost me £160.00 witch he ordered at the last minute
7 An Invoice was sent with pictures as he requested which he approved and then paid .
8 I paid one trip for the amp he needs to step up and pay the other way.
9 I offered to refund him on more-than one occasion.
10 He wanted a refund without sending the goods back which will never happen
11 And now there is also a matter of the court case which in my opinion was somehow illegal I have a legal right as a defendant to have any case made against me heard in the city where I live and he changed this on 3 occasions having the case heard in my absence I have been making HiFi amps now for 50 years built my first when I was 5, yes I am 55 my work is all over the world with only one bad customer and you have him on your website
Many thanks
John Wood
With regard to the above, it's a list of untruths which saddens me but doesn't surprise me at all.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon Steadman
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
: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.
Paul, I don't think you get it. No matter what the law says, this is a civil case, not a criminal one, and so far that has got Geoff and John nowhere. John seems able to avoid the bailiffs and Geoff has to lay out more money to get private bailiffs involved. Good luck with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulStewart
Furthermore do you really believe that County Court Judges are highly qualified and always make good decisions. A little naive I think.
A solution is required, not a procrastination of who is legally right or wrong.
Clive
Hi Marco,Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
sorry, I will attempt to do so.
1) what was asked for by email was later changed by phone so emails don't reflect the full story.
Not true, I never once telephoned Mr Wood to change my original order.
2) I don't and have never made remote volume power amps which was his first enquiry .
Not true, my original and only enquiry related to integrated amplifiers, Mr Wood quoted a price of £1,200.00, I asked whether he could build me one with a remote control, and he replied he could do one with remote volume control only for £1,300.00
3) Emails are very easy to alter I would never offer them as proof if it were me.
I certainly wouldn't know how to alter an email, I'm 68 years young and only know everyday easy stuff to do with computers.
4) I think it was his intention in the first place to get the money back no matter what, and keep the amp that's why he was saying one thing by email then making changes by phone he never sent any mail reflecting what was said in the phone calls
Not true, It was never my intention to do what Mr Wood is suggesting.
5) At first he was going to collect the amp from me and then insisted I send it, If he had collected it like every one else most of his points would not have been relevant ! and I think he was well aware of that.
Not true. At no time when I spoke on the telephone to Mr Wood did he state amplifiers he built had to be collected by the purchaser. The first time he mentioned it was on Monday 18th February 2013. At this stage I said if he didn't supply the amplifier I would like him to refund the money I'd paid. I really wish he'd done that now.
6) He never paid me for the shipping witch cost me £160.00 witch he ordered at the last minute.
It's true, i didn't pay Mr Wood for the shipping costs, the money I paid him was inclusive of delivery to my home, Marco has seen a copy of the email I sent to Mr Wood placing the order we'd earlier agreed on the telephone and his reply thanking me for the order.
7) An Invoice was sent with pictures as he requested which he approved and then paid .
Not True. To this day I've not received an invoice with pictures nor have I received a receipt for the money I paid.
8) I paid one trip for the amp he needs to step up and pay the other way.
I have no intention of paying Mr Wood more money. Mr Wood needs to answer his door to the bailiff and pay the £1,480.00 owing. When the money is in my bank account I shall for a period of 28 days make the amplifier available for collection by or on behalf of John Wood, as per the Judges ruling.
9) I offered to refund him on more-than one occasion.
Not True. I can't say any more than that, it's another of his untruths.
10) He wanted a refund without sending the goods back which will never happen
Not true. I requested a refund and for Mr Wood to arrange to have the faulty amplifier collected, he refused.
11) And now there is also a matter of the court case which in my opinion was somehow illegal I have a legal right as a defendant to have any case made against me heard in the city where I live and he changed this on 3 occasions having the case heard in my absence I have been making HiFi amps now for 50 years built my first when I was 5, yes I am 55 my work is all over the world with only one bad customer and you have him on your website.
Mr Wood ignored the letters/paperwork sent to him by the Nottingham County Court and the court found in my favour in his absence. He then applied for the Judgment to be set aside and it was scheduled for 17th January 2014. At this, I sent a letter to the Judge in Nottingham requesting on health grounds that the hearing be transferred to Eastbourne Count Court and it was granted. The new hearing took place on 13th March 2014 which I attended. Mr Wood did not attend and the evidence I submitted was accepted by the judge and the application to set aside judgment was dismissed.
Marco told me during our telephone conservation today that Mr Wood has now offered to pay for a courier to collect the amplifier from me and once he receives it back in the same condition as it left him, he has promised to refund me in full.
Quite frankly I don't trust Mr Wood to keep his promise.
Dave, I don't want the amplifier at all, I wish to God I'd never heard about John Wood and his amplifiers. I've won a court case against Mr Wood, he should comply with the court's ruling.Quote:
Originally Posted by synsei
Me too, NOT. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Ok, I'm now officially bored with this thread... Not constructive I know, but just felt like sharing...
Dirty boy :whippin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Maybe because it's not your money?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chivas
I don't know if John Wood reads this thread, but speaking as a fellow sole trader, I have made one very important observation. This is backed up by your own hand.
In my opinion, you are incredibly unprofessional. Regardless of your technical ability, I find your business attitude absolutely laughable. I can assure you that I am one less future customer.
Good postQuote:
Originally Posted by PaulStewart
Good postQuote:
Originally Posted by Rick E
Good post.
...not necessarily - I just felt like joining in! :D
Marco.
I am surprised John Wood mentions he does not make amps with remote controls.
Here's a link to a J Wood amp that was listed for sale on the Wam - with a remote control.
I remember this simply because I was seriously considering buying it because of the remote control feature.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/showthread...light=wood+amp
Interesting.... I shall ask John about that.
Btw, Deba, where are you from in the UK? We ask that all members put the area that they live in next to their country of origin on their profiles. Please do that at your earliest convenience. Ta! :)
Marco.
Fibs will out in the end, eh? I forgot about that one being sold
Thanks for pointing out Marco.
Updated location
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Clive it's you that doesn't get it, to take your points in orderQuote:
Originally Posted by Clive197
1) My late mother was a highly qualified legal secretary (specialising in patent and property law) so I grew up knowing the difference between a Civil and a Criminal case.
2) If Geoff appoints private bailiffs, they have the right to add their fees and costs to the distraint and will take goods for auction accordingly.
3) Six of my close relatives are either solicitors, barristers or advocates in the scottish courts and two of these are Judges and I know how long it took them to qualify. You have to be a solicitor or a barrister practising for at least five years after years of law school, articles or pupilage. Then after further exams The Judicial Appointments Commission, decides if they have the experience to be a judge. So yes, they are bloody highly qualified
I think it's you who is naive or I'm sorry to say foolish. The law is the law and should be upheld. Geoff I'm happy to recommend you bailiffs who have recovered money for me in the past if you wish to instruct them.
Thanks Deba! :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by banjoman
Marco.
Oops.Quote:
Originally Posted by banjoman
Oh dear I must have hit a raw nerve. SHOUTING about the law is not very constructive to this saga. Perhaps you could get one of your close relatives to sort out the mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulStewart
Clive
Hi Clive,
With respect, the tone of your last post to Paul wasn't the friendliest, and a little confrontational. I know, however, that it wouldn't have been intentional, but if I picked up on that so probably did Paul, which is subsequently most likely why the tone of his reply to you was a little 'tetchy'.
The hazards sometimes of the written word, eh! :doh:
Marco.
This is what Mr Wood said about amplifiers with remote controls.
2) I don't and have never made remote volume power amps which was his first enquiry .
He's talking about power amps not integrated.
This is how I replied.
Not true, my original and only enquiry related to integrated amplifiers, Mr Wood quoted a price of £1,200.00, I asked whether he could build me one with a remote control, and he replied he could do one with remote volume control only for £1,300.00