JD Classics, what have they been up to?

Author
Discussion

v8250

Original Poster:

2,612 posts

150 months

Tuesday 20th March 2018
quotequote all
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/19/tycoon-spent-4...

This will be an interesting one...deep pocketed client-partner, a classic car business of known questionable pricing and a £9million claim...




grumpy52

3,762 posts

105 months

Tuesday 20th March 2018
quotequote all
Ooh this will be interesting!.

Turbotechnic

500 posts

15 months

Tuesday 20th March 2018
quotequote all
It was only going to be a matter of time.

Doofus

8,669 posts

112 months

Tuesday 20th March 2018
quotequote all
Turbotechnic said:
It was only going to be a matter of time.
Until what?

GoodOlBoy

277 posts

42 months

Tuesday 20th March 2018
quotequote all
Doofus said:
Turbotechnic said:
It was only going to be a matter of time.
Until what?
Until they were accused of dodgy dealing perhaps ?

Advertisement

Gunk

2,562 posts

98 months

Tuesday 20th March 2018
quotequote all
Turbotechnic said:
It was only going to be a matter of time.
Do you have inside knowledge? I always thought they had a very good reputation.

lowdrag

9,464 posts

152 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
Gunk said:
Do you have inside knowledge? I always thought they had a very good reputation.
How long have you been around the classic Jaguar world then? Not that long perhaps. Good gracious, you'll have us believing that auction houses are honest people and don't invent bids next!

skeeterm5

1,938 posts

127 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
So a rich man was greedy and believed some “get richer quick scheme”, didn’t make the money he wanted so is suing?

A fool and his money......

grumpy52

3,762 posts

105 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
Gunk said:
Turbotechnic said:
It was only going to be a matter of time.
Do you have inside knowledge? I always thought they had a very good reputation.
"Cough" "Cough"

Doofus

8,669 posts

112 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
grumpy52 said:
"Cough" "Cough"
Whatever.

rgw2012

452 posts

82 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
skeeterm5 said:
So a rich man was greedy and believed some “get richer quick scheme”, didn’t make the money he wanted so is suing?

A fool and his money......
I think you would benefit from reading the pre-trial review judgement - not as clear cut as you seem to think

GoodOlBoy

277 posts

42 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
skeeterm5 said:
So a rich man was greedy and believed some “get richer quick scheme”, didn’t make the money he wanted so is suing?

A fool and his money......
Can you post the link to that, it's not the same one I read ?

skeeterm5

1,938 posts

127 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
GoodOlBoy said:
Can you post the link to that, it's not the same one I read ?
“The High Court heard he was “not overly impressed” with returns on standard investments and so after a “long and amiable meeting” with Derek Hood, an Essex car dealer, he decided to put his cash into classic cars.

Mr Tuke says the dealer told him classic cars were “better than banks” and that he “could double his money””

Not happy with standard type investments believes somebody who claims that they can outperform the market...... seems pretty clear to me what his motives were, greed.

If he happens to have then been conned then that is something else.

_Sorted_

331 posts

16 months

Norfolkandchance

1,461 posts

138 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
_Sorted_ said:
Absolutely not a lawyer and haven't read every word but my reading is that the claimant thought JD Classics was buying and selling on his behalf (and to my untrained eye the email trail seems to suggest that the had agreed this) with a plan to split the profit. Where as it could be interpreted that JD Classics was actually buying cars themselves, claiming they were buying from a 3rd party as an agent and then inflating the price (a lot!) and selling them to the defendant. On another occasion, it suggests, JD Classics made up a fictitious buyer and then sold the car himself for more.

Am I broadly correct?

Turbotechnic

500 posts

15 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
Norfolkandchance said:
Absolutely not a lawyer and haven't read every word but my reading is that the claimant thought JD Classics was buying and selling on his behalf (and to my untrained eye the email trail seems to suggest that the had agreed this) with a plan to split the profit. Where as it could be interpreted that JD Classics was actually buying cars themselves, claiming they were buying from a 3rd party as an agent and then inflating the price (a lot!) and selling them to the defendant. On another occasion, it suggests, JD Classics made up a fictitious buyer and then sold the car himself for more.

Am I broadly correct?
Yes.

mph

2,095 posts

221 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
skeeterm5 said:
Not happy with standard type investments believes somebody who claims that they can outperform the market...... seems pretty clear to me what his motives were, greed.

If he happens to have then been conned then that is something else.
If wanting a better return on your savings/investments is "greedy" then I think most of us are guilty.

He took advice from a well-known expert in high-end cars and based on that advice he thought it was worth investing in them.

The court case isn't about the performance of his assets it's about the way the transactions were processed and alleged dirty deeds.


Doofus

8,669 posts

112 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
mph said:
If wanting a better return on your savings/investments is "greedy" then I think most of us are guilty.
TBF, if I had £60m in the bank, I wouldn't 'invest' in anything. Why would I need to make more money? I'd already have more than I'd ever need, and investing in stuff just means you spend a proportion of your time worrying about money. Under the circumstances, that would seem like a huge waste of time and effort.

skeeterm5

1,938 posts

127 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
mph said:
If wanting a better return on your savings/investments is "greedy" then I think most of us are guilty.

He took advice from a well-known expert in high-end cars and based on that advice he thought it was worth investing in them.

The court case isn't about the performance of his assets it's about the way the transactions were processed and alleged dirty deeds.


As you say, he took £40m investment advice from a second hand car dealer, what could possibly go wrong?

a8hex

4,886 posts

162 months

Wednesday 21st March 2018
quotequote all
skeeterm5 said:
mph said:
If wanting a better return on your savings/investments is "greedy" then I think most of us are guilty.

He took advice from a well-known expert in high-end cars and based on that advice he thought it was worth investing in them.

The court case isn't about the performance of his assets it's about the way the transactions were processed and alleged dirty deeds.


As you say, he took £40m investment advice from a second hand car dealer, what could possibly go wrong?
As MPH say's the case isn't about the quality of the advise it's about whether the way the deals were done was honest. If bank was handling your investments (call it your pension, I'm assuming for the moment you don't have £60M kicking around to play with) and was buying shares at one price and then selling them onto you immediately at a significantly higher price when you had a contract saying they'd only charge you X% you'd be pretty pissed off and you'd expect the authorities to take action. This appears to be what this case is about.