JD Classics, what have they been up to?
Discussion
skwdenyer said:
singlecoil said:
I believe the courts take a dim view of claimants who refuse to settle.
Depends upon the settlement offer.RDMcG said:
What happened to Caveat Emptor?...Surely a successful businessman who was entering a new field would be diligent in checking things out?..while there may have been misrepresentation, I would have thought that there should have been more care on the part of the buyer....
So, you do your DD and agree terms on an agency whereby Dealer X buys and sells cars for you. How is it the customers fault if the dealer tells him he purchased a car for £2M from Mr Jones when in fact the dealer paid Mr Jones 1.5M, purchased the car himself and sold to the customer for 2M. That is dishonest. The same dealer tells the customer a few years later, your car is worth 2M but he sells it for 4M. If the vehicle is very rare it's not so easy to check valuations and like I said, he trusted the guy.
I don't see why we are suggesting the customer is a mug here. The dealer sounds like a crook.
OT but very similar to the utter disgraceful behaviour of some real estate agents in NZ over the past few years. Property has gone up 100% in 5 years. Many people who just couldn't keep pace with price or were a bit older got shafted. Cases like an agent valuing a house at 1M, getting a friend to buy it and they flip it the next week for $2M.
Burwood said:
So, you do your DD and agree terms on an agency whereby Dealer X buys and sells cars for you. How is it the customers fault if the dealer tells him he purchased a car for £2M from Mr Jones when in fact the dealer paid Mr Jones 1.5M, purchased the car himself and sold to the customer for 2M. That is dishonest.
The same dealer tells the customer a few years later, your car is worth 2M but he sells it for 4M. If the vehicle is very rare it's not so easy to check valuations and like I said, he trusted the guy.
I don't see why we are suggesting the customer is a mug here. The dealer sounds like a crook.
I am not in any way defending the dealer, and based on the information in the thread there seems to be little doubt that your conclusion is valid.The same dealer tells the customer a few years later, your car is worth 2M but he sells it for 4M. If the vehicle is very rare it's not so easy to check valuations and like I said, he trusted the guy.
I don't see why we are suggesting the customer is a mug here. The dealer sounds like a crook.
My broader observation is more that the world is not short of people who prey on the credulous, and it seemed surprising that the customer would not have been more diligent. If I were spending the kins of money mentioned here I would have wanted the full file including the prices. The customer was presumably a seasoned businessman and not an addled 88 year old pensioner.
RDMcG said:
Burwood said:
So, you do your DD and agree terms on an agency whereby Dealer X buys and sells cars for you. How is it the customers fault if the dealer tells him he purchased a car for £2M from Mr Jones when in fact the dealer paid Mr Jones 1.5M, purchased the car himself and sold to the customer for 2M. That is dishonest.
The same dealer tells the customer a few years later, your car is worth 2M but he sells it for 4M. If the vehicle is very rare it's not so easy to check valuations and like I said, he trusted the guy.
I don't see why we are suggesting the customer is a mug here. The dealer sounds like a crook.
I am not in any way defending the dealer, and based on the information in the thread there seems to be little doubt that your conclusion is valid.The same dealer tells the customer a few years later, your car is worth 2M but he sells it for 4M. If the vehicle is very rare it's not so easy to check valuations and like I said, he trusted the guy.
I don't see why we are suggesting the customer is a mug here. The dealer sounds like a crook.
My broader observation is more that the world is not short of people who prey on the credulous, and it seemed surprising that the customer would not have been more diligent. If I were spending the kins of money mentioned here I would have wanted the full file including the prices. The customer was presumably a seasoned businessman and not an addled 88 year old pensioner.
). Perhaps this chap has been asking for documents for years and getting no where. I suspect things soured some time ago and the legal wrangles were an absolute last resort.RDMcG said:
What happened to Caveat Emptor?...Surely a successful businessman who was entering a new field would be diligent in checking things out?..while there may have been misrepresentation, I would have thought that there should have been more care on the part of the buyer....
Caveat Emptor doesn't apply in the case of fraud and deliberate deception.JD Classics were a highly respected dealership. Globally renowned for handling the sales of top end cars with a host of wealthy clients and collectors. They had direct connections with Jaguar cars and were considered perhaps the worlds pre-eminent classic car specialist.
It seems entirely reasonable that the claimant should have expected his transactions to be handled professionally and not with "deliberate and dishonest conduct"
TVR Moneypit said:
If true, (and I've no reason to believe you are telling porkies, but 'may' have been missinformed), then that is very, very, telling.
Of course he may end up taking to the stand at the next court hearings, (if it gets that far), but if so, how can evidence that he gives at those hearings be given any credence when he failed to take the stand at the first hearing?
It's not a matter of being misinformed, all of this is documented.Of course he may end up taking to the stand at the next court hearings, (if it gets that far), but if so, how can evidence that he gives at those hearings be given any credence when he failed to take the stand at the first hearing?
It's up to JD Classics to respond to the allegations of fraud. It was JD Classics that declined to call Derek Hood as a witness. They also declined to admit his written statements as evidence.
I doubt he'll appear at the next hearing, assuming it goes that far.
This case reminds me of a businessman who had an abundance of money to spend who wanted to buy farmland. My friend was selling his upland stock farm. Land agent had this businessman who was desperate to buy into farmland. The agent sold the farm as a first class arable farm at what us locals considered to be an incredulous price even for an arable farm.
After his first harvest he realised that it was not what he had been led to believe.He tried taking the Land Agent to court but got nowhere. Now everybody in the area thought how can a man who has built up a successful company be so stupid and gullible!
After his first harvest he realised that it was not what he had been led to believe.He tried taking the Land Agent to court but got nowhere. Now everybody in the area thought how can a man who has built up a successful company be so stupid and gullible!
stichill99 said:
Yes I read the facts but somehow the claimant must have been seriously naïve! How many people on here would put so much trust in a car dealer. If someone comes basically throwing money at you to invest I doubt there are many 'investment managers' who would not take advantage.
The car dealer that has the Midas touch. The dealer who is the market. The market. You guys are the naive onesThere is some criticism on here that Mr Tuke (the purchaser) should have been more cautious and looked into JD / Hood more carefully.
It is reasonable to assume that the venture capitalists, before putting in £100m did some extensive due diligence and, given that they invested, were happy with what they found, so presumably it would have been difficult for Mr Tuke, a private individual, to get a more accurate picture.
Were there rumours of dishonest activities, rather than just of overpriced cars, prior to the court case? I wouldn't know as I don't move in those circles but none have been hinted at on here.
About the brand's future - I am not in the market for these types of cars, but I probably will be, one day*, and I wouldn't buy from JD / Tuke without a lot of proof and without it being good value. Since the brand seems to trade on being expensive but the best, and all the gentlemanly trust that goes with such an experience, then I think it would be one hell of a comeback for Mr Hood. Not impossible but difficult. Part of the value of these cars is that they come from JD Classics, sponsors of high class events, global player. Some of that value will now, surely, have been lost since the cars now come from JD Classics, alleged fraudster, no more trustworthy than any other second hand car dealer.
It is reasonable to assume that the venture capitalists, before putting in £100m did some extensive due diligence and, given that they invested, were happy with what they found, so presumably it would have been difficult for Mr Tuke, a private individual, to get a more accurate picture.
Were there rumours of dishonest activities, rather than just of overpriced cars, prior to the court case? I wouldn't know as I don't move in those circles but none have been hinted at on here.
About the brand's future - I am not in the market for these types of cars, but I probably will be, one day*, and I wouldn't buy from JD / Tuke without a lot of proof and without it being good value. Since the brand seems to trade on being expensive but the best, and all the gentlemanly trust that goes with such an experience, then I think it would be one hell of a comeback for Mr Hood. Not impossible but difficult. Part of the value of these cars is that they come from JD Classics, sponsors of high class events, global player. Some of that value will now, surely, have been lost since the cars now come from JD Classics, alleged fraudster, no more trustworthy than any other second hand car dealer.
- towards the cheaper end of their offer.
Norfolkandchance said:
There is some criticism on here that Mr Tuke (the purchaser) should have been more cautious and looked into JD / Hood more carefully.
I think that's because some have not looked at where the relationship started, and assume the claimant walked into JD green with a proposition, rather than as its documented, he had already been a customer of JD for some time prior to the 'investment' arrangement, and presumably 'thought' he had already established 'sufficient relationship' with Hood to enter into this arrangement.My comments regarding Mr Tuke's apparent lackof due diligence were about the cars themselves, rather than about Mr Hood.
However, on reflection, I concede that in a commercial relationship, you have to trust the people you appoint, otherwise you wouldn't appoint them. It is, therefore, entirely understandable for Tuke to have taken Hood at his word, and it's something many of us would do in similar/parallel situations.
However, on reflection, I concede that in a commercial relationship, you have to trust the people you appoint, otherwise you wouldn't appoint them. It is, therefore, entirely understandable for Tuke to have taken Hood at his word, and it's something many of us would do in similar/parallel situations.
stichill99 said:
This case reminds me of a businessman who had an abundance of money to spend who wanted to buy farmland. My friend was selling his upland stock farm. Land agent had this businessman who was desperate to buy into farmland. The agent sold the farm as a first class arable farm at what us locals considered to be an incredulous price even for an arable farm.
After his first harvest he realised that it was not what he had been led to believe.He tried taking the Land Agent to court but got nowhere. Now everybody in the area thought how can a man who has built up a successful company be so stupid and gullible!
Sounds like Norfolk to me. A vast amount of agricultural land was purchased at way over the odds and has skewed the market ever since. In the case of JD, surely the plaintiff can summon Hood to appear as a witness? He does seem to have shot himself in the foot with his constant stream of self-incriminating emails and should be called to explain himself.After his first harvest he realised that it was not what he had been led to believe.He tried taking the Land Agent to court but got nowhere. Now everybody in the area thought how can a man who has built up a successful company be so stupid and gullible!
Edited by lowdrag on Friday 27th April 16:49
Edited by lowdrag on Friday 27th April 17:42
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff