Mana gone

Having said that I was tempted to get some big fellows to visit a guy off eBay who tried to rip me off of £600. But, I didn't. He wasn't even a business that went under, we was just an arsehole! Make sure you never deal with a Mr. Sammy Lee okay

 

That's a mighty big if IMO Markus. Let's be honest here. If the company was effectlvely insolvent, it was small enough for the directors to be fully aware of the situation. As someone with similar responsibilites, I am acutely aware of my company finances at all times.

We won't agree. You see it as revenge, I see it as neccessary education. And regardless of your familiararity with the people concerned in this instance, you must surely apreciate that the moral thing for those concerned to have done, would have been to make sure Heuer was reimbursed in some way prior to winding up.

I suspect there is a lot more to come on this particular can of worms.

 

A Limited Company Markus. In order to establish the neccessary credit rating to gain preferential trading terms with my suppliers. Not for the reasons seemingly advocated by others.

 

Yes, but it is exactly the question that needs to be answered in cases like these. If the director acts in good faith, he doesn't deserve, nor need, to be punished, educated or whatever euphemisms you will come up with next. If he does not act in good faith, it is a matter of criminal prosecution.

I'm exactly as familiar with JW as I am with you: I have met each of you once.

You presuppose that there would have been a way to reimburse Heuer or deliver the goods. May I suggest that from my day job, I have some pretty extensive experience of companies in financial trouble, and in that experience, I have seen a lot of cases where there simply was no way of doing either.

Also, although I must assume here that what I'm writing is true for English law as well, the directors of a company in financial trouble are forbidden from treating any one creditor better than any other. Why should Heuer be paid but not the Inland Revenue or whoever? Make a "moral" argument for that.

 

Markus, I feel it is morally reprehensible to hurt the small people, be they OMB suppliers or private customers. Yes, I fully know it is against the letter etc, but it is IMO laudible when people do this.

Some of my clients (who I have dealt with for a number of years), have called me to advise me that they are going into liquidation and would I like to pick up my stock before events preclude this. Being a small company I am massively grateful.

I simply feel that in this case it appears the directors have tried to put themselves before anyone else. There was enough time for Heuer to have been reimbursed. He paid £1K.

Either that money was used to pay off debts (in which case the company was effectively insolvent and the directors will face disqualification), or it was used to provide a salary for the directors. AFAIK there were no employees. There was no marketing costs. In either case, with the company being so small, the money has directly benefitted the directors. IMO that is not what Limited Liability Companies were created for. The only "moral" justification for the above is that it might be deemed to be legal. Walking straight past an old lady who is lying on the pavement whilst suffering a stroke is legal.

 

Actually failing to provide asistence is illegal in many countries. If it isnt in our ours then the correct solution is to change the law rather than punishing the person who failed to assist vigilante style.

 

Of course BBV. I am sorry.

 

Are there not legitimate companies that take on bad and doubtful debts, paying a percentage upfront and then they work to recover the Money.

Can't see that being much use in this particular situation though....... Just a thought.

 

No intention of seeking retribution given the cost of doing so would probably exceed the amount in dispute! Just one of those things and as others have said, part of the business world. Knee jerk reactions are understandable, but in the scheme of things impracticable.

Shame a great product with low manufacturing overheads, high margin and customer loyalty should end up this way.

Regards

David

 

The moral for M**a should be - dont kill the golden goose by milking the customers.

 

This is how it looks to me regards the course of events as described at various points.

UK Company Law is generally toothless regards "punishment" of Directors who do not act in good faith. Prosecutions are few and far between. I've seen fraudulent practice at first hand and it went completely unpunished during liquidation. I was left owed £4K in salary and expenses.

I dont advocate violence - for one reason I've seen at first hand the reality rather than the "fantasy" - however there are other measures which could be taken. Professional debt collectors can be, in my experience, much more effective than you might imagine and dont resort to violence. And lets not portray HMRC as decent folks. They go for the jugular and couldnt give a toss about "normal" creditors.

 

Violence just begets more violence. It solves nothing - just promotes the cycle of suffering. Altogether now... OM!

 

Agreed, but taking someone's money when you know that there's little chance of being able to honour the contract, might be a good wheeze, biut the practice of a charlatan.

Tazz

 

As does ripping people off safe in the knowledge your assets are protected by company law begets bitterness and distress

 

Never did like their racks anyway....

 

Yes they are a charlatan and yes it can make you bitter. But chopping off their winkies if they dont pay up isnt an appropriate response! But selling Phase 57 racks made it pretty obvious they were charletans anyway - and I speak as an ex Mana owner (though only a sane table).

 

It really is pathetic when the moderators censor a brand name on their forum. I'm not exactly a big fan but I use Mana under my speakers.

M a n a f o r G o d ' s s a k e !

 

found this on their forum (written by a 'teresa' claiming to be US distributor, under a thread entitled Order Form? :

this is reprehensible in the extreme. dishonest, given the evidence of a 652a being filed. Ian posts here, I think, so for our benefit, to pass on to John Watson:

The Jig is up. get your heads out of the sand, stop treating your customers and the hifi community like idiots and come clean about what's really happening.

 

In the light of this, the type of summary justice Stereo Mic suggests does seem rather appealing.

 

Actually the forum is a source of some great disinformation and I do hope the Inland Revenue have signed up.

Apaarently Ian W took delivery of his new stands last week. How does that make Heuer feel I wonder?