Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Take BTP on the Judge Judy show. I would like to see her yell at Shawn

xxvaderxx wrote:

 gunslingerpro wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:

tenebre wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:


It means a lot in regards to the sub par service he received, which again has already been established and nobody is disputing, at least from our side. It does not mean much in regards to which course to follow. If you buy an electronic product and when you receive it is defective, you are going to request an exchange, you are not going to not let the manufacturer rectify it because you assume all his products are defective. Same thing applies here.

Sure. Then you get another defective one.. Request 2nd exchange, then get a 3rd and 4th defective one.

Then you cross that bridge when you get there. Not before.

You're not understanding. The bridge has been crossed.

No, i am not agreeing which is different, the process was not over until he signed it over. After that he rightfully so uploaded a review with his experience of said process.

The process breaking down is not in dispute either.

Them giving it another crack at the process with the working assumption that this was the exception and not the norm is not unreasonable.

This kinds of services much like software development, which i happen to work on, should be weighted as a whole thing, not every single step individually. Communication broke down, ok, i get that, that is just one step in the process not multiple attempts at fixing the same project, even if that is what you call them. In fact i would venture most projects they handle go through some correction or modification steps, whether it be because the artist screws up or the client just changes his mind. The problem here was that his feedback was not taken into account for what ever reason until he eventually desisted and there you get the finished product.

It's like you developing a game that looks like doom when gears of war was requested, them asking you to make it into gears of war and you come back with doom2 and say that's enough, it's all subjective and there's nothing wrong with doom2!

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

tenebre wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:


It means a lot in regards to the sub par service he received, which again has already been established and nobody is disputing, at least from our side. It does not mean much in regards to which course to follow. If you buy an electronic product and when you receive it is defective, you are going to request an exchange, you are not going to not let the manufacturer rectify it because you assume all his products are defective. Same thing applies here.

Sure. Then you get another defective one.. Request 2nd exchange, then get a 3rd and 4th defective one.

The manufacturer will refund 100% and profusely apologize.

My friend had a similar problem with cabinet work. The cacked up the 2nd time. Then immediately gave 50% refund and paid ANOTHER company to redo those. These were around $30k.

I don't know what the law is in the USA, I imagine it's similar when it comes to breaking contracts... but out here they are allowed to try and fix it if they can fix it within "reasonable time", if they can't fix it within reasonable time they're obliged to give you a refund. "reasonable time" is variable, but where it was specifically outlined in the original contract that the project would be completed in 8 weeks and it actually took 15 and the result is still unsatisfactory, I don't think they'd have a leg to stand on when it comes to refusing a refund. Especially when the contract has been breached not only on time but also on what they said they would produce and the quality of what they did.

I would be interested to know if US law is similar, I imagine it would be, even if you don't have as good consumer protection laws as Australia/UK/etc, I imagine actual breach of contract would be a big thing, as would false advertising.

In the US, you can rent a house, stop paying rent, continue to live in the house and the home owner can't kick you out. We tend to favor bad behavior and criminals.

Not quite correct. The laws vary from state to state, but they all require a dispossessory action to be filed. Some states make it more difficult to file a dispossessory action than others. In the state where I live, Georgia, it rarely takes more than a month to process an eviction. The other extreme would be California, where it can take 6+ months to process the eviction. It isn't about protecting "bad behavior and criminals," it's about protecting the consumer from over zealous efforts of eviction.

That being said, if you don't get a full refund, it might be worth filing in small claims, though the law might require you to file it in a court where BTP is located, and you'll need to nail down to whom the suit needs to be served. If you can demonstrate that you paid for a specific quality of product and can then demonstrate that the quality you received was far less than what you paid for, you should be awarded at least some portion of your request. However, getting a judgment is the easy part; collecting on it is a totally different kettle of fish.

xxvaderxx wrote:

 gunslingerpro wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:

tenebre wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:


It means a lot in regards to the sub par service he received, which again has already been established and nobody is disputing, at least from our side. It does not mean much in regards to which course to follow. If you buy an electronic product and when you receive it is defective, you are going to request an exchange, you are not going to not let the manufacturer rectify it because you assume all his products are defective. Same thing applies here.

Sure. Then you get another defective one.. Request 2nd exchange, then get a 3rd and 4th defective one.

Then you cross that bridge when you get there. Not before.

You're not understanding. The bridge has been crossed.

No, i am not agreeing which is different, the process was not over until he signed it over. After that he rightfully so uploaded a review with his experience of said process.

The process breaking down is not in dispute either.

Them giving it another crack at the process with the working assumption that this was the exception and not the norm is not unreasonable.

This kinds of services much like software development, which i happen to work on, should be weighted as a whole thing, not every single step individually. Communication broke down, ok, i get that, that is just one step in the process not multiple attempts at fixing the same project, even if that is what you call them. In fact i would venture most projects they handle go through some correction or modification steps, whether it be because the artist screws up or the client just changes his mind. The problem here was that his feedback was not taken into account for what ever reason until he eventually desisted and there you get the finished product.

You're just being willfully dense at this point.
1: "the process didn't breakdown", they didn't comply with any of his requests or meet any of their own timelines.
2: They aren't offering to rectify things to his satisfaction, but to _theirs_ which is absurd.

This isn't software development (hilarious that you commented on me being in an unrelated industry btw), this is a physical product. BTP has been paid in full, has shown to be completely unwilling or incapable of listening to instruction, have stated that they will only fix what they consider to need fixing and you are expecting him to send his remaining investment back to them _knowing_ that they have stated that they will _not_ be fixing it to _his_ satisfaction.

xxvaderxx wrote:

 gunslingerpro wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:

tenebre wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:


It means a lot in regards to the sub par service he received, which again has already been established and nobody is disputing, at least from our side. It does not mean much in regards to which course to follow. If you buy an electronic product and when you receive it is defective, you are going to request an exchange, you are not going to not let the manufacturer rectify it because you assume all his products are defective. Same thing applies here.

Sure. Then you get another defective one.. Request 2nd exchange, then get a 3rd and 4th defective one.

Then you cross that bridge when you get there. Not before.

You're not understanding. The bridge has been crossed.

No, i am not agreeing which is different, the process was not over until he signed it over. After that he rightfully so uploaded a review with his experience of said process.

The process breaking down is not in dispute either.

Them giving it another crack at the process with the working assumption that this was the exception and not the norm is not unreasonable.

This kinds of services much like software development, which i happen to work on, should be weighted as a whole thing, not every single step individually. Communication broke down, ok, i get that, that is just one step in the process not multiple attempts at fixing the same project, even if that is what you call them. In fact i would venture most projects they handle go through some correction or modification steps, whether it be because the artist screws up or the client just changes his mind. The problem here was that his feedback was not taken into account for what ever reason until he eventually desisted and there you get the finished product.

Guys... Vader's sitting at his bank of monitors, cat on lap, twirling his mustache and chuckling while his goons set ineffective plans in motion and the laser beam-on-shark project is underway.

He's just trolling at this point, no one is quite that vacant.

I really hope there's appropriate remuneration for this army fiasco, good luck OP!

Heres the way i see it:


Tenebre: you are NEVER going to get the money back from them. Well, your not going to get nearly what you deserve or would feel good about. They might offer a 15-18% refund, but thats a slap in the face compared to what they owe you for the utter disgrace of a paintjob and service they gave you. In my honest opinion, they owe you about a 60% refund. maybe more, maybe 70%. It will take that much to get the army repainted. You are *NEVER* going to see that. Just forget about that and plan accordingly. The only way you could ever hope to get the money back in some meaningful percentage would be to fight them for it in court and that could cost, in legal fees and travel / lodging fees, FAR more than the refund ever would be. It could also drag out so long that by the time you got the money you would have allready gone insane from fatigue and despair.

BTP knows this. They know that it is just not feasable for you to fight them for the money in court, or small claims court. They know no one is driving or flying to utah. So they are using this to their advantage and get away with this type of treatment to their customers and control any $&%#storms like this that come up like this.

However, one thing they CANT control is the internet. The internet makes the world a very small place. Especially youtube. The financial damage and havok you have caused to their reputation far exceeds by orders of magnatude any amount of the refund. Which doesnt make any sense really why shawn would rather play the spin game and try to worm his way out of any responsibility and meanwhile allow this devastating review of his company persist online. As other posters have said, its basically business suicide.


So, it seems :

You want something - You want $$$$. You know you are done with the artists of this company, so its ludicrous to give them another shot for more shoddy paintwork. You dont want their paintwork. you want $$$.

They want something - They want this horrific PR to go away, and quickly. (the threads and youtube reviews to come down). They want you to go away, quickly.

If i was a mediator, i would encourage both parties to concentrate on what the other wants and try to meet in the middle for a resolution. $$$$ for removal of all negative PR. They pay you a respectable refund, you sign a statement saying you will remove all negative PR and never make another statement about them again.


However, if your ethics are more important than $$$$, and you the type of guy would rather watch something burn to the ground instead of compromising your ethics, then i say just write the cash off your taxes - and make sure that you know every single miniature collector and gamer in the entire world knows this company is a dirty, unethical pit of slime and fraud.

Ethics should be more important than money, I don't even see why this is even a question.

I've never understood why Corvus Belli have a relationship with these guys. They seem to make smart choices with all their other partners and then you have these jokers.

 plastictrees wrote:
I've never understood why Corvus Belli have a relationship with these guys. They seem to make smart choices with all their other partners and then you have these jokers.

I agree. Corvus Belli is only of the top quality and I greatly respect that. They have great relationships with all their partners and all their partners are hard working good reliable companies. Then you have BTP. It is so out of place with the quality, honesty and community communication that CB is known for. Maybe someone should let them know how they run stuff? It is possible that they literally have no idea all the shady stuff that is coming to light (cause you know, being in Spain and all). Cause if that was the case, that would make sense.

Also yes, OP made it pretty clear in the video he would not compromise his ethics. It may cost him but he made it clear he would not remove the videos. That is commendable as so many places just bully those smaller when they can to hide the bad press.

Here's another way to look at this situation. I am not a lawyer, but the following is based on my understanding of the laws in my state and a limited amount of experience I have on the subject.

Say, for example, you hire a contractor to paint your house. You have a specific paint scheme in mind, pastel blue with white trim on the soffits, fascia, and faux shutters. You agree on a price. When you return from vacation, you discover that the wrong colors of paint were used, and added elements like stencils on the fascia were added without our request. You request corrections to be made, but after one or two attempts, the work still does not match what was contracted.

At this point, you don't have any further legal requirement to work with the original contractor. At this point, you could (within your legal rights) hire a totally different contractor to correct the mistaken paint job. At that point, you take the bill from the second contractor and use it as the basis for "damages" when filing a lawsuit against the original contractor.

It's a risk, of course; you might not win the suit. However, the burden of proof is pretty low. You'd have your original request, agreement and contract. You made good-faith effort to work with the original contractor, but they failed to live up to their part of the bargain. That's really all you would have to prove. After that, you would then have to document that the amount that you are seeking in damages is reasonable, and that might include testimony or an affidavit from the second contractor in addition to that contractor's bill for services. The defendant would then be placed in a situation where they would have to either provide a legal basis for their failure to meet the terms of the original agreement, or convince the judge that their original work actually did meet the terms of the agreement.

Dunno if it's worth the time, effort, hassle, additional financial expenditure, and risk of capital loss, but this is an option to pursue.

Lets all be honest, at this point BTP has "crossed the Rubicon", There's no going back.

We all know the video is staying up and I for one think that the video is a far assessment of the work given and payed for. He does not yell or scream. He gives a fair review and to me that's what the video was there for.

That being said, a lot of what BTP has done is worthy of note. Hiding videos, deleting his army off their photo gallery. Forcing him to remove the videos? Its all sketchy.

Does anyone have a idea how much it would cost them to return 60% of his refunds. 60% of 8000$ would be 4,800$ dollars. That's a lot of money to talk about. If he did take the 10-15% it would be 1,200$. That's a 3,600$ difference. Then there is the question if BTP even still has the money?

That is a lot of money to be talking about. I wouldn't give up without a fight either. I hope Tenebre gets his funds back because i personally would love to see that army painted up to standard as it should have been!

 neal1975 wrote:
...They know that it is just not feasable for you to fight them for the money in court, or small claims court. They know no one is driving or flying to utah...

I dunno. Anybody who can afford both that much Forge World and the extremely costly painting fees discussed in this thread (plus an amazing hobby room shown in the vids) might just be able to jump in their Lexus or have Alfred pilot the family Learjet to wherever it's needed to get papers served and see a court case through to the end without problem.

Nice attacking of Tenebre, privateer. Real classy.

 curran12 wrote:
Nice attacking of Tenebre, privateer. Real classy.

Not an attack. I'm saying the OP obviously has a financial resources that would be foolish to ignore.

 curran12 wrote:
Nice attacking of Tenebre, privateer. Real classy.

Agreed. And I'm willing to bet that tenebre's butler is not named Alfred. That would be too obvious.

RULE #1 seems to be seeing a bit of a test in here.

Let's not skirt that line anyone, please?

And, you know, On Topic, etc.

Thanks!

privateer4hire wrote:

 neal1975 wrote:
...They know that it is just not feasable for you to fight them for the money in court, or small claims court. They know no one is driving or flying to utah...

I dunno. Anybody who can afford both that much Forge World and the extremely costly painting fees discussed in this thread (plus an amazing hobby room shown in the vids) might just be able to jump in their Lexus or have Alfred pilot the family Learjet to wherever it's needed to get papers served and see a court case through to the end without problem.

Or, he could just hire an attorney in Utah.

Small claims court doesn't require an attorney, but you can still have one if you want. And, the fees can be added to the judgment.

I don't feel privateer4hire was attacking him, and really i have been thinking along these lines myself since i first watched this. I believe the nuts and bolts of it is that BTP has picked a fight with the wrong guy. Tenebre clearly is not only thinking about his own remediation but also seems to be fighting this on principal, lets face it we are looking at a 10k ish drop of capital over a short period, not a trival thing. If it were some of us at an even smaller number many of us could not afford to fight it. This is something a great many people bank on. Obviously we cannot judge (nor should we try) Tenebre's entire financial situation based on the little we know, but it surely leans towards someone who's not a pauper, which i as the little guy who would normally be pretty powerless in a situation like this, salute him for sticking to his guns.

 knighthaunter wrote:
I don't feel privateer4hire was attacking him, and really i have been thinking along these lines myself since i first watched this. I believe the nuts and bolts of it is that BTP has picked a fight with the wrong guy, Tenebre clearly is not only thinking about his own remediation but also seems to be fighting this on principal, lets face it we are looking at a 10k ish drop of capital over a short period, not a trival thing, if it were some of us at an even smaller number many of us could not afford to fight it. This is something a great many people bank on, obviously we cannot judge (nor should we try) Tenebre's entire financial situation based on little we know, but it surely leans towards someone who's not a pauper, which i as the little guy who would normally be pretty powerless in a situation like this, salute him for sticking to his guns.

Have to agree, this is a lot of money in both merchandise and service, be it me i could not really afford it nor feel inclined to go to court about it, but his situation might be different. Last i heard having money was not a crime...

xxvaderxx wrote:

Have to agree, this is a lot of money in both merchandise and service, be it me i could not really afford it nor feel inclined to go to court about it, but his situation might be different. Last i heard having money was not a crime...

Depends whose money it is

 knighthaunter wrote:
I don't feel privateer4hire was attacking him, and really i have been thinking along these lines myself since i first watched this. I believe the nuts and bolts of it is that BTP has picked a fight with the wrong guy, Tenebre clearly is not only thinking about his own remediation but also seems to be fighting this on principal, lets face it we are looking at a 10k ish drop of capital over a short period, not a trival thing, if it were some of us at an even smaller number many of us could not afford to fight it. This is something a great many people bank on, obviously we cannot judge (nor should we try) Tenebre's entire financial situation based on little we know, but it surely leans towards someone who's not a pauper, which i as the little guy who would normally be pretty powerless in a situation like this, salute him for sticking to his guns.

Thanks, Knighthaunter. You read my intent exactly.
Not an attack at all, just knowing that anybody who can spend that much on one army has considerable resources.
I will now bow out of the thread and let things get back on topic.

Been lurking in this thread for a while, and haven't seen this explicitly stated, but...

BTP's response seems to be from the perspective of responding to the BBB. From what I remember from a BBB complaint I made a long time ago (for a completely different product/issue, but it should be the same)... the process is:

1. consumer files complaint
2. Business responds, or does not. Lack of response is a ding from BBB.
3. Response is considered reasonable by consumer, or not. I know I was asked by BBB as to whether my resolution was reasonable, and since I never got an actual response from the company regarding my issue, I said no. The issue went away, though, and I have no idea what BBB did.
4. If response is acceptable to consumer, no BBB ding. If not accepted, I believe that BBB judges whether to ding the company on rating or not. This, I think, is what BTP is trying to establish... that tenebre is unreasonable, but they made an effort. Which is completely out of line based on the evidence as noted here previously, but they can spin to BBB however they want.

Anyway, as others have noted, a court case is not likely for most consumers. But a BBB rating reduction is very possible, which is why it is the angle I think BTP is attacking. The wording in the BTP response actually sounded like what I recall in my BBB dispute from back then.

Anyone else ever gotten that far with BBB? Have any other insight?

Oh. and tenebre... dude. This totally sucks. I felt so badly for you when hearing the frustration in your voice. BTP appears to be working on undermining you instead of acting to fix the issues in good faith. That is incredibly frustrating.

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Nice attacking of Tenebre, privateer. Real classy.

Agreed. And I'm willing to bet that tenebre's butler is not named Alfred. That would be too obvious.

Since when is it an attack to suggest someone might have money? If I had a butler I think it'd be written in to the contract that he has to change his name to Alfred... or Jeeves. In the case of the latter he would also be required to refer to me as Mr Wooster.

But anywho... there's probably not a lot of point offering legal advice unless we actually have some experience or qualifications on the matter in the particular state where it would occur.

Dude I'm sorry you wasted your money with that horrible speed painting over costed service. Both my buddy and I completely wasted our money. We as a support community should ban together and let the DakkaDakka community know what kind of work they will be paying for :/
I also would love Shawn to go up against Judge Judy...make the man cry cuz dude he is was to happy about his products his teams put out!

I normally don't watch Judge Judy because I found it hard to get the palm print off my face, but I would definitely watch the BTP episode

here is their BBB page
http://www.bbb.org/utah/business-reviews/painting-contractors/blue-table-painting-in-spanish-fork-ut-22300407


I noticed they have an A+ rating, and zero complaints WTF?

Tenebre, the first step would be to file a formal complaint on the BBB, did you do this?

Sadly BBB has become more of a corporate protection racket of late than an actual tool. Member companies pay dues and BBB gives them an A+ rating.

My late father got burned by a well known loan company, but I'd rather not get into it.

i think the rating system has more to do with their resolution of complaints. They can have 4000 complaints but if they have made an attempt to resolve them all, they get to keep an A rating.

But yes, its all smoke and mirrors, but its at least one avenue you can pursue to try and put some heat on a company. its better than nothing i guess.

Anothing thing you could do is report Fraud to the FTC (federal trade commission)
http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/media/video-0054-how-file-complaint

(is this technically "fraud"? not sure where you draw the line on that)

Art is a tricky thing to quantify.

 neal1975 wrote:
here is their BBB page
http://www.bbb.org/utah/business-reviews/painting-contractors/blue-table-painting-in-spanish-fork-ut-22300407


I noticed they have an A+ rating, and zero complaints WTF?

Tenebre, the first step would be to file a formal complaint on the BBB, did you do this?

yes i did. Which is why i believe he is responding at all and the way in which he is responding as mentioned already.

 Boggy Man wrote:
Sadly BBB has become more of a corporate protection racket of late than an actual tool. Member companies pay dues and BBB gives them an A+ rating.

My late father got burned by a well known loan company, but I'd rather not get into it.

Yeah, man. I getcha. I didn't go into my details in my previous post, either, but I did feel that getting the BBB involved helped made my issue go away... so maybe my context might be relevant.

My mother and I were customers of the same company. Same last name, same address for a long time, then I moved out. Couple years later, that company sent me a bill for my mother's outstanding balance on something (her name on line item, my name as billable address somehow). I called them thinking it was an error, and told them this was not OK; I was not a payee for her as a customer. They asked me to contact her and ask her to pay her bill to them. That's when I got BBB involved and the issue... disappeared.

My case is much more clear cut than tenebre, which is why I spelled out and qualified my understanding of the BBB complaint process. There are many, many ways for a business to slant the results in their favor. Which is why I view an A+ rating as neutral. My impression, after reviewing the process back then, is that it takes real stupidity/negligence or total lack of effort by a company to get a negative rating applied by BBB.

I recall that a BBB complaint had been filed in this situation, so it does seem that BTP's response is to undermine the customer instead of resolve the issues. Sadly that may be a viable tactic as far as BBB rating, which may explain the A+? Or customers that are vaguely dissatisfied never file a complaint? Not sure. But the wording/tactics seem very pointed.

ETA- tenebre ninja'd my post as I overthought/overedited my response. Edited to reflect info.