CloseUp at 7 - Mon 23 May 7pm TV1

This is where you can read any threads which have been closed by site admins. This forum is read only.
User avatar
digidog
Site Admin
Posts: 15014
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:25 am
First Name: Alfie
Location: Otago
Contact:

CloseUp at 7 - Mon 23 May 7pm TV1

Post by digidog » Mon May 23, 2005 5:42 am

Your chance to see ScamBuster Clive Hill in the flesh - well, partially
clothed I expect. Watch the programme and rate how well they told
the story here afterwards.

Mole
Members
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:45 am
Location: Kirwee

Post by Mole » Mon May 23, 2005 6:19 am

Yeah I just saw it advertised on TV...hope fully I wont miss it, knowing my luck I will though!
"Killer Boots Man!!"

bling
Members
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 1:47 am

Post by bling » Mon May 23, 2005 7:21 am

So they didnt try to find out who Peter Vink is?

SuperMama
Members
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 5:14 am

Post by SuperMama » Mon May 23, 2005 7:24 am

No effort what so ever to track and trace this guy.
But then he's in Holland now - right?
So when do the police get involved?

bling
Members
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 1:47 am

Post by bling » Mon May 23, 2005 7:28 am

Oh and Clive Hill you looked very pretty :D

trisheart
Members
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:35 am
Location: Auckland
Contact:

Post by trisheart » Mon May 23, 2005 7:30 am

Clive - I think I'm in love *w*

No seriously very good viewing .
As mentioned on another thread here though, it is going to make people a little wary of buying art off the net - but better for all to be safe.
TM I felt were as uncommital as they possibly could be -but fair enough
surely a house unkept could not be so distressing as a life unlived

User avatar
digidog
Site Admin
Posts: 15014
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 2:25 am
First Name: Alfie
Location: Otago
Contact:

Post by digidog » Mon May 23, 2005 7:31 am

Clive... pretty? Almost hairless I'd say ;-)

It wasn't exactly an in-depth investigation, but served its purpose.
I wished they hadn't said that we were spotting 50 scams a day...
that was over a year ago. And it seemed that Richard Spranger
discovered the fraud himself, rather than us alerting him to it.
And they missed several other photographers who have been
ripped off by Vink.

However, if I was Vink I'd be looking for a hole to hide in.
But thankfully, I'm not him.

trisheart
Members
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:35 am
Location: Auckland
Contact:

Post by trisheart » Mon May 23, 2005 7:32 am

oh yeah - and WAY TO GO SCAMBUSTERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!
surely a house unkept could not be so distressing as a life unlived

User avatar
mings
Scambuster
Posts: 2132
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Palmerston North

Clive was GREAT!!!!

Post by mings » Mon May 23, 2005 7:32 am

Clive was GREAT!!!!!
Richard Spranger was GREAT!!!!

Mike O'Donnel was protecting his BUTT!!!!

Mike O'Donnell failed to mention that TM users had to contact Richard Spranger (and a number of other copyright holders) DIRECTLY because Trade Me, despite having been provided the evidence, said they had to receive the complaint direct from the original photographer/copyright holder!

Mike also failed to mention that the photographer in Switzerland (Rolf Maier) couldn't ring them on their 0900 number and couldn't find them listed in the White Pages either!!!! And that Mike Levin's original message "got lost" in the TM system for over a week!

Why didn't Trade Me pick up the phone (or email) Richard, Rolf and Mike themselves .... how come the owners of the copyright were expected to contact Trade Me? Trade Me had the links to the copyright sites for these photographers.

An "investigation" by Trade Me .... HA HA HA HA.

trisheart
Members
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:35 am
Location: Auckland
Contact:

Post by trisheart » Mon May 23, 2005 7:35 am

good points mings - but lets face it TM is a business - why shoot themselves in the foot?
surely a house unkept could not be so distressing as a life unlived

Mole
Members
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:45 am
Location: Kirwee

Post by Mole » Mon May 23, 2005 7:36 am

Yeah as soon as they said 50 a day..I thought hey that dosent sound right.
Also trademe didnt really give the scambusters any credit..ah someday

anyway it did its bit, Peter Vinks misdoings are know well known.
"Killer Boots Man!!"

artist
Members
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:51 am

Post by artist » Mon May 23, 2005 7:43 am

I thought that man from Trade Me sucked. I understand the situation, but still - he make it out the we were harrassing peter with horrible comments - all of the comments at the beginning were supportive of his work, until it was replied with a blacklist or a nasty comment from the con 'artist'.

Was it not Peter who had hired a PI to find all of us (naughty ones)
Was it not Peter who then placed a reward to have our contact details.

Was it not us who wanted to know his lawyers name?

Still banned from tm message board...

j

User avatar
mings
Scambuster
Posts: 2132
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Palmerston North

Yes, trisheart

Post by mings » Mon May 23, 2005 7:43 am

.... a business that turns a blind eye until it's hand is forced

.... a business able to silence it's critics

.... a business who only withdraws the single auction for a proven IP copyright breach on May 4th and carries on allowing the offending trader to sell other people's IP until those other people contact them as well and;

.... a business who edits out statements made by the offending trader(s) in a public auction process after such time as those public auctions have closed.

I make no bones about it .... Trade Me have (in my opinion) nearly as much to answer for as the infamous Mr Vink.

User avatar
chinaqt
Members
Posts: 3100
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 7:26 am
Location: queenstown

Post by chinaqt » Mon May 23, 2005 7:43 am

Good on ya Clive. Now who did the Press for tomorrow?

SuperMama
Members
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 5:14 am

Post by SuperMama » Mon May 23, 2005 7:46 am

I guess success fees on $105,000 adds up a bit.
Will Peter Fink resurface some place else?
I have just read his little rant on his website. With the HIV bit thrown in for the sympathy vote.
As a voyeristic onlooker I am curious - Did his love for hospice and animal charities occur about the same time as ppl were getting suspicious and ansey? Or has he been this philanthropic with his winnings (eeer earnings) all along?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests