Skunkworx Computers or Skamworx Computers?

Thread Rating: 8 votes, 5.00 average.
(8 votes)
Results 351 to 375 of 561

  1. Post
    Fragluton wrote:
    Sure isn't.

    They really need to sort their inbox issues out, seems to happen a bit. Or so I heard...
    Indeed: "...thank you for your email! It was delivered to a different inbox... "

  2. Post
    Update:
    I have just received this email from the Court:

    "visited 15/278 Gloucester st - 9/1/20 @ 9.05. 3p eldely man at the
    residential address (who identified himself as Egyptian) stated does not
    know of debtor company.
    rung phone number provided twice. No response."

    If anyone knows their current address please send it to me in a PM. Thanks.

  3. Post
    Nearly purchased off these guys a couple weeks ago, something didn't seem right so didn't go thru with the sale at the last point, rather glad I went elsewhere now.

  4. Post
    antan wrote:
    Update:
    I have just received this email from the Court:

    "visited 15/278 Gloucester st - 9/1/20 @ 9.05. 3p eldely man at the
    residential address (who identified himself as Egyptian) stated does not
    know of debtor company.
    rung phone number provided twice. No response."

    If anyone knows their current address please send it to me in a PM. Thanks.
    Hey man can we link up? I spent $7500 on computers with these guys, they delivered one incomplete and one undelivered and i haven't heard from them since xmas. Their correct address is:

    Skunkworx Computers Ltd
    4-138 Stanmore Road, Linwood, Christchurch 8011
    GST 125-464-621

    Darryl B Smith
    027 464 3737
    [email protected]

    I have verified their address as I have seen the owners red car there with number plate HDQ838

  5. Post
    How did you pay? If CC, do a charge back

  6. Post
    stated does not know of debtor company
    Of course they just take his word for it :/

  7. Post
    ptrappo wrote:
    Hey man can we link up? I spent $7500 on computers with these guys, they delivered one incomplete and one undelivered and i haven't heard from them sincexmas. Their correct address is:

    Skunkworx Computers Ltd
    4-138 Stanmore Road, Linwood, Christchurch 8011
    GST 125-464-621

    Darryl B Smith
    027 464 3737
    [email protected]

    I have verified their address as I have seen the owners red car there with number plate HDQ838
    Maybe the MoJ bailiffs are just useless. One more reason to use a private debt collector agency.
    The address you provided is not valid anymore, apparently. Hopefully, you paid by credit card so you can get the money back.
    If he can afford a 5737 cc car, then he can also afford to give the money back. The money that he has basically stolen, based on the definition of stealing: " take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.". He definitely falls in this category.

    Feel free to send me a PM so we can share information.
    Last edited by antan; 13th January 2020 at 2:04 pm.

  8. Post
    antan wrote:
    Maybe the MoJ bailiffs are just useless. One more reason to use a private debt collector agency.
    The address you provided is not valid anymore, apparently. Hopefully, you paid by credit card so you can get the money back.
    If he can afford a 5737 cc car, then he can also afford to give the money back. The money that he has basically stolen, based on the definition of stealing: " take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.". He definitely falls in this category.

    Feel free to send me a PM so we can share information.
    Sorry to nitpick, but its not "theft" or "stealing". He didn't take your money. You gave it to him willingly as part of a contract. This is simply breach of contract, hence why the police don't give a shit.

  9. Post
    teelo7 wrote:
    Sorry to nitpick, but its not "theft" or "stealing". He didn't take your money. You gave it to him willingly as part of a contract. This is simply breach of contract, hence why the police don't give a shit.
    If he never intended to supply, then it's theft?

  10. Post
    KevinL wrote:
    If he never intended to supply, then it's theft?
    Nah, it would be more fraud. You've been given something on a lie, theft is taking something without permission. They didn't permit you to not supply the goods, but you were permitted to receive the money.

  11. Post
    I'm still baffled how people pay CASH to a company with such a shitty website. Warning sign number one. You can reverse google all the images.

    Probably a good plan to get people on the job that get a cut of the claim. They might be a bit more motivated to get the money back.

  12. Post
    antan wrote:
    Maybe the MoJ bailiffs are just useless. One more reason to use a private debt collector agency.
    The address you provided is not valid anymore, apparently. Hopefully, you paid by credit card so you can get the money back.
    If he can afford a 5737 cc car, then he can also afford to give the money back. The money that he has basically stolen, based on the definition of stealing: " take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.". He definitely falls in this category.

    Feel free to send me a PM so we can share information.
    It definitely is valid. I went there the other day to check and his red car was parked out back. He would live there I guess. I paid by debit visa card and am currently going through things with the bank. I have in writing that he was supposed to deliver on the 18th December and he hasn't and if he wouldn't he would offer me a refund or "huge discount". He made heaps of excuses which were different to each other from 17th to 26th December including that one of his staff died! He has not been responding to my fb messages, calls, texts or emails since the 26th - I have shared all screenshots of this to the bank. I'm waiting to hear back, I am shocked that companies like this exist in NZ, it's something you'd expect from a third world country.

  13. Post
    With all the charge backs you'd think the banks would have identified the company as a scam and start auto blocking transactions.
    I know they do have a system like this, my bank one time blocked me from paying Apple because their system mistakenly identified it as a scam.

  14. Post
    SirGrim wrote:
    my bank one time blocked me from paying Apple because their system mistakenly identified it as a scam.
    well they weren't wrong


  15. Post

  16. Post
    suntoucher wrote:
    Nah, it would be more fraud. You've been given something on a lie, theft is taking something without permission. They didn't permit you to not supply the goods, but you were permitted to receive the money.
    Fraud is still illegal. I do not understand why the Police do not care.

  17. Post
    Was trying to find what our legislation around Fraud actually is.

    Crimes Act sections about it have been repealed. Summary Offences Act has:

    Offences resembling forgery or fraud

    15 Seeking donations by false pretence
    16 Acting as medium with intent to deceive
    17 Publishing false notice of birth, marriage, civil union, or death
    18 Imitation of court documents
    19 Imitation of official documents
    20 False claim of qualifications
    Only other Act I can think of is Serious Fraud Office Act but this would be far from the threshold needed for that.

    I'm guessing the law around it has been moved somewhere else but Idk where.

  18. Post
    antan wrote:
    Fraud is still illegal. I do not understand why the Police do not care.
    This kind of fraud is usually dealt with by civil means, or has a lot of hearsay.

    I imagine they'd probably get involved if enough people complained and civil means were exhausted. Or the scale was large enough.

    Also it's difficult for police to get involved with limited liability companies, technically the company defrauded you, not the person. The person was just a representative of the company and can't be held liable. The company itself would have to punish him and since he's the company all you can really do is sue and force them to liquidate.

    Police probably don't want to touch anything that isn't beyond reasonable doubt, EG every man and his dog calling up saying Noel Leeming committed fraud because they didn't offer a refund on an item they didn't like.

  19. Post
    suntoucher wrote:
    This kind of fraud is usually dealt with by civil means, or has a lot of hearsay.

    I imagine they'd probably get involved if enough people complained and civil means were exhausted. Or the scale was large enough.

    Also it's difficult for police to get involved with limited liability companies, technically the company defrauded you, not the person. The person was just a representative of the company and can't be held liable. The company itself would have to punish him and since he's the company all you can really do is sue and force them to liquidate.

    Police probably don't want to touch anything that isn't beyond reasonable doubt, EG every man and his dog calling up saying Noel Leeming committed fraud because they didn't offer a refund on an item they didn't like.
    I see what you mean. But the director of an LTD is still responsible and liable for the company's actions.

    I have learnt many lessons in this experience. The top one is pretty obvious: "never pay via bank transfer when purchasing online. I must say, I never had this kind of problems before. Fortunately, the majority of people are not scumbags.
    The other lesson learnt is that our Justice system is inefficient, to use a polite term. It has many gaps. Gaps that allow scumbags to have a relatively easy life here.

    But I also believe in Newton's third law of motion, or karma for the more spiritual ones. Scumbags always pay the consequences of their filthy actions, in a way or the other.

    In the meantime, the more effective private debt collection company that I have involved has served him with a Statutory Demand. He has until the end of the mouth to pay. I doubt that he will pay. But I am looking forward to discussing the next step to inflict him with the biggest damage I can, within the legal boundaries, of course.

  20. Post
    antan wrote:
    I see what you mean. But the director of an LTD is still responsible and liable for the company's actions.

    I have learnt many lessons in this experience. The top one is pretty obvious: "never pay via bank transfer when purchasing online. I must say, I never had this kind of problems before. Fortunately, the majority of people are not scumbags.
    The other lesson learnt is that our Justice system is inefficient, to use a polite term. It has many gaps. Gaps that allow scumbags to have a relatively easy life here.

    But I also believe in Newton's third law of motion, or karma for the more spiritual ones. Scumbags always pay the consequences of their filthy actions, in a way or the other.

    In the meantime, the more effective private debt collection company that I have involved has served him with a Statutory Demand. He has until the end of the mouth to pay. I doubt that he will pay. But I am looking forward to discussing the next step to inflict him with the biggest damage I can, within the legal boundaries, of course.
    Hehehe, that's one way to pay off a debt.

    Name:  9843141.jpg
Views: 343
Size:  90.0 KB

    It's important to talk about this kind of stuff because he will either start a new company, and Google results will name and shame him. Or he'll give up and apply for a job, and new employers will Google him.
    Last edited by suntoucher; 14th January 2020 at 5:56 pm.

  21. Post
    KevinL wrote:
    If he never intended to supply, then it's theft?
    I explained my case with Skunkworx to the police officer at the station. The case was filled under Offence/Incident: "Obtain By Deception (Over $1000)".

    However, another officer explained on the phone that since this is a case of Civil Law and not Criminal Law, police won't get involved in a single incident. This didn't make sense to me, since these are clear cases of fraud and deception.

  22. Post
    chch_developer wrote:
    I explained my case with Skunkworx to the police officer at the station. The case was filled under Offence/Incident: "Obtain By Deception (Over $1000)".

    However, another officer explained on the phone that since this is a case of Civil Law and not Criminal Law, police won't get involved in a single incident. This didn't make sense to me, since these are clear cases of fraud and deception.
    Perhaps if more scammed people report them to the police it will not be a single incident... So the police will have to get involved. We need to change it into a criminal case as it should be.

  23. Post
    Not sure how I missed this roller coaster of a thread. Was a doozy to read. Sorry your going through this OP. What theyre doing is absolute bullshit. The fact they had the nerve to come in this thread and try and discredit your story is just astounding. But you really should have asked for advice in the pc builders thread when you joined. Especially when spending that amount of money. At the same time and im sure you learned this now. I do feel like a bit of responsibility does fall onto the consumer to do some kind of research. Not trying to be mean. But a little bit of due diligence could have gone a long way and you could saved yourself a whole lot of stress. Fingers crossed you get your money back m8.

  24. Post
    chch_developer wrote:
    I explained my case with Skunkworx to the police officer at the station. The case was filled under Offence/Incident: "Obtain By Deception (Over $1000)".

    However, another officer explained on the phone that since this is a case of Civil Law and not Criminal Law, police won't get involved in a single incident. This didn't make sense to me, since these are clear cases of fraud and deception.
    So everyone in this thread owed money needs to get on that train. File the same fraud / deception complaint. Get the ball rolling from there.

  25. Post
    Fragluton wrote:
    So everyone in this thread owed money needs to get on that train. File the same fraud / deception complaint. Get the ball rolling from there.
    Also make the case very clear: You ordered product, seller refused to send or refund. The endless delays and excuses are beside the point, and the tactic that the scammer is using to complicate the case and make it appear that there are a number of legitimate complications. There aren't any. You paid for a product, seller refused to send or refund, and this is how much money you lost. That's it.