Tim Bill and IMOC

[jmachling]

To clarify the situation regarding Tim Bill and IMOC.

Tim posted the follwing on his own forum on Thurs 7th May 2009:

the reason i was banned as they put it down to slagging off another trader, truth is i informed a customer of a Well known and very local specalist to me caught doing burnouts in a customers car in a local Mcdonnalds carpark. Now when that specalist found out they reported me for making it up to cause him to loose his reputation, thats why i was banned!

Then the constant lies started about how i threatened to shut the club down with a legal letter and i was taking them to court, oh and the best one the legal costs came to over £2000 of membership money. PMSL. Anyway to discredit me in anyway.

And as for legal action is was them who brough a solicitor in against me, not the other way around.

Tim seems to think:

1) he was banned for reporting the activities of a 'specialist'
2) the Committee of IMOC-UK instigated the use of solicitors in 2007
3) he did not make a legal challenge of IMOC-UK that he was fully aware would have closed down the club and bankrupted the Committee
4) IMOC-UK Ltd is a profit making organisation and that the members' money is being spent in ways other than directly on the members

None of this is correct.

1) The Warnings and Ban

I have had a good look through our archive relating to this and there are no reports concerning any 'specialist' doing burnouts .

What there is documented in great quantity and with great clarity are threads documenting how and why each warning was given and votes from the Committee for each. The information is unequivocal about why he was banned. Why he feels the need to mention this alleged incident, I don't know. It bears no connection to his ban from IMOC-UK. It just looks like an attempt to discredit one of his competitors, unfortunately.

Tim was banned from IMOC-UK in 2007 as a result of a string of warnings for unprofessional conduct similar to this. Three formal warnings within any 12 month period leads to a permanent ban; a fact of which he was fully aware.

Tim received four formal warnings within nine months and a number of informal warnings also . On each occasion he was offered advice and support from the Committee about his behaviour.

First warning – Thurs 10th August 2006: Publicly criticising competitor products on IMOC forums

Second warning – Weds 4th October 2006: Publicly criticising competitor products on IMOC forums

Third warning – Thurs 18th January 2007: Publicly criticising competitor products on IMOC forums

Forth warning and ban - Mon 23rd April 2007: Abuse of PM system to criticise competitors

The following are a small sample of the PMs forwarded to the Committtee at the time that Tim sent whilst on IMOC in an attempt to undermine other traders:

the pistons can take them but the bores of the engine were badly done so the rings are probably no good now.

total bodge from start to finish mate.

Tim

...his workman ship is shoddy at best.

2) and 3) The Legal Threat

The actual events occured in the following order:

Sunday 29th April 2007 - First mention of legal representation comes from Tim (Tim was still banned at the time so communication took place through his acquaintance 'Ed')

Hello Ben,

Would it be possible for your email as Tim has requested that he can make contact with you as he needs to descuss the situation regarding his presence on this forum after speaking with legal advice.

i think its best he speak to you directly.

Thankyou

Ed.

Tues 1st May 2007 - Legal threat made against IMOC-UK by Tim Bill. Please note the mention of the involvement of a legal professional and also the explicit acknowledgement of the likely results of his action

Hello Ben,

Did you receive my PM regarding your email address? Tim needs to contact you regarding some legal complications regarding this whole matter.

Bottom line he’s got a family member who’s a barrister specialising in commercial and financial law, After going through the terms and conditions of this site with consideration money has been taken for an affiliate statues this make its a contact based agreement which states after 3 incidents of breaking the rules the affiliate status will be removed, removal of Tim's club membership and removal of existing posts warrants a breech of contract where the head of the committee is ultimately responsible for a loss of earnings.

Free legal representation has been offered by his family member where all documents have been examined, the vagueness of the condition and a paid agreement means the club has got little argument regarding removal of his membership, with possible complications for breech of contract and loss of earns of over £60,000 per year have been calculated.

Once again this is an overview Tim’s given me and I feel it best you talk with him about this, He's also expressed his concern that this doesn't happen but this effects his lively hood and has to be taken seriously, He's also asked me that this be kept off the public forum as this could possibly bankrupt the forum and he doesn't want to be seen to be aiming for that.

Thank you

Ed.

4) IMOC-UK Ltd's Finances

Tim's accusations that the membership fees and other income from our Affiliate scheme goes anywhere apart from back into the club are completely unfounded and potentially libellous to the Directors and Committee of IMOC-UK Ltd.

His assertions seem to boil down mainly to the costs of hosting a forum and the cost of having to form a Limited Company following his legal threat.

Because of the number of members and traffic (600+ unique visitors per day to the forum) IMOC requires fast and reliable dedicated servers. We currently use Memset to provide this service at a cost of around £2000 per annum ( http://www.memset.com/dedicated_servers.php ). We could go for a cheaper option, but the forum would be slower and less reliable. Smaller forums can get away with lower costs in this department due to the lower volume of traffic and stored data.

Legal representation costs for that year came to around £500 and we now have Liability Insurance to protect the members and Officers of the Club since becoming a Limited Company. This is an annual fee of around £800 and protects the Officers of the Club from legal threats and also the members' interests whilst at official IMOC-UK events.

For example, if one of our gazebos blew over and seriously damaged your car during an official IMOC event, you'd be covered by us. Not all car clubs have this insurance but we feel it's worth it. We also undertake thorough risk assessments for all official events also to reduce the possibility of these things even happening.

Events are actually a considerable cost to the club also, but one we are happy to spend money on to ensure the members have a great time. For example, last year we made a loss of around £900 for JAE from the hire of the plot, generator and lighting hire and the hog roast. We'll probably do the same this year and perhaps more. That's what the membership fees are there for.

This is probably a good time to point out that the major financial hit of the results of Tim's actions was taken by our Affiliates, not the members. Their fees increased considerably compared to the modest increase in membership fees to become a Premium Member. Please note also that it is still free to access the majority of content on IMOC-UK's forums. Rather than decreasing what is available to regular members, we're trying to increase and improve what is available to our Premium Members to maximise value for money. Premium Membership costs £7.50 per year and for that you can save hundreds in terms of insurance, discounts and events. For example, you'll save £5 on your JAE ticket alone.

Now we are a Limited Company, our accounts will be publicly available. Our accounting period ends in the middle of June so I assume they should be available on the Companies House website not too long after that. While you're on the Companies House website, you'll see that IMOC-UK is a private company limited by guarantee with no share capital. IMOC-UK Ltd would be liable for Coporation Tax if any profits were made so we are very careful to ensure all surplus is re-invested in the club.

All Officers of the Club (including Directors) are volunteers and not one penny is taken out in payment. We don't even make expenses claims for doing things on Club business (such as the trip two members of the Committee went on recently to visit the JAE venue to attend a planning meeting).

From the above, you may be able to see that Tim's version of 'the truth' doesn''t always match the hard facts in black and white. Unfortunately, sometimes when they don't, he's not above altering communications to suit his own purpose. The following is an example of Tim altering and forwarding an email to shift the blame from him:

The original:

----- Original Message -----
From: *removed for privacy*
To: *removed for privacy*
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 10:34 PM
Subject: Forum grief!

Hi Tim
Hope all is well mate.
Seems like we are both having forum problems by a certain member eh!
What is it with these people!!!

I see you have banned *removed for privacy* again from **Banned Trader** as per your report on IMOC. Seems like the 2nd chance you gave him has not worked out too well eh! Some people will never learn mate.

We are obviously discussing this on IMOC and i was wondering if you could forward the IP address that *removed for privacy* was using to post on your forum. If it matches the *removed for privacy* account on IMOC we have enough for a ban.
A thorn from your side will be removed!

Kind regards

Scott

As it appeared when forwarded by Tim to the member in question:

Hi Tim
Hope all is well mate.
Seems like we are both having forum problems by a certain member eh!
What is it with these people!!!

I see you have banned *removed for privacy* again from **Banned Trader**. Seems like the 2nd chance you gave him has not worked out too well eh! Some people will never learn mate.

We are obviously know his IP address that *removed for privacy* uses to post on your forum and ours. We've decided to remove him from IMOC again because of his recent actions and comments. The thorn from our sides will be removed!

Kind regards

Scott

Tim's reason for doing this:

I do appologise for editting your words slightly, it was basically to take the heat off me

This isn't just IMOC-UK. Tim has been banned from trading other MR2 forums for similar behaviour and it seems he is still behaving this way.

I hope now it is apparent why IMOC-UK Ltd cannot and will not allow underhanded advertising or plugging of an individual who risked collapsing IMOC and did so in the full knowledge of the potential results of his actions.

As far as possible, everything on IMOC is intended to cater for the members and will continue to do so. We would love to run the club for free, however, our forum is not linked to and promoting a business that is used to subsidise club activities.

Tim has since stated that:

Well now i have nothing more to loose i can openly promote by business through the PM system which you will never be able to trace or contain.

So it would appear he is still not above unprofessional and unbusinesslike practices.

If any member receives a PM promoting either Tim's website or his forum through IMOC or contact from him (or a member of his forum) they believe to be inappropriate, please report it in privacy to us via [email protected]. We take spamming using our forum and the information contained therein very seriously and will not tolerate the privacy of our members being abused.

Everything that is presented in this announcement is factual and taken directly from substantiated communications and archive posts. It is just the tip of the iceburg concerning the communications and discussions that have taken place regarding this individual.

On behalf of the Directors, Committee and Moderators, we regret having to make announcements like this. However, considering the consistent untruths, mis-information and downright lies that are being publicly posted on Tim's forum, it is necessary to counter these in public also.

Should anyone have any comments regarding this post, please contact me directly by PM or use the email address given above.

[jmachling]

ADDENDUM - 11/5/09

It would appear that I wasn't quite clear enough on a couple of points:

1) There were four warnings spaced over nine months. The dates of these are are given above and I have double-checked they are correct. At the time of the third warning, the Committee made a mistake over the date of the first warning - Tim should have actually been banned at that point.

2) The forth warning led to an immediate ban. There was no interim period.

3) The forth warning was generated after IMOC received information that Tim had contacted a member in an attempt to poach business from another trader. His first PM to this member reads:

if your after parts i will beat any price *removed for privacy* can offer you.

Tim
xxxx

This was sent following the member posting up on a specific Trader's thread seeking information and prices.

There then followed an exchange of PMs pricing up various parts. When the member eventually decided to stick with the original company, PMs were sent by Tim which were openly critical of the original Trader's work. There is no mention of this information having to be kept private.

Any Trader or Company found to be criticising or undermining another on IMOC-UK will receive a formal warning for each incident.

The PM system was checked and it was confirmed it was Tim who initiated contact with this member. There are no references made to this alleged carpark incident. I am at a loss to see its relevance as it played no part in any of the warnings or ban. I hope I've made that clear enough now.

4) The forth warning also has nothing to do with advice given to another trader, nor is it anything to do with what may have happened over MSN. The reason any MSN conversations were not taken into account is that they were nothing to do with the final warning and ban.

5) IMOC-UK has never questioned Tim's ability to look after his customers or provide them with a good service - this information is irrelevant in the history of this situation. The problems when he was on IMOC were not to do with this aspect of his business.

The warnings and ban on IMOC were for unprofessional behaviour towards other traders. Again, I hope I've been clear enough about this so the confusion does not continue.

6) No mention was made by IMOC-UK of the involvement of a solicitor until the first mention of legal involvement was made by Tim's representative on the dates stated above. Again, I hope this is clear enough.

Tim - dates and times are available for all this information if you'd like to cross-reference it against your own archive? It would appear you're missing some key information.

Either that or our archive is incomplete? If you still have the emails you are quoting various comments from, it would be useful to have them posted up including dates as I can find neither any record of them or their content.