A Message From Aero Leather USA

[zaman fu]

In response to Atticus and others regarding Moye's criminal intent:
When I expressed my opinion that what Moye did was theft, I wasn't talking about whether or not there's enough to find him guilty in a court of law. What I meant was that Moye's continuing to collect payments from people under the pretense that their money would be going towards the purchase of a new jacket, and then using that money for other things (his bills, dinner, cigarettes, who knows), was straight up theft in my book.
ZF

 

[JakeHolman]

When I placed an order with Good Wear, the first thing I noticed was the order number in the email subject. Tis has been used on all communications with JC & Vickie. I have no clue how Aero does it without this sort of system in place.

... Hesitate to enter this debate but...

Being in the UK I've only ever dealt directly with the factory. When I place an order they give me an order ID which we then use in ongoing communications. Is there a reason Mark was unable to pass this on to his customers?

 

[Tony B]

If you paid by Paypal funded by credit card fill in a credit card charge back form. As I've said previously, this is not time limited. I've successfully done this six months after a dud Ebay purchase. The loser is Paypal as the charge is against them (assuming the miscreant has an empty Paypal account.)

It's pointless talking to Ebay or Paypal if their guarantee period is expired.

This is the best advice on here, ebay said do this paypal said do that....yes you have to start by complaining through them but they will have you running round in circles (all of which uses up valuable time) because they refuse to offer any proper sort of buyer protection and from my experience of them will always take the sellers side in disputes so like hpalapdog said get onto your card issuer and get your money back by hook or by crook.

This will get your money back in your account and then and only then will they (paypal/ebay) have any real axe to grind with the seller as their company/companies has had to fund the payback.

Jumping up and down making noise will not get get your money back but making sure you are talking with the right people at the right level should and then and only then will you see any proper reaction from ebay/paypal because only then are they out of pocket, THAT is when you might see some action from them as they can afford to upset some plebby little individual but they have to be nice to card issuers and cough up the repayment on demand or else they will have some very big infuluential companies refusing to let people make ebay/paypal payments using their cards.

If your bank is not helpfull go over their head's to visa/mastercard direct. Basically be a right pain in the arse to all concerned untill you get your money back then it becomes someone else's problem and then they can sort it out amoungst themselves. The point of these cards is that you get some protection and there are generous time limits on chargebacks, and they are big guns compared to an individual so people think twice before messing these big companies around.

 

[jlanderson]

I have to say, I don't really get the public statement myself. It reads like a carefully worded statement that was meant to give a false sense of security. I mean, it essentially says that Aero Scotland will take over fulfilling his outstanding orders, and everything will go smoothly. How can you write a statement like that when you never bothered to place 80+ orders and a large group of customers were left holding the bag? In my opinion, it was a last ditch attempt to save face, and more importantly, to delay the inevitable flood of calls and emails from furious customers.

Jimmer, that is EXACTLY how I read it when I first saw it on Aero Scotland's Facebook page. And in my very first email to Holly, I asked if her note was just a stock email, because Moye said his customers' orders would be taken over by them with no problem. Everything in that note of his was false, except that Aero USA was closing. Sad

 

[Grayland]

Well, it makes no sense to run a solid business for years, then internationally screw people over.Then to post here doesn't smell like someone trying to hide, does it? I simply have to believe that Mark is not this beast that intended to rip people off and ruin both his and Aero's reputation, not to mention the hobby for many. I have to see where this goes. We're all speculating, and I for one have to come full-circle and say I'm not going to crucify Mark for what I don't know. I have absolute sorrow for any and all whom have lost money and faith here.

Although it doesn't look good, I have some doubts about Mark being a beast as well. I paid my deposit on March 15th, but waited a few days to begin to spec out the jacket. On the 19th, I started to list my specs with Mark. He replied that day and cc'd Amanda. On the 20th, Amanda responded and answered a question (regarding the back length of the jacket). Although there may be a simple explanation, this puzzles me. If he had bad intent in mind, why Cc Amanda and if Aero Scotland knew of bad intent on the part of Mark, why didn't they warn me? I'm not blaming Aero Scotland; just speculating that whatever happened, happened very quickly?

 

[Worf]

I've been trying to think of a way to make this all more clear. Maybe this will help. Officers frequently bring cases like this to me for possible indictment. Like here, the victims are usually very upset and are burning up the officers' phones trying to get the suspect charged. I try to listen to each case objectively as I can but at the end of each officer's presentation, I always ask them to tell me how his case is different from the hundreds of contract breach cases filed in District 3-B every year. I expain that in those cases, victims have also been left holding the bag for big bucks. And in those cases the business owner has probably been doing some borderline shady things trying to save his business. And in those cases, the suspect, ashamed and frustrated with his failure, has stopped returning phone calls and has maybe even disappeard. If the officer can clearly articulate something that shows that the suspect was...on purpose and by design...trying to rip people off, then to the Grand Jury the case goes. But if the officer can show nothing more than another poor dork floundering around, trying and failing to save his business, then the victims....mad though they may be...get to find their relief in civil court.

AF

I understand your logic. Would this qualify? It's been established by Aero and stated here that they "cut Mark off" in January, but he CONTINUED to take deposits and payments right up until he called it quits. Doesn't that meet the smell test? You know you're not going to get any jackets from Scotland and you still take folk's money and lie to them that they will get thier product? Just asking?

Worf

 

[jlanderson]

I understand your logic. Would this qualify? It's been established by Aero and stated here that they "cut Mark off" in January, but he CONTINUED to take deposits and payments right up until he called it quits. Doesn't that meet the smell test? You know you're not going to get any jackets from Scotland and you still take folk's money and lie to them that they will get thier product? Just asking?

Worf

I, too, wonder about this point. Those orders taken after the cut-off date are problematic, especially as one of them is mine; Moye specifically told me when I placed the order that his "orders were running 12 to 16 weeks at the factory, but most were coming in around 12." Just as when he told me my order would be taken over by Aero Scotland when he said Aero USA was closing, this, too, would appear not to be the case.

 

[Atticus Finch]

I understand your logic. Would this qualify? It's been established by Aero and stated here that they "cut Mark off" in January, but he CONTINUED to take deposits and payments right up until he called it quits. Doesn't that meet the smell test? You know you're not going to get any jackets from Scotland and you still take folk's money and lie to them that they will get thier product? Just asking?

Worf

OK. Now you have my attention. Yes. This is exactly the kind of independent evidence of fraudulent intent that could get a criminal case to the jury. It isn't a smoking gun, but if this is true...that is, if it can be established that Mark knew he was cut off in January with no chance of re-establishing a business relationship with Aero UK...then, yes, I think the case would survive a motion for nonsuit...at least with respect to the post-January transactions.

AF

 

[Otter]

IIRC Cloudy said that they had suspended his line of credit until it was brought back within its agreed limits.

 

[Atticus Finch]

IIRC Cloudy said that they had suspended his line of credit until it was brought back within its agreed limits .

Ooops. There goes that.

AF

 

[Davo]

How is everyone doing about getting their money back?

eBay and PayPall were useless for me.

However, my bank came through with no problems despite the transaction taking place over a year ago. Filed an online complaint, talked to them two days later and got the cash in the bank a day after that.

 

[Persimmon]

OK. Now you have my attention. Yes. This is exactly the kind of independent evidence of fraudulent intent that could get a criminal case to the jury. It isn't a smoking gun, but if this is true...that is, if it can be established that Mark knew he was cut off in January with no chance of re-establishing a business relationship with Aero UK...then, yes, I think the case would survive a motion for nonsuit...at least with respect to the post-January transactions.

AF

Having read and re read all the pages and postings I have to say I find it remarkable that you now only say this has caught your attention.

Over several "legal" postings from you I got the impression you thought the case unprovable etc etc yet this statement about Mark Moye taking money (deposits and full price) after being cut off by Aero Scotland from supplies of jackets has been clear in the posts in this thread almost from the get go.

His business model has been shaky at best over the past few years but recently the wheels financially clearly fell off. As soon as he was told he was not receiving any more stock from Aero Scotland he would have known the "game" was up yet he carried on intensionally taking money. That is clear fraud and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or even a legal expect to see that if they really choose ..to look.

The shame is that 80 + folks are out of pocket and for some/many big time and its all down to one guy who has ran for the hills as soon as the bubble burst.
And all that "I was forced out" etc etc email postings to he various forums as well !!
Another sign of this guy's poor bahaviour. Blame everyone else but me ....

I have bought several jackets direct from Aero Scotland , indeed on every occasion visited the factory to do so and found the folks to be very friendly.
Still I have to say that I find it hard to reconcile Aero Scotland 's "I know nothing attitute" until the ShxT hits the fan.
The name Aero USA implies that it is a division of the main company and I think for most people on both sides of the Atlantic they would think that.
Aero should have picked this up long ago for any issues/problems (and look what's happen !!) that can arise can damage a companies reputation immensly.
The "We are to busy to look " really does not hold water here at all.

Personally I think Aero Scotland do owe a responsibility to these 80 or so customers and not the 20% future discount offer. Thats fine if you buy lots of jackets etc but right now its really "I am owed money or a jacket" and I find them (Aero Scotland) at least 50% guilty in this.
Personally I believe Aero should at least offer this amount of discount off a replacement jacket right now. Reputations are hard won and easily lost and its time to act.
I hope the folks in the US go after this guy. Even if its just to make his life difficult. If I lived in the States and I were one of the 80 I would really make it my job to make his life as miserable as he would have made mine.

Alan

 

[ButteMT61]

OK, devil's advocate. If Aero Scotland cut off Mark last year, why did they not post on the forums stating this? I know that right now, I'd have enough "p*ssed" to go around if I bought from Mark and found this out here. That certainly doesn't take blame off of Mark. But I think you see where I'm going...

 

[Otter]

I can see where you are coming from there, but only with the benifit of 20/20 hindsight. None of us saw this coming or if we did we kept our fears quiet. Cloudy said the had suspended his line of credit, we have to do that sometimes in my line of business, but we do not go shouting that to all and sundry because that is a matter between us and our client. I am sure Aero hoped this was just a glitch and that they could continue buisness as soon as he had sorted himself out.

Alas we now know otherwise.

 

[Atticus Finch]

Having read and re read all the pages and postings I have to say I find it remarkable that you now only say this has caught your attention.

Over several "legal" postings from you I got the impression you thought the case unprovable etc etc yet this statement about Mark Moye taking money (deposits and full price) after being cut off by Aero Scotland from supplies of jackets has been clear in the posts in this thread almost from the get go.

His business model has been shaky at best over the past few years but recently the wheels financially clearly fell off. As soon as he was told he was not receiving any more stock from Aero Scotland he would have known the "game" was up yet he carried on intensionally taking money. That is clear fraud and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or even a legal expect to see that if they really choose ..to look.

Hi Allen. Yes, that part escaped me. But, as you can tell from my post, I'm still not saying it proves a fraud. I'm only saying that it might be enough evidence of intent to defraud to at least get part of the case to a jury. After that, the distance is long between surviving a motion for nonsuit and convincing the twelve beyond reasonable doubt. Also, I posted thinking that Mark Moye was actually cut off...as in disassociated with Aero. As it appears, this was not the case. He was only cut off until he could get within Aero's credit limits. That is more than a small distinction, legally.

I haven't said much about this, because I haven't practiced civil law in years, but since the start of this, I have also thought that there was an argument that Aero UK could be liable via apparent agency. But that's something the civil guys here might want to address....if any of them care to jump into this fray.

Finally...this will be my last post on this subject. I've been trying my best to provide accurate information to my friends by posting my opinions openly and answering PMs, but I'm afraid that (for some people) I might have only become a proxy for Mark Moye. Folks, I understand that people don't like to hear bad news but I have not been defending Mark Moye. I have only been trying to explain what I think might be the landscape ahead. And I really do hope that everyone here harmed by this mess, one day, receives full restitution. I wish the best to you all.

In the meantime...I've been neglecting my Stetson and Akubra threads. I think I'll go and catch up on them...and devote my jacket talking time to VLJ.

AF

 

[jlanderson]

How is everyone doing about getting their money back?

eBay and PayPall were useless for me.

However, my bank came through with no problems despite the transaction taking place over a year ago. Filed an online complaint, talked to them two days later and got the cash in the bank a day after that.

Bank of America, despite their having almost destroyed the financial system a while back, did right by me and refunded the charge to Moye.

Congrats, Davo ... it looks as if our banks/card issuers are being a heck of a lot better than eBay and PayPal are with this mess.

Thank God!!!

 

[HoosierDaddy]

OK, devil's advocate. If Aero Scotland cut off Mark last year, why did they not post on the forums stating this? I know that right now, I'd have enough "p*ssed" to go around if I bought from Mark and found this out here. That certainly doesn't take blame off of Mark. But I think you see where I'm going...

Maybe because Aero Scotland expected Aero USA to update 'his' credit (pay his bills). Perhaps it had happened on occassion before without any devastating effects? Both Aero Scotland and Aero USA have stated and admitted that Aero USA was Mark's baby. Yes..even Mark made the distinction. His only jab at Aero Scotland was that they 'forced' him to shut down.
So far..on this thread...I haven't seen an 'attempt' from Mark Moye to do what he said in his statement. No working with anyone to help customers/past customers of 'his' business. I have seen no positive 'updates' of refunds from Aero USA..explanations from the ex CEO of Aero USA. Only silence...contact cut off. No friendly compassion behind the scenes for past friends or customers whatsoever.
The only info has come from Aero Scotland...or those who have $$ refunded from their CC companies.
Either the CEO of the desolved Aero USA is broke and in shameful hiding and 'can't pay his bills...or has accumulated thousands of dollars to bolster a planned escape from a workload that didn't really matter anymore. To at least 80 customers left holding the bag..it most likely means very little..either way. The silence is deafening.
HD

 

[2jakes]

Yes , you're are right , if the people who were recommending Mark & knew about his "ripping" off people ,was wrong . I agree with you. But
don't you realize that there were folks too who were not aware of what was happening ? I only mention the big store to prove a point ! Sorry !

 

[cloudylemonade]

Although it doesn't look good, I have some doubts about Mark being a beast as well. I paid my deposit on March 15th, but waited a few days to begin to spec out the jacket. On the 19th, I started to list my specs with Mark. He replied that day and cc'd Amanda. On the 20th, Amanda responded and answered a question (regarding the back length of the jacket). Although there may be a simple explanation, this puzzles me. If he had bad intent in mind, why Cc Amanda and if Aero Scotland knew of bad intent on the part of Mark, why didn't they warn me? I'm not blaming Aero Scotland; just speculating that whatever happened, happened very quickly?

Your timing must have been awful, it was on the 20th that we had first indications that something was wrong. Our accountant spotted a problem and contacted us. At that point we hadn't had a response from Mark to our first email and Amanda wouldn't have been aware of any problem, even on the 21st it merely looked like sloppy book keeping, so it wasn't until late that evening we started to get wind of a bigger problem that couldn't be solved by a relaxation of credit limits or by us standing a loss on what at first appeared to be a few jackets still outstanding.

 

[cloudylemonade]

It's been established by Aero and stated here that they "cut Mark off" in January, but he CONTINUED to take deposits and payments right up until he called it quits. Doesn't that meet the smell test? You know you're not going to get any jackets from Scotland and you still take folk's money and lie to them that they will get thier product? Just asking?

Worf

I don't know where this misinformation came from.

The last jackets left the factory by air to Mark on the 19th of March and were paid for on that date. We did know in January that his credit had been extended in December as Amanda was trying to help him through what seemed to us to be typical Xmas cash flow... lots of stock needed, money not yet in the tills... but we didn't cut him off, instead we gave him time to pay it off. I'm sure we made this clear earlier?