Re: Re: [CR]hetchins

(Example: Production Builders)

From: <vze4k5n6@verizon.net>
To: "Jerry & Liz Moos" <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>, <Patrick@aardvark-pro.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [CR]hetchins
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:02:13 -0500

Jerry: This is a rehash of the controversy of a few years ago. Miller and Rivera bought the company ligitimately, so I fail to understand why you refer to Miller as a stranger. He is no more a stranger, than my buying Ford Motor Company (if I had the money), but didn't register yhe sale and trademark, which apparantly wasn't done by Millers boss. Good thanksgiving, Peter
>
> From: "Jerry & Liz Moos" <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>
> Date: 2002/11/26 Tue PM 10:33:49 EST
> To: <Patrick@aardvark-pro.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Subject: Re: [CR]hetchins
>
> At the risk of jumping into the middle of a controversy here, I am grateful
> to Mark for the courage to join and explain his side to a group rather
> overwhelmingly inclined to side with David Miller. I've heard good things
> recently about Miller's work, and I'm sure he's a fine fellow, but quite
> frankly, say about 3 years ago, I'd heard of Omega, but never of Miller. To
> me the "genuineness" of a marque has to do with continuity, and any
> semblance of that was destroyed when Bob Jackson went into bankruptcy and
> was sold to strangers. So both Omega and Miller are seemingly sincere
> admirers of Hetchins tradition trying to revive the marque, but neither has
> a real link to the original company. So why accept one as more valid than
> the other? To me it is a simple matter. Either Miller owned the trademark
> or he did not. If he did not, Omega had every right to register it. I note
> that Mark has made no mention of trying to prevent Miller using the name.
> Perhaps Miller should return the favor, and allow buyers to decide which
> "revival" they consider more authentic.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
> Houston, TX
> Recently ordered a new Bates to be build by Ron Cooper
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Patrick" <Patrick@aardvark-pro.com>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:00 PM
> Subject: FW: [CR]hetchins
>
>
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Patrick [mailto:Patrick@aardvark-pro.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 5:00 PM
> > To: 'Mark Reilly'
> > Subject: RE: [CR]hetchins
> >
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > Thanks for taking to time to address the CR list at large. I do have a
> few
> > questions to ask, but I may be at a bit of a disadvantage here, as I don't
> > know the details of U.K. laws as they relate to business names,
> trademarks,
> > registrations etc. As such, some of my thoughts may be a bit off base,
> but
> > please indulge me.
> >
> > I feel that a lot of the vintage lightweight crowd, both in the U.K and
> the
> > U.S., were aware that Hetchins were being made by Bob Jackson Cycles in
> > Leeds during the 1980s and into the early 1990s. As I remember the press
> > reports, the party that had taken over both Bob Jackson and Hetchins
> > basically ran the operation into the ground by about 1993 or so, which
> > resulted in the banks stepping in, foreclosure and the assets of BJ and
> > Hetchins put up for sale. It was at this time that Donald Thomas stepped
> in
> > the take over the Bob Jackson marque, bringing Bob Jackson himself out of
> > retirement to lend a hand. Also at this time, didn't the Hetchins name
> > legally end up in the hands of Jake Riviera? It is also my understanding
> > that David Miller was then assigned management of the Hetchins marque,
> where
> > it remains to date. This said, there was a clear paper trail left by the
> > involvement of the banks and the courts in the foreclosure and sale of the
> > Bob Jackson and Hetchins name. You surely knew of these events, as a
> frame
> > builder based in the U.K. Did you ever make any effort to investigate the
> > disposition of this sale? Did you contact Donald Thomas to ask for further
> > information regarding the status of the Hetchins marquee? This seems to
> be
> > common sense, since Jackson was the last "high profile" builder of the
> > Hetchins frames.
> >
> > Moving on, your story of discovering that there wasn't a Hetchins website
> > rings a bit hollow with me. A business isn't required to have a website,
> > which you surely know. Your efforts at registering or purchasing rights
> to
> > Hetchins Cycles Ltd seems to be purely a grab of a dubious nature. So
> what
> > if David Miller works out of the home? So what if he doesn't have email?
> > Does that mean he isn't worthy of carrying on the Hetchins name? And you
> > seem to be making an effort to separate your Hetchins efforts from your
> > Omega shop, aren't you? You have two separate websites, with no link
> > between the two, even though they are both operating from the same
> address.
> > You don't even acknowledge any link to Omega in the verbiage on your
> > Hetchins site. True? And why is that? OK, so perhaps Jake Riviera didn't
> > properly register the Hetchins name with the U.K. government, which is
> what
> > you're indicating. So in your eyes, that put the Hetchins name up for
> > grabs? In your eyes, hasn't here been a traceable, unbroken paper trail
> of
> > the Hetchins marque name into Jake Riviera's hands, with management
> assigned
> > to David Miller? If not, why not? And it really doesn't matter who
> builds
> > the frames for David Miller, if he indeed has been assigned legal
> management
> > duties by Jake Riviera. I mean, David Miller could realistically have
> > Hetchins frames made by anyone he chooses to and he'd be within his legal
> > rights, wouldn't he? And what about Reynolds? They only sell the 531
> curly
> > stays to David Miller, don't they? Doesn't this lend some credence to
> David
> > Miller being the legal tender of Hetchins? Omega has been forced to bend
> > stays themselves, if I am correct, and this is quite visible on the
> examples
> > of the Hetchins frames you've built.
> >
> > I know this is long winded, and I appreciate your patience here.
> Seriously,
> > I just seem to have some serious ethical and moral qualms about what you
> did
> > in registering the Hetchins name, and now making frames under that name.
> > Maybe you're "OK" under the letter of the law in the U.K., but I just
> don't
> > know if that makes your actions right. Now, I don't want to get into a
> > pissing contest with you, but I would very much like to hear your answer
> to
> > my questions. As I said, it was big of you to reply and I am only
> > interested in a bit of civilized debate here. Please respond and let's
> see
> > if there are indeed more facts to this story that I'm mistaken about, or
> > unaware of. Thanks for your consideration.
> >
> >
> > David Patrick
> > Chelsea, Michigan USA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org
> > [mailto:classicrendezvous-admin@bikelist.org]On Behalf Of Mark Reilly
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 2:48 PM
> > To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > Subject: [CR]hetchins
> >
> >
> > Hetchins....
> >
> > Well it all started a couple of years ago when me and my business partner
> > were registering domains names, we tried hetchins.com and were astonished
> to
> > find it wasn't registered, we did so immediately. We were always under the
> > impression that the name was owned by a pop mogul or some such, however
> > subsequent checks were made and in fact no one owned the name, company or
> > indeed domains.In the past few years there had not been a single advert
> for
> > Hetchins, no address to write to, no number to phone!, why because there
> was
> > no such company. We thought this was a crying shame given the heritage of
> > the brand, our next step was never taken with money in mind, just through
> a
> > passion for bikes. We purchased all the correct domains and paid all the
> > government duties and registered Hetchins cycles ltd, a bona-fide
> business,
> > not someone working from home, not giving out their address, phone number
> or
> > even having a website.
> >
> > We wanted to re-create the greatness of the brand from years gone by and
> set
> > about making tools for lugs and chain stay jigs etc. We make absolutely
> > everything in our own workshops, all by hand in the traditional fashion as
> > taught to me by the brilliant Ron Cooper, a frame building artisan in my
> > eyes. Only after we started to market and produce frames did we
> receive -one
> > and that has been the only one to date- an email from a mr David Millar,
> > claiming that he owned the company. Again checks were made but it seems as
> > per our first checks, he didn't own anything. If he really did then surely
> > he would have the following things:
> >
> > an official website hetchins.com etc
> > a genuine business address (you cant find a land address for his supposed
> > enterprise anywhere in the uk)
> >
> > Frame building, who makes his version of hetchins frames? does anyone ever
> > ask?, we make all frames ensuring that when you but a hetchins its made by
> > hetchins, us. Mr Millar even lets another company make fake hetchins in
> > Australia! surely that's not correct, we can't stop this due to the legal
> > costs involved.
> >
> > Never at any time was it our intention to cause all of this fuss and
> > controversy, we do believe that we had and have every right to do what we
> > did, both legally and morally.
> >
> > Many Thanks

> >

> >

> >

> > Mark