Davison Design & Development, Inc.

Review: Davison is presented as a company that will facilitate the process of taking an idea to a final prototype which can be presented to potential investor(s). I have paid a lot of money and 3-4 years later I only have a sketch that any child can do on basic CAD software. I have been very patient with this company and have communicated my disappointment many times, hoping that it would improve the progress. But all I get is meeting notices which I am not able to meet and when I am available they are not. The delays and excuses have now been going on for months. After continued frustration of wasting time in writing emails and missed calls, I have requested a refund from the company for the incomplete service/scope. Now I get even less attention. The company presents itself as one that will facilitate the process of taking an idea to a physical prototype, with a hope that it will sell. Unfortunately that is not what their intention is. I cannot believe that this company is still allowed to continue to do business in such a dishonest way.Desired Settlement: About 6 months ago I have proposed a generous settlement(refund). But since the company continues to ignore my generous refund/offer, I would like to request the full amount to be refunded to me. I have experienced negative impact on my personal health because of this dishonest treatment and Davison does not deserve any of the money I have paid them.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]

Review: In May of this year/2013 I sent Davison two payments of $6,000.00- totalling approximately $13,000.00 to develope and design an original product idea I had submitted on thier website back in 2009. Since then I have recieved nothing save a couple of 'phone appointments' with the 'head of new products' and the 'Davison design team'-still nothing on paper about the progress of my product sample-CAD/computer drawing and NO $2000.00 info-mercial I paid for;(Davison kindly added this into the $13,000.00 package-if you're gonna dangle a carrott in front of me at least show me the carrott!).I was also promised Davison would then pitch my idea to certain companies on their list for possible licensing; I'm not holding my breath and don't have any delusions about a 90/10 split if my ingenious idea was to hit the WAlmart shelves by Christmas.The truth is I have a gut feeling Im being strung along here and have already asked for a refund however, unfortunately it's passed the point of no return.Maybe my lawyer could help me out with this...Desired Settlement: I would simply like a full refund of the $13,000.00 and some change. and if I need representation from the same people that helped me with my Va Disabilty Compensation I will contact them forthwith.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above-referenced complaint. Davison has

reviewed the complaint and its file on Mr. [redacted] and cannot find any grounds for the

requested refund.

Mr. [redacted] did pay approximately $13,000 for services and Davison has

diligently performed services and diligently attempted to perform other services.

However, Mr. [redacted] has been less than cooperative.

Contrary to his statement that he has received nothing but a couple of phone

appointments, Davison has designed his product idea and submitted a rendering of his

idea to him for his approval. The company has not received approval or disapproval from

him. Also, the company has very diligently tried to communicate with him about his

project. Davison’s records reflect that its representatives either spoke with Mr. [redacted] or

left a phone message for him on thirty-four (34) occasions during the past eight months.

Mr. [redacted] is correct in stating that he asked for a refund; however, it was not on

the basis of non-performance or dissatisfaction. On July 17, 2013, Mr. [redacted] requested

a refund stating that he needed the money to hire a lawyer for an unrelated matter. His

request was made over six weeks after paying for the services, which is well beyond the

seven business day cancellation period contained in the contract.

As for the video that the company offered to him at no charge, it cannot be

completed until his product is designed and built, which requires his communication and

cooperation. The company remains ready to continue performance. Mr. [redacted] need

only contact his assigned representative to complete the process.

Regards,

General Counsel

Legal Department

Review: My name is [redacted]. Back in 2011 I was in touch with Gary H[redacted]'s. I had sent him my idea, but nothing became of it. Fast forward to 4/15, [redacted] H[redacted] got a hold of me by e-mail. I explained that I lived on only on 750 a month. He said he couldn't tell me what the full amount was. He said that the predevelopment would cost 750, and that I could pay 100.00 a month, which I did. At the end of my payments in Nov. 15 I got an e-mail from [redacted] Bear telling me [redacted] had left the company, and that she would be taking over. She sent me the new agreement. I realized I couldn't afford that. She said I needed to put down 1,000 down. I told her I had no one to back me, and I could of sworn she said that she would have backers. I had to get a loan for the money, and she called me every day till I got the money. She had sent me a prepaid Fed Ex envelope to mail the money. She was suppose to have a phone call with me on 2/11/16, instead I got an e-mail from Jason Z[redacted] He told me [redacted] had left the company also. I found this a little strange, so I called both their extensions, and they are both up and running. I feel I was taken advantage of. They knew I didn't have 10,0000 dollars. I would like a refund of my 1,700.00. I feel I was scammed. They can't use the 1,000, if I'm not able to pay the other 9,000. I have to pay the next whole year, and I could use the money for more important things, as I am on SSD.Desired Settlement: I would like a refund as they knew I had very low income, and never disclosed to me the full amount until I paid the 1,000. Even after I pd. the one thousand [redacted] told me I only had to pay 60%. Then when I talked to Jason Zurbach I told him what [redacted] had said, and he informed me that I would have to pay the other 40% later. I feel they haven't been upfront and honest with me. The two Ashly Bear, and [redacted] H[redacted] have not left the company.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about03/17/2016. At the outset, please note that BEFORE Ms. [redacted] filed her complaint,Davison had provided to her, and she accepted, a full refund for services that were notperformed. Her submission of a complaint following her acceptance of the refund issimply an egregious action. Her contention that she was not informed of the feesassociated with the offered services is blatantly false. It is not possible to be moreupfront with its clients about the services and fees. As will be detailed below, Ms.[redacted] received the services for which she paid in full and was provided, on multipleoccasions, explicit, clear disclosures of the relevant fees for further development of herproject. Further, while the details of her personal situation may elicit empathy, it is notreasonable to impose a paternalistic obligation on Davison to counsel its clients on theirpersonal financial affairs.Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’swebsite. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible fora person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in aprintable and savable format, and the person electronically acknowledging thedisclosures. Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she receivedand read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures aremade BEFORE the Client enters any service contract or makes any payment to Davison.Among the disclosures is the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek morethan one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides alist of the various services and related fees. Enclosed, please find a copy of the disclosuredetailing the services and fees.Following her acknowledgment of the disclosures, Ms. [redacted] entered into anagreement for pre-development services which obligated Davison to compile researchdata related to her product idea. Davison completed the pre-development services andforwarded the compiled research to Ms. [redacted]. She completed a questionnaire inwhich she agreed the services were professional and prepared in accordance with hercontract. A copy of her signed questionnaire is enclosed. The Pre-DevelopmentAgreement states in relevant part (emphasis added);“Section II B Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a productsample, packaging and relevant information about the product in a professional format forpresentation to a Licensee, at Client’s sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer toprovide further development services, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assistin obtaining or creating the sample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client isaware that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain them.”Consistent with the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement and the disclosuresprovided to Ms. [redacted], Davison offered additional services for the development ofher project. She entered into a second contract, the New Product Sample Agreement, forthe design and construction of a product sample. This contract provided a seven dayrevocation period, which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She selected a payment optionand made a partial payment toward the fee. It is beyond belief that she now claims thatshe did not know how much the service fee would be, when she chose the amount to payand initialed next to it. A copy of that page of her contract is enclosed. The contractprovides that no services are due until full payment has been received. There is no basisfor a refund if the contract is cancelled after expiration of the revocation period.Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refund, Davison hasrefunded, in full, all monies she paid toward the New Product Sample Agreement. Thereis no basis to refund any monies on the Pre-Development Agreement as these serviceshave been perfonned to her doc[redacted]nted satisfaction.David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosures

Consumer

Response:

Review: I contacted this company to assist in marketing a registered trademark that I own for t-shirt. They tried to tell me that they could design a t-shirt/dress/jacket conversion that is not possible. They sent me a portfolio that was simply downloaded information off of the United States Patent and Trademark website of other peoples patent information; some of it being years old.Davison also wanted me to submit an additional $14,000 to design a prototype AND sign a contract without choosing the method of payment. They were basically trying to get me to sign a contract so that I would have to pay the $14,000. I am requesting my $795 that I paid for the preliminary administrative fees and portfolio that is bogus and useless.Desired Settlement: $795.00

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 0 1/27/2014. At the outset, Ms. [redacted] alleges she hired Davison to “assist in marketing a registered trademark...” Contrary to her statement, she did not retain Davison to market a trademark. Davison does not market products to the general public, we design and develop product samples for presentation to corporations who in turn may manufacture and market the product. As will be detailed below, Ms. [redacted] was provided a complete disclosure of the types of services offered and their related fees BEFORE any contract was entered. Davison provided its services for the contract that Ms. [redacted] entered. Davison offered additional services, which she declined. On 12/06/20 13, Ms. [redacted] amicably terminated her relationship with Davison. Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. On 09/04/20 13, Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she received and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing the various services and related fees. Following her acknowledgment of the disclosures, on 09/11/2013, Ms. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services which obligated Davison to compile research data related to her product idea. Davison completed the Pre-Development services on 11/08/2013. The Pre-Development Agreement states in relevant part (emphasis added); “Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample and relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to a Licensee, at Client’s sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further development services, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the sample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain them.” Following the completion of the services under the Pre-Development Agreement, on 11/26/2013, Davison provided to Ms. [redacted] a proposed agreement for further development work. This proposal is consistent with our disclosures and the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement. On 12/06/20 13, Ms. [redacted] sent an e-mail thanking Davison for its efforts but declining the additional services. There has been no contact with Ms. [redacted] subsequent to receipt of the e-mail, unit the present complaint. In her complaint, she raises issue with the fact that the research portfolio provided to her included “other peoples patent information”. That is the express nature of the Pre-Development research to identify patent documents and products currently available which are similar to the client’s idea. She does not dispute that the service was provided, and interestingly only now, more than two months after the service was completed, does she raise any concern. Further she alleges Davison offered to design a product “that is not possible”. I do not know on what basis she makes such an allegation. The fact is she did not contract for the design and development of a product sample, as such, no proposed design was ever submitted to her. As stated, Ms. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered by Davison, BEFORE she entered into any contract. The services for which there existed a contract have been performed, no additional contracts have been entered and no additional payments have been received. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered.

Consumer

Response:

I made it very clear to [redacted] (IF that is his real name) that I wanted to market my t-shirts in coastal beach t-shirt shops, cruise lines, casinos, etc. Mr. [redacted] was very receptive to the idea. I also informed him that I was unemployed and had reservations about the $795. He told me to "just sign the contract" and we could get the project going. On the evening of October 3rd, the day before our next phone appointment was scheduled Mr. [redacted] called me and left me a message in a very excited to tone to call him as soon as possible that he had some very good news. When I called him he informed me that the owner of the company was EXTREMELY excited to get started on my project. I made several payments through the month of October and November and only when I would make any payments was the time when Mr. [redacted] acted like he was interested.

When I received the contract to sign for $14,000 for the prototype I became very suspicious because Mr. [redacted] was insistent that I sign it without making a payment option. I decided not to pursue any further payments to the company after investigating online and reading how many people lost money, there was even an article in Forbes magazine.

The rest of the statements made my the company's general counsel are completely false. I will pursue a refund if this matter does not get resolved through the Revdex.com.

Regards,

Review: At the beginning of the Year I had started business with the Davison Company expecting results soon after making the required payments of $795. I only later realized after making said payments; was later informed of another very large sum of money needed to continue service with this company. In the hopes to make a smart investment I continued to pay on the extra $10,000 (paid $907.50) that I did not have. In return the only phone calls I personally received from one [redacted] Leader of New Products Department was only to collect payments. Rarely did we talk about the actual project that was assumed to have been in the process of being made. I am filing this complaint in the manner that I am but a single Mother on low income unable to make such payments and would with no results in the favor of what was payed a total of $1,702.50. I request a refund in the manner that I have made no more payments and shall make non thus far. I have saved the receipts of transactions and files of my business with the company.Desired Settlement: In the full Amount of what I Have paid to the company. $1,702.50

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 12/05/2014. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to maintain an open channel of communication. In her statement, Ms. [redacted] alleges she was not informed of the additional fees associated with the offer of additional services. She is simply incorrect. As will be detailed below, she was provided a complete disclosure of the types of services offered, and their related fees, BEFORE any contract was entered. Davison has performed its services which were contractually due. Ms. [redacted] has not met her obligation of payment, thus any outstanding services are not yet due to be performed.In April 2013, Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she received and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing the various services and related fees. Further, this information is freely available on Davison’s website. To allege she was not provided this information is simply false.Ms. [redacted] entered into two separate contracts for services. The first, the PreDevelopment Agreement obligated Davison to compile research data relevant to her submitted idea. This service was completed and the research was sent to Ms. [redacted] on or about 10/15/2013. Following the completion of the first contract, Ms. [redacted] entered into a second contract, the New ProductSample Agreement, for the design and construction of a product sample. This contract provided a seven day revocation period which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She selected a payment option and has made a series of partial payments toward the fee. The contract provides that no services are due until full payment has been received. Davison is willing to proceed under the terms of the contract; however there is no basis for a refund if the contract is cancelled after expiration of the revocation period.Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refund, Davison has no interest in retaining fees for services that will not be performed. Davison will agree to waive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund 80% of the monies paid toward the New Product Sample Agreement. There is no basis to refund any monies on the PreDevelopment Agreement as these services have been performed. If Ms. [redacted] desires to accept this offer, she need simply contact me directly in our legal department and the paper work will be forwarded to her attention.Sincerely[redacted] Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: When I asked for my money back due to health related money issues, I was told By [redacted], "That's not going to happen!" Previously he and his predecessorAshley and [redacted], said I could have my money back anytime I needed it. Mr [redacted] said I had to put it in writing, if I wanted my money back on the project Now he claims he never said that, that I was putting words in his mouth. He also Did not want to give me the address, he kept saying he had given it to me inpast emails. I have paid in $550.00 and still owe $245.00. I haven't given them any drawingsso they couldn't have done any work on my idea. So, all they've done is make interest off my money. I haven't made a payment in a year for health issuesthat have caused me to move due to lack of resources. Now, after looking them up on the Revdex.com website, should have asked for my money back a long time ago.Desired Settlement: $550 that I have paid in on this project.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]

Review: WE CONTRACTED WITH DAVISON, RIDC PARK, [redacted], TO BRING OUR INVENTION IDEA THROUGH THE PLANNING STAGE,DEVELOPMENT STAGE,AND INTO THE MARKETING STAGE. WE WERE LED DOWN THE GARDEN PATH.FROM THE START WE WERE LED ON. AS OUR ASSOCIATION CONTINUED WE LOST CONTROL AND OUR ORIGINAL IDEA WAS CHANGED. WHEN WE RECEIVED OUR PRODUCT SAMPLE AND COMPLAINED, WE NEVER HAD ANY OF OUR INQUIRIES ANSWERED. THEY WILL NOT EVEN COMMUNICATE WITH ME OR MY WIFE. CONSEQUENTLY, WE FEEL WE WERE LEFT OUT TO DRY. I SEEK SOME FORM OF RECOURSE, NAMELY A FULL REFUND. THANK YOU, PETER AND [redacted]TELEPHONE [redacted] E-MAIL [redacted]@AOL.COMDesired Settlement: FULL REFUND OF ALL OF OUR INVESTMENT WITH DAVISON.IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,115.

Business

Response:

Mr. [redacted] Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania [redacted] October 10, 2013 Re: [redacted] Your ID#: [redacted] Dear Mr. [redacted]; This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 101/02/2013. At the outset, please be advised that Mr. [redacted] is a co-inventor with his wife, [redacted]. In his statement, Mr. [redacted] alleges they were misled, their product was changed, and that Davison has failed to maintain contact. As will be detailed below, the [redacted]s were fully apprised of all services and fees BEFORE entering into any contract. Davison’s services have been performed with their express written approval and authorization and to their documented satisfaction. The complaint provides no basis to warrant a refund. The [redacted]s contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website in 2011. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. It is important to note that the disclosures arc made------------ BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. The disclosures provide detailed information about the services offered and their related fees, as well as a historical summary of the contracts entered, licenses secured and number of clients who have received more money then paid to Davison. On 11/30/2011, Mrs. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she received and read the two disclosure statements. The [redacted]s initially entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services which obligated Davison to compile research data related to the product idea. Davison completed the Pre-Development services and forwarded the compiled research. Subsequently, the [redacted]s entered into a New Product Sample Agreement which obligated Davison to design and construct a product sample addressing the problem identified by the [redacted]s. It is important to note that Davison is not a prototype manufacturer that creates a product sample based upon the client’s preconceived notions. Davison is a design and development firm whose goal is to create a product sample that is a cost-effective solution to the problem identified by the client. Davison performed these services with their approval, authorization and to their satisfaction. The presentation of the new product idea was made to the agreed target corporation who, unfortunately, chose not to license the product idea. Additional services were offered to make a subsequent presentation to a new corporation; however the [redacted]s declined this service. The [redacted]s requested their product sample to be shipped to them, and this was done on 08/22/2013. Enclosed, please find the following supporting documents; 1. A signed approval of the proposed design. (Note the actual design has been obscured for confidentiality purposes.) 2. A signed questionnaire providing positive feedback about the design (Integrated Product Rendering). 3. A signed authorization to make the presentation to the targeted corporation 4. A signed questionnaire providing positive feedback about the presentation material Davison has completed the contracted services with the express written approval and authorization of the [redacted]s and to their documented satisfaction. Having completed the services for which there existed a contract, having not entered into any new contract for services nor received any payments on any subsequent contact and having provided to them the product sample, there is no valid basis to warrant a refund for services rendered. That stated, in the interest of customer satisfaction, we will offer to the [redacted]s two additional presentations at no cost. If they choose to accept this offer, they need only contact our Licensing Department who will proceed with the necessary paperwork. Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I wish to end my contract with Davison and receive a refund of $6702.00

We entered into contract with Davison in June of 2012. we paid the $795 pre development money knowing it was nonrefundable. They set up for us to make some payments as we had money. 8/13 Visa $1000 8/27 MasterCard $1500 8/28 MasterCard $1500 10/19 MasterCard $2702.00 for a total of 6702.00 We tried working with the design team and they designed something but its nothing like the tool I was trying to develop. They forced me to sign the design page and accept the design and to not make notes of the design page on the changes that NEEDED to be made. I emailed my rep and told him I wasn't happy and showed him a video of what I was trying to accomplish. No response. We haven't made a payment since Oct 2012 and haven't been financially able to. They won't do any more work unless we pay a total of $4468 more making the final total $11000. I have read through my contract pages and there is nothing that says this money cannot be returned. We have mailed a certified letter requesting our refund. the US Postal service says they received it April 17, 2014. I mailed it 4/14/2014. I have also emailed our representative and asked if he even works there anymore and if he received our letter. Our representative was [redacted]. His email is [redacted].[redacted]@davison.com His phone number is ###-###-#### his Fax number is ###-###-####. I have copies of all the email communication from [redacted] and myself. I also have my original drawings of what I was looking for and what they tried to make me accept. I do not however have a copy of the notes I made on the forms they made me fill out and send in with the acceptance signature.Desired Settlement: We would like a refund of the $6702.00 that we paid towards the final product of the tool we were trying to invent.

Business

Response:

Review: Below is the email that I sent to Davison after I requested my $795.00 several times for the past 60 days be returned to my family and my Inventors materials of my Idea and my drawings before they could complete the pathetic so called Pre-Development. I honestly believe I was misled and taken advantage of and given 2 advertisement CD's and 1 damaged advertisement CD a week after so called Pre-Development was finished and for the price of $795.00 that Davison took from my credit card. And refused to return the money for their 3 CD's of advertisements that I am not happy with and do not want at all, while my family and I have to suffer gang attacks and now fight for our refund due to us for all the shady, undermined dealings of Davison:"I am a client of Davison and I feel that Davison is a fraudulent company that is selling hard working Americans false hopes and dreams with a 2 CD pack of Advertisements and then send you a 3rd CD later of more Advertisements and is nothing that an Inventor can use to help them patent or get their product to market. During the payment process Davison has changed the amount of money that you can pay for what they call "Pre-Development". They would not take a $15.00 payment after receiving it several times and in the middle of payment arrangements. They would only take a payment of $35.00 or more until the so called Pre-Development work was done for a cost of $795.00-$800.00, and this was the worst and the most remedial job that I have ever seen from a so called professional company. Davison sent me 3 CD's of advertisement, and not what I thought I was getting for $795.00. I informed Davison of my disgust several times and have asked for a refund of my $795.00 several times before Davison could even complete the so called Pre-Development they refused to return my money to my credit card or my material and requested $16,720 to move froward. "What!"This is at a time that my family and I are facing gang violence and death threats and the only thing that Davison..."Desired Settlement: That Davison return my $795.00 and all my material for their 2 CD and 1 damaged CD that came through the mail damaged and scratched and I will return their material postage free with the promise that Davison never attempt to reconnect with me and never discriminately speak to my family I again!

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]

Review: My name is [redacted] and nearly two years ago I started a product with Davison. It was an [redacted] Idea I had and after they initially did a patent search and some research, as well as me paying them $696.00, they came back to me with a proposal to develop the [redacted]. I paid them the $6850.00 and was working with a woman named Lashun Gallati. She stated that she is a director of new products and will work with me till I am passed off to the licensing people to sell the [redacted] to [redacted] from Norwalk CT. During these months we spoke of the progress being made by the engineers I gave her information to give to them so they could know what to do and how I wanted it to work. It took a very long time but was reassured it would be not to long for the engineers to wrap things up. Suddenly four months ago I was transferred to the Senior Vice President of new products Mike K[redacted]. He said he was handling the [redacted] from here on out and will take over till Im ready for Licensing. Things began to get really weird here when all of my questions would go unanswered. I would only receive computer generated responses. I was not allowed to speak with the licenseing team. They would not tell me anyFinally after much arguing back and forth I was transferred to the licensing team. Here name was Ellen G[redacted] This was about three months ago. Again, things began to get really weird as she started stepping over her words. She kept saying she met with [redacted] but hinted at it being in the future. I started to ask hard questions and she would not return my voicemails. after a couple months of cat and mouse I decided to do some research based on the name of the president Frank V[redacted]. THIS WAS LAST NIGHT. I FOUND NUMEROUS STORIES ONLINE EXACTLY LIKE MINE. I COPIED THESE TO EMAIL AND SENT TO ELLEN. THIS MORNING I GOT A CALL STATING THAT [redacted] WAS NOT INTERESTED IN MY IDEA, BUT THE [redacted] WAS MINE AND I COULD DO WHATEVER I WANTED WITH IT, AS LONG AS IT WAS NOT WITH [redacted]. I THEN ASKED HER HOW I GO ABOUT GETTING THE SOFT WARE FOR THE [redacted]. “SHE SAID WHAT SOFTWARE?” IT WOULD COST A LOT MORE THAN $7000.00. SO BASICALLY THEY DEVELOPED A PIECE OF PAPER AND A 30 SECOND DVD ABOUT NOTHING FOR ME FOR ALL THIS MONEY.Can you please help me recoup some of my money and put me in touch with a lawyer or something who may handle things like this out in Pittsburgh. I know that this is not the first time things have happened with this company. YOU SEE I WAS DEPENDING ON THIS TO WORK AS I AM A DISABLE IRAQ WAR VETERAN. I MOST LIKELY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO WORK IN A “NORMAL WORK ENVIRONMENT” I AM ONLY LOOKING TO GET SOME OF MY MONEY BACK.PLEASE HELP ME.Desired Settlement: Refund

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about02/12/2016. Customer concerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of aninitial contact and throughout the process, Davison maintains an open channel ofcommunication, disclosing its services and fees upfront and securing its clients’ [redacted]rovaland authorization throughout the process. The contracts are simply written, with no “fineprint” provisions. A review of Mr. [redacted]’s file indicates that Davison has performedall services with his approval and authorization, and to his documented satisfaction.There is no support for his complaint.Briefly stated, Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison in July 2014. At the time of hisinitial contact, he was provided with two separate disclosures displayed in a printable andsavable format. Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that he receivedand read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures aremade BEFORE the client enters any service contract or makes any payment to Davison.Among the disclosures is the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek morethan one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides alisting the various services and related fees. Enclosed, please find a copy of thedisclosure detailing the services. Mr. [redacted] then entered into two service contacts.The first was for pre-development research which was provided to him. The second wasfor the creation of a rendering that depicted his product idea and presentation material.Mr. [redacted] approved the proposed rendering, authorized the presentation of his idea andcompleted a questionnaire about the rendering and presentation material, providingpositive feedback. His product idea was presented to the targeted corporation on11/20/2015. The corporation chose not to license his idea. Copies of his approvals,authorization, and completed questionnaires are enclosed. Note the actual approveddesign has been redacted for confidentiality purposes.software application. This is inaccurate. He had entered an “Integrated ProductRendering” agreement. The language in the contract, from its title to the specific terms,is clear that a graphic representation of his product idea, i.e. a rendering, depiction,design, was to be developed. No term refers to application development. In addition, thedisclosure statement that details the various services offered by Davison does not indicatethe offer of application development. Simply stated, Davison did not offer applicationdevelopment, and the contract that Mr. [redacted] entered does not include applicationdevelopment services. Davison can only fully disclose its services and fees. To theextent Mr. [redacted] was under the belief that he contracted for application developmentservices, such a misunderstanding is not due to a lack of disclosure by Davison. In theinterest of full disclosure, it should be noted that Davison does currently offer applicationdevelopment services and this service is listed on the current version of the disclosurestatement. However, that service was not a service offered at the time of Mr. [redacted]’sengagement, and was not included in his contract for service. Following the completionof all services, Mr. [redacted] did raise his concerns with Davison. The Office of thePresident reached out to him to arrange a call to address his concerns. Mr. [redacted] hasrefused to engage in any discussions.As stated, all services have been performed with Mr. [redacted]’s express writtenapproval and authorization, and to his documented satisfaction. While it is unfortunatethat the targeted corporation chose not to pursue his product idea, that fact does notnegate the provided services. The simple fact is that the product development processprovides no guarantees of financial gain. The contracts and disclosures are explicit inthis regard. While this is of little comfort to a client who has expended considerabletime, money, effort and emotion into a project, the fact that a particular project does notbring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that were provided.There is no basis to warrant a refund. However, in the interest of customer satisfaction,Davison will offer two additional presentations at no cost to Mr. [redacted]. If he choosesto accept this offer, he need only contact the Licensing Department who will coordinatethe necessary paperwork to authorize the presentations.David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc

Good Morning:
Wanted people to beware. This company is out there taking people money and not making good on what they claim they are able to do with your invention(s). You're lucky if you get a phone call once every two week or even monthly. Once they get
the money from you they lie and tell you your invention is in productions for months. I'm still waiting to see what will develop from my invention. In addition, I invested in them only because I saw them on the "Balance Act" show and I thought it was a legitimate company really out there helping consumers. It was an investment I could not afford but invested in what I thought would have been profitable. The investment along was over $11,000+. Please beware consumers......

Review: I sumited my own "[redacted]" design. what I got back was a completly different design. I did pay in full which was a total of $11,225.00, but I did not get what I ordered and paid for. They want me to approve a different design, one which I did not make, and they will not proceed until I sign and approve the new design, which they made. My patent design number is [redacted]. My patent attorney is [redacted]. his phone number is ###-###-####.Desired Settlement: I expect to get my payment back in full. which was $11,225.00, sense they refuse to make my patent design. I will not settle for any less or for any other patent design besides mine.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted]against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 12/11/2014. Ms. [redacted]had previously filed a complaint on 11/01/2010, ID# [redacted], to which Davison provided aresponse on 11/12/2010. As previously stated, Ms. [redacted] has been a valued client since firstcontacting Davison in 2006.On 04/24/2007, she entered into an agreement for the production of a product sample,embodying her concept. This Agreement contains the following provisions;“1. iv) Preliminary Product Design Team “brainstorming” sessions will be held touncover product design solutions that blend with the targeted corporation’s manufacturingcapabilities. The ergonomics and aesthetics of the product are also taken intoconsideration. This process often results in the Design Team making modifications andenhancements, which are sometimes substantial, to the proposed solution or thepreliminary design submitted by Inventor, particularly if Inventor’s proposed design isnot a cost effective solution to solving the problem outlined by the client, does not reflectcurrent manufacturing techniques or may be in conflict with products patented or on themarket....4. 0. Inventor acknowledges that there have been no representations by Davison that theInvention as conceived and submitted by Inventor is feasible or that the design to becreated by Davison will function in the manner and with the attributes as originallyconceived by Inventor.”At the time of her original complaint, Ms. [redacted] had not made full payment of thecontract fee; accordingly no services were due to be performed. Despite not receiving the fullretainer, Davison proceeded to develop her product sample. As her statement indicates, Davisoncreated two separate designs. In response to her original complaint Davison had indicated that:“Davison has not simply complied with its obligations under the Agreement, but has exceeded itsobligation by proceeding with the development of her concept despite not having received the fullretainer. If Ms. [redacted] desires to continue to work with Davison, we would be happy tocontinue our relationship. If, on the other hand, she wishes to terminate our relationship, Davisonwill agree to not pursue recovery of the balance of the unpaid retainer. Ms. [redacted] can notify usin writing of her decision on the matter.” Ms. [redacted] did not provide any written reply, howevershe did finalize payment of the contract fee on 04/16/2014.There has been no change to her product sample design following her complaint in 2010.Her payment, in 2014, of the unpaid balance represents the intent on her part to proceed with herproject. In her current complaint she references a U.S. Patent which has expired. It is importantto note that Davison is not a prototype manufacturer that creates a product sample based upon theclient’s preconceived notions. Davison is a design and development firm whose goal is to createa product sample that is a cost-effective solution to the problem identified by the client. Thecontract provisions referenced above are clear in this regard.Davison remains willing and able to continue the development of her product sample.The proposed design fulfills Davison’s obligation to design a product sample that solves theproblem identified by Ms. [redacted]. If she believes the proposed design does not meet thisobligation, we ask that she provide specific details explaining how the proposed design does notsolve the identified problem. Davison will make all reasonable efforts to develop the productsample accordingly. It is our hope that Ms. [redacted] will approve the proposed design, continuewith her project and allow us to fulfill the remaining terms of the contract.Sincerely,[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: Was contacted early July 2011 about my invention of the [redacted] ([redacted]) I had filled out a form over the internet about a company that would take an idea and build it into an end product ready for stores. They would find a distributor and a manufacturer and even get a [redacted]ent for it. As this side of the business was not in my expertise I was willing to pay someone else to do it for me that knew what they were doing.I received a letter on July 2011welcoming me to Davison.As my product was passed the development stage there was not a lot of work to be done on it. I even had the packaging.I was still charged the full amount for development as there were no discounts. They said they may need to refine the product depending on who they will present the product to.The first payment to them for the first stage was $5850.00 they charged an extra $125 for a [redacted]ent search.August 17 2011 Davison stated that they had a company called [redacted] to target. To be able to [redacted]ent the idea I had to do all the paper work and dimensional drawings of the [redacted]In the contract it says the client agrees to pay $745.00 which is due prior to the performance of any services by Davison.This is another statement: Davison views pre-development to be integral to our exclusive process. It is our opinion that pre-development is necessary before proceeding to the step of product sample design and development and attempting to obtain a license agreement with a corporation. It is Davisons policy to require that pre-development be performed prior to moving forward toward licensing. Should you not wish to purchase pre-development, you may still be able to secure a license, either on your own or with the assistance of another party, but Davison will refuse to work with you to develop your product idea. So if they take a long time and do nothing as in my case it has been 3 years than you have lost everything.You are made to sign a confidentiality agreement so you dont talk to anyone else about your invention. I did this and then found out late last year that another company in New Zealand had come out with the same product and has a [redacted]ent on it. I find this not just bad luck. They said they had done a [redacted]ent search and nothing came up. My son did one last year and this is how I found out about the company in New Zealand. I paid good money for their search.They had sent me a letter in 2012 saying they were targeting a company called primoand they had presented 32 products to them and had 1 license agreement. After me agreeing to them to target this company they wanted more money and then reported back to me feb 3 2012 that they had made a mistake and that they had 0 license agreements within the past 5 years. If I had known this I would have pulled out than.The only change that Davison had done to the original packaging was to change the picture and wording on the cardboard heading.The problem with this company is if you dont keep paying for the next stage they say they cant help you. I had no stages to go through as my product was complete. All I needed was the distributer and manufacturer. This project cost me close to $9.000 I have used up all my funds and havent even received my product back even though I had requested it.I have received no feedback from Davison in 3 years. They do not return my messages. There are a lot of complaints on the internet about them and I have joined a class action to find a lawyer who is willing to take on hundreds of people in the same boat as me. There is a face book set up to collect names. Davison has been taken to court so I have been told and has had to pay back millions to scammed people. He was still allowed to continue to operate.I have quit my job to try and promote my product as I think it is important enough that it needs to get out on the market.Companies like Davison need to be exposed for what they are. They take people that have great ideas and leverage off it. They want the money for someone elses ideas. Once you are locked into their contract, you loss no matter which way you go. If you dont pay and go to the next level they wont continue and you loss what you had already paid, or you pay them and it starts all over again. They wanted more money from me to do an infomercial. I told them I had no more money and this is where they said Im sorry we cant help you anymore.There are many stories of people losing more money than me and would like something to be done about it. Unless you have the money to take these people to court, you lose. This is what they rely on and why they do what they do. Whatever they get fined is a lot less than what they make.Many comments I have read is that they have done their own investigations and contacted the companies that Davison had said they had presented their product to and was told they know nothing about it and would not deal with Davison. Some found that only a letter was sent to the company and no presentation done as stated in a letter to them. Because of the privacy act it is hard to get companies to confirm or deny contact with Davison.Sorry I thought it was 5 years until I looked at the dates. (it just feels like it)I also have a letter from a former employee of davison that I can forward you if you are interested.The only proof of receipts I can find come to $6,720. I am sure there where other payments but I dont at this moment have them.The names of people I dealt with are [redacted] (director of new products) [redacted] (licensing coordinator)I have contacted via email the company Nap pak and they said they have had no contact from davison and have not been shown my product. Davison had told me it was with them and waiting for a decision. When they told me it would cost me more money to target another company, I said I had no more money and that was the last I heard from them. Yes they had told me they had presented my product toDesired Settlement: I would like full refund as they did not hold up their part of the deal and I have proof that the company they said they had approached and I paid for have never dealt with them and did not hear or receive anything from them. They did not return my product as requested. Another company now has my idea and selling it.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against

Review: I paid Davison $100 as a down payment retaining their services in the development of a product design with the provision that I had 3 business days to cancel for any reason and a refund would be made within 10 business days. After further research I did decide to cancel, in writing, within that 3 day period. This was in January 2014 and to date I have still not received a refund, my phone calls are not accepted, and my emails go unanswered.Desired Settlement: The $100 that I paid them refunded as per the cancellation agreement.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]

Review: I contacted Davison about an invention that I came up with. They convinced me that the only way to see if it is something that exists in the marketplace or as a patented product or a trademarked product was to conduct a 20 to 30 year product and patent search for a fee of $795.00 and it will take up to 6 weeks to complete.

After 5 weeks had passed, a man named [redacted] he called himself a Managing Senior Director, called me back and said that their search came back negative and that there is no product or patent in the world like my design. So based on their results, I moved forward and paid them more than $9,000.00 for them to make my product.

Today, May 27th, 2015, I learned that there are multiple (at least 6) products available on the market today and that they have been on the market for years. They completely lied to me and tricked me into paying for them to make a product that already exists.

I feel completely robbed from. That was my life savings too. I'm not wealthy, I live paycheck to paycheck.Desired Settlement: I want a full refund because they completely lied to me to get me to buy their services.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 05/27/2015. Customerconcerns upset everyone and Davison’s staff works very hard to troubleshoot them socommunication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact and throughoutthe process, Davison maintains an open channel of communication, disclosing its services andfees upfront and securing the clients’ approval and authorization throughout the process. Thecontracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. Unfortunately, despite its bestefforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularly when their product ideas are not licensed.As will be detailed below, Davison has performed its services with Mr. [redacted]’s approval andauthorization, and to his documented satisfaction. There are no grounds for a refund.In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] alleges he was not informed of existing products that weresimilar to his submitted idea. This is false. Davison is not aware, and simply can not be aware,of every idea for a new product that any person, anywhere, may conceive. It is not uncommonfor multiple people to conceive of the same or similar products independently. It is important tothe product development process, and in fact Davison believes it is necessary, that a client beaware of patents and similar products that constitute the “prior art” before deciding to furtherpursue the development of their product idea. That is the purpose behind the Pre-Developmentservices. Because of this fact, Davison requires all of our clients to undergo the initial predevelopment research so that some level of knowledge may be secured as to what is in the priorart.Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison on 10 08 2013 with an idea for a product. He initiallycontracted for the Pre-Development services, which obligated Davison to compile researchinformation relevant to his product idea. These services were completed and the researchmaterial, comprising eleven (11) U.S. Patent documents and information on fourteen (14) similarproducts then on the market, was sent to Mr. [redacted]. He has acknowledged his receipt of theseitems.After having been provided with the research material, Mr. [redacted] entered into anAgreement for the design and construction of a product sample, packaging and presentationmaterial. This Agreement contains the following disclaimer; “4.M. Davison cannot be aware of;and is not responsible for, the existence of every similar product or idea that may already be inthe global market, in development by others, or introduced by others at a later time.” Davisoncompleted the services with Mr. [redacted]’s express written approval, authorization and to hisdocumented satisfaction. Specifically he approved the design, completed a questionnaire aboutthe design providing positive feedback, authorized the presentation of his product idea andcompleted a second questionnaire about the presentation material again providing positivefeedback. Copies of theses documents are enclosed. (Note the actual approved design has beenredacted for confidentiality purposes.) Mr. [redacted] authorized a total of three presentations of hisproduct idea. Unfortunately, no corporation has chosen to license his product.As stated, Mr. [redacted] was provided with information regarding U.S. patents and productson the market, which were similar to his submitted idea BEFORE entering into any developmentcontract. The design, construction, and presentation of Mr. [redacted]’s product idea have beenperformed with his express written approval and authorization, and to his documentedsatisfaction. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered. The simple fact is; theproduct development process provides no guarantees of financial gain. Davison’s contracts anddisclosures are explicit in this regard. While this is of little comfort to a client who has expendedconsiderable time, money, effort and emotion into a project, the fact that a particular project doesnot bring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that were provided. However,in the interest of customer satisfaction, we will offer two additional presentations at no cost to Mr.[redacted]. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contact our Licensing Department whowill coordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize the presentations. Sincerely[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I visited and called the Patent Office to hopefully Renew my so called Provisional License thinking you pay most things when they come due. While in the process of all that I found out after providing them with my Filing License Number [redacted] and asking them to renew my provisional License. You should not have to find out from the Patent office that Davison was up to there old tricks again. They informed me that Davison was sued by Federal Trade Commission. They told me exactly everything that Davison did and how they presented it to me and exactly what I received and they even concluded, " I hope you did not pay a lot of money for that." I found an article: by [redacted] We just received this interesting piece of invention related news to share. This is good news for the everyday inventor!: Pittsburgh Invention Firm Settles With Feds For $10.7 Million Davison & Associates Was Sued By FTC -- 3:08 pm EDT July 14, 2008 PITTSBURGH (AP Wire) - A Pittsburgh-based invention-promotion firm agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission and will pay nearly $11M. I emailed Davison and they refuse to email me back about my questions I had for them because I was very disturbed to find out that they had no intention to do anything about what they had promised. I have forwarded all my emails concerning this matter to the Colorado federal bureau of investigation here in Colorado to show proof of the matter. I even filed a complaint with the federal trade commission because they told me to take a number and wait in line. I found out that Davison is a capital "B" for billion dollar company that somehow manages to stay in business despite there bad practices. So in a nut shell I have a patent floating around for the taking because the Patent office informed me that Davison should have made it a Non Provisional License from the start rather than a provisional license because one actually gets the ball rolling to sell your invention, and the other just sits there and does nothing.Desired Settlement: I wish to have my money eventually returned back in full with interest. I wish Davison was more truthful and forth coming about there past instead of finding out from the Patent Office. I wish for the FTC, FBI, Revdex.com, and anyone else I find to report to about this matter to deal with this company and to get rid of bad business if they need too. To have Davison pay for my provisional license like they should have from the start and if my patent is lost, for them to be liable.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against

Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 02/24/2014. From the time of an initial

contact, through the research and development of a new product idea, to the presentation of a client’s

product idea, we try to maintain an open channel of communication, disclosing our services and fees

upfront and securing our clients’ approval and authorization throughout the process. In fact, our clients are

provided with full disclosures at the time of an initial submission of an idea. This is BEFORE any service

contract is entered and BEFORE any monies are paid. It is not possible to be more upfront and forthright

with our disclosures. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied,

particularly when their product ideas are not licensed. That appears to be the situation with Mr. [redacted].

Initially, Mr. [redacted] raises a concern regarding his “Provisional License”. To my knowledge, there

is not such thing as a provisional license, and I assume he is referring to a Provisional Application for

Patent. His complaint implies that Davison was hired to assist in securing patent protection for the

submitted idea. This is incorrect. Davison is not a law firm and we do not advertise that we provide patent

services or any other legal services. The contracts for services that we do offer do not include patent filing

services or any other legal services. The contract with Mr. [redacted] contains the following explicit

disclosures;

3) Provisional Patent Application Materials

Davison will provide to you materials that you may find helpful in filing a Provisional Patent Application.

The Inventor is solely responsible for the sufficiency of the application and for acknowledging and

filing the final application. Please note the following information, which is derived from the United States

Patent and Trademark Office:

a. A Provisional Patent Application establishes an official United States Patent Application filing date for the

project.

b. A Provisional Patent Application permits one year’s authorization to use “patent pending” notice in

connection with the project.

c. A Provisional Patent Application enables immediate commercial promotion of the project.

d. A Provisional Patent Application automatically is abandoned after 12 months if the inventor takes

no further action,

e. A Provisional Patent Application can NEVER mature into a United States patent In order for a

patent to issue the Provisional Patent Application MUST be replaced by a conventional patent

application within one year. (This contract does not include any services for filing a non-provisional

patent application.)

f. A Provisional Patent Application provides a simplified filing with one full year to assess the project’s

commercial potential before committing to the higher cost of filing and prosecuting an additional nonprovisional

application for a patent.

To the extent Mr. [redacted] believes our services include patenting of product ideas, he is mistaken, through no

fault of Davison.

Secondly, Mr. [redacted] raises the FTC case as a basis for his complaint. This is without merit. As

you are aware, that case was initiated in 1997 (nearly seventeen years ago) and resolved via settlement in

2008. In November 2011, when Mr. [redacted] first contacted Davison, the company was, and has continued to

be, in complete compliance with all requirements of the Court and the FTC. Thus, reference to the case as

a basis for a complaint is unfounded.

Finally, a review of Mr. [redacted]’s project file indicates that all services were performed following a

full disclosure of the services, the services were performed with his express written approval and

authorization, and the services were performed to his documented satisfaction. Mr. [redacted] contracted for

the design of an Integrated Product Rendering and presentation materials for his new product idea. He did

not contract for the design and construction of a physical product sample, though such a contract was

offered. The contract was entered after he acknowledged two separate disclosures which detailed, among

other items, the full range of services and fees offered by Davison. Davison created a design for the

product rendering which Mr. [redacted] approved. Enclosed, please find a copy of his signed approval (note

the actual design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes). The presentation materials, in the form of

an Executive Briefing, were prepared and Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation of his product idea.

Enclosed please find a copy of his signed authorization. Mr. [redacted] also completed two questionnaires, one

covering the Integrated Product Rendering, and one covering the Executive Briefing in which he provided

positive feedback. Copies of the signed questionnaires are enclosed. The presentation was made;

unfortunately the company chose not to license his product idea. An offer to present to a new corporation

was made, however Mr. [redacted] declined this additional service.

Davison has completed the contracted services with the express written approval and authorization

of Mr. [redacted] and to his documented satisfaction. There is no valid basis to warrant a refund for services

rendered. That stated, in the interest of customer satisfaction, we will offer two additional presentations at

no cost. If Mr. [redacted] chooses to accept this offer, he need only contact our Licensing Department who will

proceed with the necessary paperwork.

Consumer

Response:

I should not have to find out through the FTC about something that Davison should have disclosed to me long ago. I am a firm believer that honesty is the best policy. I was pleased at first as it shows on there questionnaire paperwork because it seemed what they were doing in the beginning was acceptable . But I also have the right at any given time to be displeased and have the right to ask for my money back if the service I was paying for was not being provided towards the end. I asked them for documentation phone records of how many times a day they were calling the potential target and the name of the person that they were trying to sell my product too. I asked what day, time, and who was all involved when they supposedly did my presentation to sell my idea to the company of interest and all the documentation for that. What was said, what happened? "After all, I paid for it." Instead I get a once of month call from Davison saying, we heard nothing yet, we will get back to you next month for any updates. Interesting that I did not get any questionnaire to voice my concerns, only a questionnaire in the beginning. Interesting that when I called the FTC that they new exactly what I was asking for since I did not use the words provisional application, but instead provisional license. I believe the Revdex.com should call up the FTC and talk to them directly about Davison: Based on the FTC law suite which was July 2008 it looks like they are still doing some of the same practices that they were doing back then. It does not hurt to talk to Davison and ask them and see what they say about their legal problems.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the supplemental comments submitted by Mr. [redacted]

regarding the above referenced complaint. His comments allege that Davison has not

been forthright with him. This is simply false. As previously stated, it is not possible to

be more upfront and forthright with our disclosures. The hill disclosures about our

services, fees and the high risk nature of new product development are freely available on

our website. Every client is directly provided a copy of the disclosure and every client

acknowledges that they received them and that they read the disclosures. Our contracts

are simply written and contain no “fine print”. Our services are provided with the

express written approval and authorization of the client. Unfortunately, despite our best

efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularly when their product ideas are not

licensed.

Mr. [redacted] claims that he has the right to demand his money back at any time that

he becomes dissatisfied. While he is certainly within his rights to voice his opinion, and

Davison will work with our clients to address any reasonable complaint, there is simply

no basis to warrant a refund when the services have been provided with a client’s

approval, with their authorization and to their documented satisfaction. Mr. [redacted]

provided all of this positive feedback throughout the development process; it was only

after he did not receive a positive response from the targeted corporation that his

“dissatisfaction” arose. His complaints have no support in the documented evidence.

There is simply no way for Davison to guarantee that a particular product idea will be

licensed or will result in a financial gain. Our disclosures and contracts, which Mr. [redacted]

acknowledged and entered, are explicit in this regard.

Finally, Mr. [redacted] now raises an issue with the presentation of his product

sample. As previously stated, the presentation materials, in the form of an Executive

Briefing, were prepared and Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation of his product idea.

He provided positive feedback on the questionnaire about the Executive Briefing. The

presentation was made on 03/06/2013. Our licensing personnel continually made follow

up calls to the targeted corporation while the product idea was being reviewed and kept

Mr. [redacted] apprised. From the time of the presentation through 01/27/2014, a total often

follow up calls were made. Also, on two occasions, (05/07/2013 and 10/17/2013), Mr.

[redacted] was offered the service of presenting to a second corporation. He declined this

service and advised our licensing personnel that he wanted to continue to wait on a

response from the first targeted corporation. While a prolonged review process can be

frustrating, Davison simply can not force a decision from a corporation that is reviewing

a new product idea. To allege any fault on Davison for not apprising him of the status is

simply unwarranted.

Davison has completed the contracted services with the express written approval

and authorization of Mr. [redacted] and to his documented satisfaction. There is no valid

basis to warrant a refund for services rendered. We will continue our previously stated

offer of two additional presentations at no cost. If Mr. [redacted] chooses to accept this offer,

he need only contact our Licensing Department who will proceed with the necessary

paperwork.

Consumer

Response:

It is obvious Davison has experience in dealing with issues like these that I am now dealing with and I am however trying to do the right thing by contacting the proper people and proper channels to handle this matter in hopes that Davison can do the right thing. That is simply to give my money back. I thought I was pleased and I am still not entirely convinced that Davison did not make every effort or intention to what they have promised. It is safe to say they left the impression to me they were doing well on paperwork of there progress so as long as they were getting paid to do the job they were supposedly promising to do. But that changed because the paper trail can show being satisfied to a point, but then the monthly waiting game while the time was ticking for a response from the company they were dealing with Lennox never makes s decision as in they are interested, not interested, but Davison just tells me there is no response and they are still waiting an answer or for them to get back with them. I am sorry but did not Davison have a meeting presenting my product? So to settle this matter I propose the following documentation be provided and submitted because I have obviously paid for a service for them to do so. The only reason why this matter has even been brought up in the first place was because when trying to renew my application for my patent idea, you should not have to hear from the Patent office the words of in a nut shell being taken advantage of and your hard earned money taken from you for something that was supposedly promised that would probably never happen. Davison was so kind to send me to the history channel info to view invention land: http://www.inventionland.com/ you could watch there video of peoples ideas, how they presented it and the person was there to witness his idea come to life. I can back that up by this as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amKJKOYztcEThis is how the company sold me under the budget I had and showing the videos of average people making there dreams come true. I was told that before Davison ever takes your money because they are in the business of making money after all. The 1st step, you go to there website, submit an idea. They then call you and tell you some stories of some stupid ideas people come up with but tell you that your idea can and will make money and that is why they are calling you because they believe in your idea. The whole idea is that you keep 90 percent of your profit while they keep 10 percent of your profit if they should sell it. But they say they are in the business of making money or they would not be in business and if they believed your idea would not sell they would not take your money.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the second set of supplemental comments submitted by Mr. [redacted] regarding the above referenced complaint. His comments are simply arehashing of the concerns addressed in our prior two responses. Without re-iterating thedetails previously provided, I will address his three areas of concern.Product Design and Presentation Materials; Mr. [redacted] approved the design of hisproduct sample. In reliance of his approval, the physical product sample and presentationmaterials were created. After being provided with the presentation materials, whichincluded a photograph of the physical product sample, Mr. [redacted] authorized thepresentation. Mr. [redacted] completed questionnaires about the process in which heprovided positive feedback. All supporting documents have previously been provided toyour office. Any allegation that Davison did not fulfill its contractual obligation to Mr.[redacted]’s satisfaction is not supported by the evidence. Patent Protection; Mr. [redacted] raises a concern over the Provisional Applicationfor Patent that he has filed. As previously stated, Davison is not a law firm and we do notadvertise that we provide patent services or any other legal services. The contracts forservices that we do offer do not include patent filing services or any other legal services.The contracts are explicitly clear that the Client is solely responsible for securing any andall intellectual property protections.Presentation of product idea; In our prior responses, we provided the detailsregarding the presentations of Mr. [redacted]’s product idea. While a prolonged reviewprocess can be frustrating, Davison simply can not force a decision from a corporationthat is reviewing a new product idea. Mr. [redacted] has demanded that Davison provide adetailed explanation of why the company chose not to pursue his product idea and hedemands that Davison provide the specific identity of the contact at the target company.With regard to the former demand, Davison can not provide information which is notprovided to us. Simply put, many companies simply do not provide an explanation oftheir decision. Accordingly, Davison can not relay to the client more detail that we are provided. As to the latter demand, Davison does not disclose the specific contact at aparticular company. Corporations, in general, are hesitant to confidentially receive newproduct ideas from the general public. The corporations that register with Davison agree to review projects in confidence and in exchange want to limit their communication to only Davison. The alternative is that the corporation gets swamped with update requestsand projects are rejected summarily or refused entirely. There is no ulterior motive to our maintaining this information confidentially, only the attempt to ensure that one client’s over enthusiasm does not cause a corporate target to refuse to accept other ideas Davison may submit. Davison has completed the contracted services with the express written approval and authorization of Mr. [redacted] and to his documented satisfaction. There is no validbasis to warrant a refund for services rendered. We will continue our previously statedoffer of two additional presentations at no cost. If Mr. [redacted] chooses to accept this offer,he need only contact our Licensing Department who will proceed with the necessary paperwork.

Review: I have an idea for a new product. They told me that if I gave them $715 that they would develop my product. Now they are asking for $165/hr or $13080 or $11080 and a 5% royalty or $9080 and a 10% royalty. They did not say in the beginning it would cost that much more to get the product to market they only said it would take the initial $715 which was a hardship for me to begin with. They want refund my money. I feel they were misrepresenting themselves therefore I deserve my $715 back . I live on disability and don't have that kind of money to throw away.Thank you,[redacted]Desired Settlement: I would like the $715 back that I paid in the beginning. because they misrepresented themselves.Thank you,[redacted]

Business

Response:

Re: [redacted]

Your ID#: [redacted]

Dear Mr. [redacted];

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted]

against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 11/03/2013. In her

statement, Ms. [redacted] alleges she was advised that the payment of $715.00 would be the only

cost for her entire project. She is mistaken. As will be detailed below, she was fully apprised of

the types of services offered and their related fees BEFORE any contract was entered.

Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website.

The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit

an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format,

and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. On 08/25/20 13, Ms. [redacted]

acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she received and read the two disclosure

statements. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any

payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice

to seek more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then

provides a listing the various services and related fees. Enclosed, please find a copy of the

disclosure as it was presented to Ms. [redacted].

Following her acknowledgment of the disclosures, on 09/04/20 13, Ms. [redacted] entered

into an agreement for Pre-Development services which obligated Davison to compile research

data related to her product idea. Davison completed the Pre-Development services and forwarded

the compiled research to Ms. [redacted] on or about 10/01/2013. The Pre-Development Agreement

states in relevant part (emphasis added);

“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample and

relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to a Licensee, at Client’s sole

expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further development services, under a separate

contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the sample and presentation material for the

targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain them.”

Following the completion of the services under the Pre-Development Agreement, on

10/21/2013, Davison provided to Ms. [redacted] a proposed agreement for further development

work. This proposal is consistent with our disclosures and the terms of the Pre-Development

Agreement. To date, Ms. [redacted] has not engaged these additional services, which is her

prerogative.

As stated, Ms. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered by

Davison, BEFORE she entered into any contract. The services for which there existed a contract

have been performed. No additional contracts have been entered and no additional payments

have been received. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered.

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I contacted Davison regarding a product I had invented and wanted to find a possible source for helping in the promoting and locating of potential companies to produce or purchase the rights to my product. I was connected to Chadd M[redacted], Vice-President of New Products. After many telephone conversations, I agreed to the initial evaluation by his team to see if my product had any potential and sent the required fee. He asked me to send him the two (2) prototypes I had developed and all diagrams, descriptions, and proof of my patent pending. I requested he set up a tour at their company, which I did take, and after we completed the visit Chadd said a proposed agreement would be emailed with the final steps for development. After perusing the proposal, I decided their company was not what I needed a this stage of my enterprise and the required fee was out of my price range. I contacted Chadd regarding my decision and asked him to send back my property. He stated I would be responsible for the shipping charges, which I agreed to send when the amount had been determined. This discussion occurred over three (3) months ago. I have repeatedly called Chadd, asking when my property would be returned, but he keeps evading the issue by claiming the shipping department is not fulfilling their responsibility. I sent George D[redacted], CEO of Davison, a registered letter requesting his assistance in resolving this problem. He has not responded to my letter, nor has anyone from his company.Desired Settlement: The return of my property. The two (2) prototypes, all written designs and plans, and all personal papers.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about01/28/2016. Davison understands that customer service is vital in all businesses and isimperative when operating a successful business. Customer concerns upset everyone andthe staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to aminimum. From the time of an initial contact, through the research and development of anew product idea, to the presentation of a client’s idea, they try to maintain an openchannel of communication, disclosing our services and fees upfront and securing theclients’ approval and authorization throughout the process. Mr. [redacted] submitted anidea for a new product, and entered the initial Pre-Development (PD) agreement. Thoseservices were performed and additional services were offered. He has declined thoseadditional services.In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] mischaracterizes the services provided by Davison.He asserts the initial service was for an “evaluation” of his idea. This is incorrect. Mr.[redacted] was apprised on multiple occasions, including BEFORE any contract wasentered, that Davison does not evaluate ideas submitted to it. Specifically, when hesubmitted his idea, he was provided with, and acknowledged that he received and read,two disclosures. The disclosure statements set forth, among other details, the followingstatement; “Davison does not offer evaluations of idea submissions for commercialpotential”. The disclosure also details the various services and their related fees,including the repackaging service. A copy of the disclosure addressing the evaluation ofideas is enclosed. Following his acknowledgement of the disclosures, he entered into thePD agreement for research services. This contract contains the following disclaimer;“Client acknowledges that Davison has not made any representations concerning thepotential of Client’s Product to be marketed, licensed, patented or to make a profit forClient. Davison has not evaluated the Product...” To the extent Mr. [redacted] believes hisidea was “evaluated” he is mistaken, through no fault of Davison.Secondly, Mr. [redacted] raises a concern over the return of his prototype material.Again, he was informed on multiple occasions that Davison has no obligation to retain orreturn any material provided to it by its Clients. Mr. [redacted] submitted his idea byentering a Confidentiality Agreement. The Agreement expressly states; “I [Mr. [redacted]]will not send Davison materials or prototypes that I want returned because Davison willnot return any materials submitted to it by me concerning my idea.” Further, the PDagreement which he entered contains the following provision; “E. Client Materials.Davison is not responsible for the loss, maintenance or return of prototypes, drawings orany other materials submitted by Client to Davison.” It is not reasonable to requireDavison to serve as a permanent repository of any item any person decides to send. Thatis the express reason the above language is part of the Confidentiality Agreement and partof the service contracts.Despite having no contractual obligation, Davison will attempt to locate hisprototype and, if it is located, will make arrangements for its return.Sincerly,David *. D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Deve opment, Inc.Enclosure

Review: I had hired Davison Corp. in fall of 08 to design to develop my idea for a [redacted] toy. I was informed that they would research design develop and market my product to prospective companies for purchase or licensing. Over the course of this happening I have given Davison over $15,000.00. I have reached out to Davison many times over the years for proof that they have actually designed and developed my product as they claim. They have only sent me one computer generated picture. They state that there is a completed rendering of my idea but they have to retain it for demonstration purposes to prospected clients. I was informed by letter with the company they plan to demo my product to. Every time they went to a different company it would cost me $395.00 for them to redesign the package in which they would just change out the logo to the company of the sales pitch. I have asked Davison for copy of any minutes from these presentations and was only told they are not interested at this time. Never have I been given any proof that Davison has done any of the task I had hired them to do. The last time had had spoken to matt A[redacted] from Davison. I had asked him again to send me a my product or any physical proof he just tells me that I have to send him more money for them to ship it. He also tells me that if they send it to *e they will not have one for any presentations. I feel he does this intentionally know that I have told him I told I would not give Davison another dime. I feel that Davison has intentionally misled and defrauded myself and my family out of a lot money.Desired Settlement: I want all *oney that I have been defrauded of returned to *y fa*ily.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint, filed by Mr. [redacted], against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about09/16/2015. It bears noting that Mr. [redacted] filed a complaint in April 2015 (ID#[redacted]) to which Davison provided a full response on 04/16/2015. As stated in theprior response, Mr. [redacted] has been a valued client since 2009. Davison has providedits services with his express written approval and authorization, and to his documentedsatisfaction. Copies of the supporting documentation were provided. Without reiteratingthe prior response, his current concerns will be addressed.Mr. [redacted] alleges that he did not receive “proof’ that his product sample wasconstructed. This is inaccurate. He was provided the initial design which he approvedand about which he completed a questionnaire giving positive feedback. He wasprovided an actual photograph of the constructed product sample and a copy of thepresentation material. He authorized the presentations and he completed a secondquestionnaire about the product sample and presentation material, again giving positivefeedback. Copies of his signed approval, authorizations and completed questionnairesare again provided herein. At his request, his product sample is in the process of beingshipped to his attention.With regard to the presentations, there were three presentation of his product idea.These presentations occurred on 02/25/2011, 08/24/2011, and 10/01/2012. Eachpresentation was specially authorized by Mr. [redacted]. Enclosed, please find copies ofthe e-mail documentation of the first two presentations, and a copy of the US Customsform documenting the mailing of the third presentation. As for documenting acorporation’s decision to not license a client’s project, it is common for a company tosimply inform Davison of its decision and not provide a detailed explanation or writtenrejection. Accordingly, we can not provide to our clients information that is not providedto us. However, in the case of the third presentation, the corporation did provide aresponse e-mail, which is enclosed. Note the names of the specific contact individualshave been redacted.As stated earlier, the simple fact is; the product development process provides noguarantees of financial gain. Our contracts and disclosures are explicit in this regard.While this is of little comfort to a client who has expended considerable time, money,effort and emotion into a project, the fact that a particular project does not bring financialgain to the client does not invalidate the services that were provided. Davison has noobligation, legal or otherwise, to refund any monies paid by Mr. [redacted] for servicesrendered to his documented satisfaction.SincerelyDavid ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosures

Review: I paid the $11,000 they charged me, I sketched a rough draft of my idea, I talked to the Senior Director of New Products many times by phone describing my idea in detail, I filed for and paid for and received a patent, I did everything they asked me to do, only to be ignored for the next year. I finally received a one page drawing of a poor rendering of my idea, no blueprint specs, and the picture and description didn't have anything I described in detail, they changed the most important features of my idea. I called them and told John D'Alessio that was NOT what I described and he assured that the prototype would be made the way I described. Almost one year later I finally got them to send me the prototype. What they made is NOT even close to what my idea was, not even the material it was "made from". Then they said they showed it to one prospective buyer who wasn't interested. If I wanted them to show anyone else, it would cost me $400 each time they showed someone. They lied, they changed my design and made a worthless, useless piece of junk. They did not do anything they agreed to do in our "signed contract".Desired Settlement: I want every penny of my $11,000 given back to me. They did not do one thing they said they would do in our signed contract, and I have the prototype they sent me to prove it.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] againstDavison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 05 03/20 15. Customer concerns upseteveryone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to aminimum. From the time of an initial contact and throughout our process, we maintain an open channel ofcommunication, disclosing our services and fees upfront and securing our clients’ approval andauthorization throughout the process. Our contracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. Inhis complaint, Mr. [redacted] raises a concern over the fee for the additional service ofrepackaging/refurbishing of the product sample for presentation to an additional corporation, and he allegesthe product sample did not meet his approval. As will be detailed below, Mr. [redacted] was advised of thereferenced fee at least three times and Davison has performed its services with his express writtenauthorization. While it is unfortunate that his product idea was not licensed, that fact does not provide abasis for a refund.Fee Disclosure:Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website. The systemDavison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit an idea without firsthaving two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronicallyacknowledging the disclosures. Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature on 04 30/2012, thathe received and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures are madeBEFORE the Client enters any service contract or makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosuresis the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with asubmitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing the various services and related fees. Enclosed,please find a copy of the disclosure detailing the services and fees. As Mr. [redacted] is a resident ofCalifornia, these disclosures are again provided as part of the Pre-Development Agreement. A copy of thissecond disclosure is attached. Finally, as part of the New Product Sample Agreement, the fee is againdisclosed in Section 4.L. which states; “The Client shall not be responsible for any additional expenses toDavison within the scope and term of this Agreement, with the possible exception being additional servicesto refUrbish or repackage the sample, for which Davison currently charges $385.00.” For Mr. [redacted] toallege he was not informed of the fee is simply baseless.Product Sample:Mr. [redacted] entered into a contract for the design and construction of a product sample andpresentation material based upon his submitted idea. It is important to note that Davison is not a prototypemanufacturer that creates a product sample based upon the client’s preconceived notions. Davison is adesign and development firm whose goal is to create a product sample that is a cost-effective solution to theproblem identified by the client. The contract which Mr. [redacted] entered explicitly states the following;“I. A. iv) Preliminary Product Design: Development Team ‘brainstorming sessions will be held to uncoverproduct design solutions that blend with the targeted corporation’s manufacturing capabilities. The ergonomics and aesthetics of the product are also taken into consideration. This subjective process oftenresults in the Development Team making modifications and enhancements, which are sometimes substantial,to the proposed solution or the preliminary design submitted by Client, particularly if Client’s proposeddesign is not a cost effective solution to solving the problem outlined by the client, does not reflect currentmanufacturing techniques or may be in conflict with products patented or on the market....4. 0. Client acknowledges that there have been no representations by Davison that the Idea as conceived andsubmitted by Client is novel or feasible or that the design to be created by Davison will hinction in themanner and with the attributes as originally conceived by Client.. This Agreement does not contain orincorporate any specifications, performance characteristics or other qualities for the design or product sampleto be produced.”Davison performed its initial design of the product sample and submitted an integrated productrendering for Mr. [redacted]’s approval on or about 1114/2013. Initially, he did not approve of the design.Following numerous discussions, Mr. [redacted] did provide his approval of the design on 02/22/20 14. A copyof his signed approval is attached. (Note the actual design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes).At the time he provided his approval, he also completed a questionnaire in which he provided negativefeedback. Having received contradictory feedback, Mr. [redacted] was asked to clari~’ his position. On03 12/20 14 he provided a letter giving Davison authorization to move forward with his project. A copy ofhis letter is attached. In reliance on his authorization, the physical product sample and packaging wereconstructed and presentation materials, including an Executive Briefing, were created. It is important tonote that the Executive Briefing contained an actual photograph of the physical product sample andpackaging. On 08 08/20 14, Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation of his product idea. A copy of theauthorization is enclosed. To now allege the product sample did not meet with his approval is contrary tothe documented evidence.The presentation was made to the target corporation on 09 12/2014. Unfortunately the companydeclined to license the product idea. Consistent with the disclosures and contract terms, an offer foradditional services for presentation to a new corporation was offered. Mr. [redacted] has declined this service.At his request, the product sample was shipped to his attention on 04/23/20 15. His complaint followed.As stated, Mr. [redacted] was fully informed of all services, and their related fees, offered byDavison, BEFORE he entered into any service contract. The services have been performed with hisexpress written approval and authorization. While it is unfortunate that the targeted corporation chose notto pursue his product idea, that fact does not negate the provided services. There is no basis to warrant arefund for services rendered. The simple fact is; the product development process provides no guarantees offinancial gain. Our contracts and disclosures are explicit in this regard. While this is of little comfort to aclient who has expended considerable time, money, effort and emotion into a project, the fact that aparticular project does not bring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that wereprovided. However, in the interest of customer satisfaction, we will offer two additional presentations at nocost to Mr. [redacted]. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contact our Licensing Department whowill coordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize the presentations.Turnin ideas into productsSincerelyAssociate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

The document Davison Design showed to you was sent to them, (at their request) AFTER the documents I've attached to this e-mail, and after a phone call to John D'Alessio where I again went into detail about the unacceptable errors pertaining to the design specs that I received from them. The document that they sent to you was requested from us AFTER John D'Alessio promised, during our phone call, to make all the changes I said were necessary. Upon receiving the completed prototype it was obvious that NOT ONE of the changes I deemed necessary were made. Because Davison DID NOT follow my design specs is the reason why the prospective buyer turned down my idea. The product they made is NOT easy to install or to remove and it causes PERMANENT damage to the vehicle. If they had followed my design specs correctly, the final product would have been very easily installed and easily removed WITHOUT CAUSING ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE at all. Davison Design has misled and scammed hundreds of people out of thousands of dollars and he will continue to do this unless he is held accountable. I want my $11,795.00 returned to me. [redacted]