Davison Design & Development, Inc.

Review: I've been trying to get my Proto Type of my invention delivered to my house to myself since March after signing some official papers I needed to. After signing these papers and delivering back to the office of Davison nothing has been done. They just told me they were going to ship it to me after 5 months delay. It was shipped an it cost me $15 dollars. I got it yesterday. All it was, was a cardboard design I shipped them before not the Proto Type they said they were shipping me. I have Epilepsy and my seizures are very strong at times. What causes my seizures most are frustration, anger, and stress. Having this product not in my hands the way I need it has cause some harsh ones at times. I'm speaking to the President of Davison right now, [redacted] and nothing is getting done correctly. He knew he & I were talking about a shipment product that had a cost of up to ten-thousand dollars and I only got a cardboard design I made once myself. With the $15.00 I pain for this shipment for this I shouldn't have to pay for another shipment next time. This one was totally unneeded.Desired Settlement: I want my Invention Proto Type Sampler sent to my home ASAP by FED-EX with them putting an insurance coverage on my Package. The Insurance to cover the cost of any damages to remake the product if anything ever did happen to it during the shipment getting to my house.

Business

Response:

See attached File? This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 08/09/2013. Mr. [redacted] complaint alleges he requested his product sample, i.e. the physical product sample designed and constructed by Davison, and instead he received a “cardboard design I made once myself’. On its face, this seems to be a reasonable complaint. However, after reviewing his file, this synopsis is incomplete. Mr. [redacted] was advised that Davison does not have possession of his product sample because the corporation that licensed his product idea has taken possession and forwarded the sample to one of its buyers. Mr. [redacted] project has been presented to numerous corporations, at least one of these presentations being made at not cost to Mr. [redacted]. The most recent corporation has elected to license his product idea and requested the product sample. This is the precise reason Davison develops a physical product sample - so that a corporation can have a tangible item to review and show to its buyers. When Mr. [redacted] made his request, he was informed of this fact. Davison has requested that the sample be returned, but to date has not received the sample. When informed of this fact, Mr. [redacted] requested his prototype, i.e. the sample he constructed, to be shipped to him. That was done. There is no valid basis for his complaint. If and when Davison receives the product sample back from the Licensee, it will be shipped to Mr. Gary’s attention at no additional cost. However, Davison can not guarantee that the sample will in fact be returned. The shipping authorization form, which Mr. [redacted] signed to allow the shipment of the sample to the eventual Licensee, clearly states that Davison is not responsible for damage or loss of the product sample when it is out of Davison’s control. A copy of this Shipping Procedure Agreement is enclosed. [redacted] Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I was going to use Davison to produce my invention, here is the break down of my payments: from last email from VP of Davison. what was mine that I paid was 618.00. They had stated to me that they could take a little more royalties for the cost of them building the prototype...the next thing I know not only they wanted a larger potion, but $11,000.00 cash. I told them I could not go any further and asked for my funds back, they refused, can you help me?Thank you, [redacted] Pre-Development Agreement Receipt for SECURE CHAIR DATE TYPE AMOUNT June 27, 2013 MasterCard $100.00 June 27, 2013 Savings $80.00 September 4, 2013 MasterCard $50.00 September 13, 2013 MasterCard $250.00 October 3, 2013 MasterCard $50.00 November 4, 2013 MasterCard $50.00 November 26, 2013 MasterCard $115.00 November 26, 2013 Savings$100.00 Cost of Pre-Development Agreement$795.00 Total Payments$795.00 Balance Remaining$0.00 Creatively Yours, [redacted]Executive Vice President of New Products DAVISON | [redacted] | [redacted]Desired Settlement: a bank draft of $618.00 made out to [redacted]

Business

Response:

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

Review: Davison Misrepresented themselves as a company that helps develop and market new ideas. This is a false statement. Davison is operating under false pretences to lure clients into the believe that Davison can help them bring their ideas to market.

After the horrible experience I've had with Davison and the horrible customer service and indifference to me after they exploited me for a large sum of money. I want my money back from Davison.Desired Settlement: For them to send me back all my money including damages

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 06/25 2015.Customer concerns 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. A briefsummary of events is provided to give a complete view of his project.07/14/20 12: Mr. [redacted] submits his idea to Davison and acknowledges having receivedand read two disclosures with detailed all offered services, fees and historicaldata regarding the securing of license agreements for clients.07/24/20 12: Mr. [redacted] enters into the Pre-Development and RepresentationAgreement. Davison subsequently performs these services and provides theresearch data to him on or about 08/31/2012.09/08/20 12: Mr. [redacted] completes a questionnaire in which he states the Idea toProduct Portfolio was completed in accordance with the contract. Acopy of the questionnaire is attached.10/21/2013: Mr. [redacted] enters into a New Product Sample Agreement for theconstruction of a product sample.01/06/2014: Mr. [redacted] approves the design, and completes a questionnaire inwhich he provided positive feedback. A copy of his approval and thecompleted questionnaire are attached. Please note the actual approved designhas been redacted for confidentiality purposes.03312014: In reliance upon his approval of the design, Davison completes theconstruction of the product sample and presentation materials which aresubmitted to Mr. [redacted] for approval. The Executive Briefing containedan actual photograph of the constructed product sample. Mr. [redacted]authorized the presentation of his product idea and completed aquestionnaire about the Executive Briefing materials in which heprovided positive feedback A copy of his authorization and the completedquestionnaire are attached.05 09 2014: Davison makes the presentation of Mr. [redacted]’s product idea.07 15 2014: The corporation informs Davison that they have declined to license the ideaand Mr. [redacted] is informed. Additional services are offered to Mr.[redacted], which he declines.As the above chronology indicates, each step of the process has been performed with Mr.[redacted] ‘ s express written approval and authorization. Further, throughout the process he hasprovided written documentation of his satisfaction with the services. His first noted concern wason 07/01/2014. At that time he demanded that his product sample be re-designed, despite the factthat the product sample was constructed per his approval and was already presented and underreview.Following the completion of all services on 07/15/2014, there was no contact from Mr.[redacted] until 06/25/2015, when Davison received a letter demanding a full refund. In response,Davison attempted to schedule a call for Mr. [redacted] with the Office of the President. Mr.[redacted] declined such a call, stating he had “nothing to talk about”. On 07/07/2015, Davisonreceived the current complaint from your office.As detailed above, Davison has performed its services with Mr. [redacted]’s approval,authorization and to his documented satisfaction. There is no basis to warrant a refund forservices rendered. The simple fact is; the product development process provides no guarantees offinancial gain. Davison’s contracts and disclosures are explicit in this regard. While this is oflittle comfort to a client who has expended considerable time, money, effort and emotion into aproject, the fact that a particular project does not bring financial gain to the client does notinvalidate the services that were provided. The complaint sets forth no basis to warrant a refundfor services rendered to the client’s documented satisfaction. However, in the interest ofcustomer satisfaction, Davison 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 who willcoordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize the presentations.Enclosures

Consumer

Response:

I signed off on the design at the insistence of Robert B[redacted] who

pressured me stating "we needed to get the idea TO MARKET

before anyone else does!". THE WHOLE PROCESS IN WORKING WITH DAVISON WAS VERY INTIMIDATING, KNOWING THEY HELD ALL THE CARDS AND HAD NOTHING TO LOSE. ROBERT B[redacted] ALSO convinced me to accept a design that

was not what I wanted rationalizing that my original idea was TOO EXPENSIVE HE SAID TO PRODUCE. Which was B.S. And that the idea could be

modified and improved at a later DATE.WHICH HE DIDN'T TELL ME WOULD COST ME MORE MONEY. ROBERT B[redacted] ALSO TOLD ME FROM THE BEGINING THAT [redacted] WAS INTERESTED IN MY IDEA. THAT WAS MISLEADING AND NOT TRUE. IF HE HAD BEEN TRUTHFUL HE WOULD HAVE SAID, [redacted] REVIEWS ALL OUR CLIENTS PRODUCTS AND YOURS WILL BE PRESENTED TO [redacted] ONCE WE FINISH THE DESIGN. INSTEAD HE MADE IT SOUND LIKE [redacted] WAS INTERESTED IN MY IDEA. THAT WAS PRIOR TO SIGNING THE $12, 720 DOLLAR CONTRACT. . WHEN I INITIALLY APPROACHED DAVISON, I THOUGHT THEY WERE A LEGIT TRUST WORTHY COMPANY. THAT THEY WOULD LISTEN TO MY CONCERNS AND ALLOW ME TO PARTICIPATE IN DESIGNING MY OWN IDEA. THE IDEA I WAS PAYING THEM TO DEVELOP. LATER WHEN I DISCOVERED DAVISONS HORRIBLE TREATMENT OF THEIR CLIENTS, I BROUGHT THAT TO ROBERT B[redacted]S ATTENTION AND HE JUST SCOFFED AND SAID, "OH PEOPLE CAN WRITE ANYTHING THEY WANT ON THE INTERNET."BUT AS TIME WENT BY IT WAS CLEAR ABOUT DAVISONS REPUTATION AND I FOUND MORE AND MORE HORROR STORIES FROM DAVISON CLIENTS. ALSO BECAUSE DAVISON HAD A VERY LARGE SUM OF MY MONEY, I TRUSTED THAT THEY HAD MY BEST INTEREST AT HEART. BUT LATER REALIZED THEY WERE ONLY ON THE TAKE. EVERYTHING WRITTEN INTO DAVISONS CONTRACTS IS DESIGN TO TAKE AWAY THE RIGHTS OF THE CLIENT AND GIVE ALL RIGHTS TO DAVISON. WHAT I DID NOT KNOW PRIOR TO SIGNING WITH DAVISON WAS HOW I WOULD BE TREATED MY THEM??? IN THE END IT WAS CLEAR DAVISON WAS ONLY OUT FOR THEMSELVES. EXPLOITING PEOPLE FOR THEIR IDEAS AND MONEY. DAVISON IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED WITH ANYONES IDEAS, OR THEIR MONEY. ONE OF THE TACTICS DAVISON USES IS THE CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE, ABOUT NOT DISCUSSING THE IDEA WITH ANYONE! WHILE IT IS REASONABLE TO NOT PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE SENSITIVE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, THE PRIVACY ALSO KEEPS THE CLIENT IN ISOLATION AND ALLOWS DAVISON TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK WITH OUT ANY INTERFERENCE FROM OUTSIDE PEOPLE LIKE CONCERNED FAMILY OR FRIENDS, WHO MIGHT BE CONCERNED OR SUGGEST AN ATTORNEY GET INVOLVED. NO OFFER WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE BY DAVISON ACCEPT A REFUND OF MY MONEY. DAVISON DID VERY LITTLE WORK FOR THE ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY I GAVE THEM. THERE WAS NO CREATIVITY IN THIS PROCESS, IT WAS ALL LEGALISTIC. THEY DID NOT WANT TO HEAR MY CONCERNS. THEY WROTE A CONTRACT THAT ONLY PROTECTED THEM. PLUS THEIR PERFORMANCE IS DISMAL. THEY CAN'T BE TRUSTED. ALSO WHEN I FOUND DAVSION HAD LOST A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT TO THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION IN 2008/9 FOR $26,000,000 MILLION DOLLARS BUT SETTLED FOR $10.6,000,000 MILLION THAT WAS EVIDENCE ENOUGH. I REALIZED I WAS NOT ALONE IN THE DECEPTIVE TREATMENT BY DAVISON. MY TRUST IN THEM AND THEIR SERVICES IS TOTALLY GONE.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the supplemental comments submitted by Mr. [redacted] on orabout 07/16/2015. In his comments, Mr. [redacted] raises two areas related to his project; thepresentation of his idea to the targeted corporation and the design of his product sample. As willbe detailed below, his position on both issues is not supported by the documented evidence. Asstated in the initial reply, Davison has performed its services with Mr. [redacted]’s approval andauthorization, and to his documented satisfaction. While it is unfortunate his product idea wasnot licensed, that fact does not provide grounds for a refund.Presentation of his product idea:Mr. [redacted] alleges that he was informed the targeted corporation had expressed interestin his product idea, before he contracted to have the product sample designed and constructed.He offers no support for this contention. The documented evidence counters this allegation. WhenMr. [redacted] submitted his idea, he did so by entering a Confidentially Agreement. Under theexpress terms of the Agreement; “Davison will not use, disclose, license or sell this idea with outmy [Mr. [redacted]] express written permission.” Davison takes the obligation of confidentialityseriously, and abides by the terms of the Agreement. While the target corporation was identifiedin September 2012, Mr. [redacted] did not provide authorization to make a presentation untilMarch 2013, i.e. after the product sample had been designed, approved, constructed and thepresentation material created. Further, in September 2012, the letter informing Mr. [redacted] ofthe identity of the target corporation explicitly states that Davison has not disclosed anyinformation about his product idea to the corporation.Design of the Product Sample:Mr. [redacted] acknowledges having approved the design of the product sample, but allegeshe was pressured into doing so. While it is not possible to document his mindset when heapproved the design, his contention that it was not a sincere approval is contradicted by hissubsequent actions. Specifically; after approving the design, he completed a questionnaireproviding positive feedback; after the product sample was constructed, he authorized thepresentation to the targeted corporation; and in connection with the presentation material, hecompleted a second questionnaire, again providing positive feedback. The subsequentauthorization and completed questionnaires simply do not corroborate his contention that thedesign did not meet with his approval In a final attempt to find support for his complaint, Mr. [redacted] raises the FTC case.That case has no bearing on Mr. [redacted]’s project. The FTC case was from 1997, nearlyeighteen (18) years ago and fifteen (15) years before Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison. WhenMr. [redacted] contacted Davison, the company was, and has continued to be, in completecompliance with all requirements of the Court and the FTC. As noted in the initial reply, whenMr. [redacted] first contacted Davison, he was provided with, and signed, the AffirmativeDisclosure required by the Court as part of the FTC case. Further, information concerning thecase is readily available to the public. Mr. [redacted]’s reference to the case establishes that fact.As such, that case does not provide any valid basis to support his complaint.Davison has performed its services with Mr. [redacted]’s approval, authorization and tohis documented satisfaction. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered.However, Davison will honor its offer of two additional presentations at no cost to Mr. [redacted]as was presented in the initial response. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contactour Licensing Department who will coordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize thepresentations.Sincerely David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

I would really like to know if Davison has put any new products in to the market place?? Very few from the statistics listed in the contract disclosure. This statistics listed in the contract disclosure, would almost give them the legal right to steal blindly from people. They hold to no accountability accept their own. Initially when I contacted Davison I was told my [redacted] idea was a good and marketable idea. That it would be simple to make and would really have some usefulness and functionality in the world. Which I still believe. But after I went through the process with Davison I was told, by [redacted], sorry, you idea wasn't selected" and to add insult to injury said, "WE GET 2-3 IDEAS FOR TOILET SEAT OPENERS A WEEK." That was another Davison Slap in the Face. I found the experience with Davison to be impersonal and I was manipulated into a design that did not represent my idea. I was told that [redacted] was interested in my Idea. But Davison and Robert B[redacted] had their own ideas about how they thought it should be designed. The whole process was unfriendly and did not respect my idea and the design I came up with and paid Davison Handsomely to help me with. The pressure from Robert B[redacted] to hurry up and accept a design inferior to my Idea was an attempt to manipulate the process in order for him to get his commission. I was told by Davison employees Robert B[redacted] was no longer with the company after that. When the initial [redacted] idea had gone through the design phase and onto licensing Robert B[redacted] was out of there. And he could not be reached for consultation on simple questions I had to fill out the application form. so I proceeded on my own without his help. Perhaps he had gone on vacation with the money he got from his commission? When he finally returned I had already filled out the form and sent it in. The Customer service Davison provided was only an effort to satisfy their own criteria in legally taking a huge some of money from me and to rationalize it. Davison has done this again and again to people, burning them in the process. You have a path of destruction and unhappy clients that that goes back over 20 years I am sure. Thank God for agencies like Revdex.com who give ratings on businesses like you. You have an F rating from Revdex.com which is understatement. I was also told Davison made a pro to-type of my idea and that I would get a sample of it, which never happened. Later when I requested it, [redacted] told me they needed to keep it in their sample portfolio in the event companies would be interested in it. I don't believe any pro to-type was ever created. In speaking with other unhappy Davison Customers, they also told similar stories of crappy pro to-types that were shotty and inferior. I extended way too much trust in Davisons willingness help me design my product. As far as redesigning my idea or presenting it to other companies? I have no faith or trust in Davison what so ever. And would only be insulted to make any more effort with them.

Business

Response:

Dear Mr. Baker;This letter is in response to the additional comments submitted by Mr. [redacted]on or about 08/17/2015. In his comments, Mr. [redacted] raises a variety of issues, manyof which have been addressed in prior responses. The issues are again addressed,however, as stated in all prior replies; Davison has performed its services with Mr.[redacted]’s approval and authorization, and to his documented satisfaction. While it isunfortunate his product idea was not licensed, that fact does not provide grounds for arefund.Mr. [redacted] again alleges he was informed the targeted corporation had expressedinterest in his product idea, before he contracted to have the product sample designed andconstructed. There is simply no logic in this contention. Mr. [redacted] was informed ofthe target corporation’s identity in September 2012. The letter informing him of theidentity of the target corporation explicitly states that Davison has not disclosed anyinformation about his product idea to the corporation. It was not until 2014 that Davisonhas a physical product sample, presentation material, and Mr. [redacted]’ s authorization tomake the presentation.Mr. [redacted] again alleges the product sample did not meet with his satisfaction.The prior responses provided the documented evidence of his approval of the design, hisauthorization of the presentation and his completed questionnaires in which he providedpositive feedback. To now, in retrospect, allege dissatisfaction is not credible.Mr. [redacted] questions whether any Davison designed products are actually in themarketplace. He is directed to Davison’s website. On the site, there is a listing oflicensed products and the stores in which the specific product has been sold. Further,there are video clips, taken in the various retail stores, showing the licensed products onthe store shelves. Mr. [redacted] can search that site or, better yet, he is encouraged todrive to one of the identified stores in his local area to find the products himself.Finally, Mr. [redacted] alleges he did not receive his physical product sample. Aspreviously stated, he received an actual photograph of the product sample as pert of theExecutive Summary. The contact terms explicitly state; “4. F. . . .The items to bedelivered for Client’s possession pursuant to this Agreement are the Integrated ProductRendering and the Executive Suimnary. Client intends that Davison will retain possessionof the product and packaging sample, unless Client requests otherwise in writing.” Therecord indicates that Mr. [redacted] has not made such a request. Should he desire toreceive the product sample, he need only inform the Licensing Department who willcoordinate the shipment of the sample.Davison has performed its services with Mr. [redacted]’s approval, authorizationand to his documented satisfaction. There is no basis to warrant a refund for servicesrendered. Despite his stated refusal, Davison will continue to honor its offer of twoadditional presentations at no cost to Mr. [redacted]. If he chooses to accept this offer, heneed only contact our Licensing Department who will coordinate the necessarypaperwork to authorize the presentations.David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I visited Davison.[redacted] website one time. As I began to fill out the information so I could learn how they help people develop their ideas, it seemed very clear that they had helped very few people launch new ideas. I stopped and never finished the process. Immediately, I began to receive marketing emails and phone calls. I called at least once and wrote about a dozen times (including filling out the unsubscribe box on their internet), yet still, over 1-2 years later, they are still harassing me with their emails. I was very clear with my request. I want this to cease and desist immediately.Desired Settlement: I would like my name, email, phone number, address, or any other information about me removed from any and all websites, email lists, marketing lists, calling lists, etc., past, present and future, and erased from any computer, hard drive, CD, DVD or other memory device.

Business

Response:

[redacted]

Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania[redacted]

October 31, 2014

Re: [redacted]

Your ID#: [redacted]

Dear [redacted];

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

[redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about

10 22 2014. As her complaint states, she is not a client of Davison. She initiated contact

with us, however she has not submitted an idea for a new product, she has not entered

into any contract and she has not made any payments to Davison.

Her allegation of harassment is simply unjustified. Although she claims to have

initially contacted Davison “1-2 years ago”, our records indicate she made her first

contact on 04 14 2014. Davison made a total of five attempts to contact her over the

course of the next month, each attempt was unsuccessful. Our last attempt to contact her

was on 05 15 2014. Reaching out to a potential client, who initiated contact with us,

simply does not warrant the characterization as anything other than prompt, responsive

conduct.

At her request, her file has been marked as “Do Not Contact”.[redacted]

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Turning ideas into products

Davison [redacted]

Review: I received an email from Davidson. I replied because I wasn't sure what exactly they did with new products. I was contacted by [redacted]. he explained to me what his company does and that there are costs and fees involved but they take the product from concept to store shelves. I explained to [redacted] that I would not be interested for two reasons. First my product is in the package, and already selling. second being a new startup company monies extremely important. so I wouldn't have any need for his company. At the end of our conversation [redacted] asked me to send them out the product so he can take it to his owner and see if he would be interested in it.we schedule a conference call about a week later (Wednesday) with my partner, [redacted] & myself. In that conference meeting, which said he loved it, and contracts were being sent out. The contract and Davis needed $6000. I moved on but I kept getting emails from Davis so I decided to answer it split in the lucrative Odyssey heated understand but eventually I would be the position to hire his company. two weeks later I called the request to get my brace back. Poor little [redacted] had the attitude of a six-year-old, that quit playing because nobody would play his way. I explained to him that nowhere on Davis's website documentation or our conversations was it disclosed that I would have to pay to have my product back like most companies do if they want you to pay. if I was a known and from the beginning I would that enable to make a decision whether or not I would've send it out originally. Davison the company as a whole great concept and just some research probably one of the top out there. Unfortunately they need to eliminate some unprofessionalism with their staff. they should never take anything personal!!!!!!! "right [redacted]"Desired Settlement: I would like my brace returned to me in the new clean unscratched condition that they received it. At their cost. and for future reference they need to disclose these facts to any future client so they also can make an educated decision.

Business

Response:

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

Review: My husband, [redacted], myself, and a business partner were looking into marketing a design for an [redacted]. We were dealing with a man by the name of [redacted]. Initially, it was my husband who had sole contact, but as our dealings went on, I became more cautious and decided to get involved directly. [redacted] was told by Mr. [redacted] that he needed 795.00 in order to begin the pre-development phase. We have a young family, so he made small payments for a total of 300.00. Nothing was given to him in writing until the month of August 2014 regarding this process and the contract makes no mention of monies owed for services rendered; the contract was never signed as a result. At this point, I began to have doubts and looked up the business on Revdex.com website. I saw the amazing amount of complaints. I voiced my concerns with Mr. [redacted] and then he demanded another payment or he would close the deal; that's when I knew something was wrong. On 08/18/2014, I emailed Mr. [redacted] and told him that we no longer wanted to deal with him and ask for immediate refund. Another man called my husband and said that refunds are issued within 7 days. We have no record of this either verbal or written and demand our refund of the 300.00 paid. No services had begun and it is now obvious that this company is a scam operation...we found out about the additional money needed through the Revdex.com website (not from Mr. [redacted]) that could total up to 15,000 after the 795.00 was paid...Very dishonest and we ask for a total refund.Desired Settlement: A refund of the initial 300.00 paid to Davison Designs.

Business

Response:

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

Review: HI, I HAVE CONTACTED DAVISON 2 TIMES VIA FAX REQUESTING A FULL REFUND ON 6.25.13 AND 6.29.13 THEY HAVE FAILED TO MAIL ME A FULL REFUND CHECK, THERE FEES ARE TOO EXPENSIVE FOR ME TO WORK WITH THEM. THANKS, GOD BLESS, YOUR PARTNER FOR PROGRESS, [redacted]Desired Settlement: I BELIVE THEY OWE ME AN $800 REFUND CHECK.

Business

Response:

See attached File

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]r [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 07/28/2013. Mr. [redacted] makes a demand for a refund, however as will be detailed below, Davison has already offered and Mr. [redacted] has already accepted a refund in June of 2010. There is no basis to warrant any additional monies. Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison in December of 2009. As with all potential clients, he was provided two disclosure forms, in a printable and savable format, and he acknowledged that he received and read the disclosures. These disclosures outline, among other details, all services and related fees offered by Davison. Mr. [redacted] entered into the initial Pre-Development Agreement for custom research services on 01/13/2010. These services were performed and the research provided to Mr. [redacted] on 03/19/2010. It bears noting that these initial services were provided at a reduced fee. Following completion of the initial services, Mr. [redacted] entered into a second contract for the design and construction of a product sample and the preparation of presentation materials. This second contract was entered on 05/10/2010. Mr. [redacted] made a partial payment of $400.00 toward this contract fee. Mr. [redacted] terminated this contract, after expiration of the cancellation period. Though not contractually obligated, Davison offered, and Mr. [redacted] accepted, a refund of $300.00. Davison retained the difference to offset the administrative expenses incurred. This refund was processed on 06/30/2010. A copy of the refund receipt is enclosed. There has been no activity on Mr. [redacted]’s project since 06/30/2010, other than a few unsuccessful attempts to contact him in 2011. On 05/29/2013, nearly four years later, Mr. [redacted] sent a facsimile to Davison with a proposal to re-activate his project. A copy of this facsimile is enclosed. Davison attempted to call Mr. [redacted], though the number was disconnected. Mr. [redacted] then forwarded his baseless demand for a refund. As outlined above, Mr. [redacted] was provided a refund in June of 2010. There has been no activity on his project since that time. There is no basis to warrant a farther refund.

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

A FULL REFUND ASK THEM TO SEND ME A CHECK FOR $100 AND CLOSE THE CASE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GOD BLESS, YOUR PARTNER FOR PROGRESS,

Review: Sent 2 Davison by registered mail: I answered an internet ad that appeared in my email about 2-3 months ago regarding Davisons ability to bring an invention to fruition and make money with it. I called the toll free number listed and Initially the person I spoke to told me his name was George Davison and that although 90% of inventions fail, yours is a good one. He told me he would have one of his reps call me the next day. The next day I received a call from a representative, [redacted], who I was recently advised was no longer employed by Davison and he also liked my idea, also thought it was a winner and told me over numerous more phone calls that $750 was required in order to get the ball rolling. I paid Davison $750 over several installments. [redacted] would call me each week to get the next installment. After installments complete, I received this New Product Sample Agreement. In it, another request for money, four different amounts this time. The average amount is approx. $16,000 and along with it came an agreement stating I owed Davison that large amount of $$ and its to be returned to Davison in the enclosed self addressed pre paid FED EX envelope. After 4 or 5 unreturned phone calls to [redacted] I received a phone call from [redacted], also in Florida office. ([redacted] X [redacted]) who told me [redacted] was no longer with Davison, and that he was going to handle my account, that he held a big position with Davison so I could not miss any scheduled phone calls he was making because he was too busy before taking over [redacted]s accounts. To this date I have not seen anything that the $750 paid for. I told him and am now telling you, I want the $750 back! [redacted] never advised me of additional $$ above n beyond the $750, that you have a D- rating with the Revdex.com and there have been over 250 cases that Davison has been reported. The money was paid to you in good faith, but due to the turn of events, I want all the money back.Desired Settlement: I want returned what I paid to Davison, $750 and a written notice stating that my idea for the bedole will not be disclosed. But in the event that it is, I demand 30% of the profits.The same applies to the other inventions [redacted] had put into a log at each phone conversation.

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 09 18/20 14. 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 his statement, Mr. [redacted] alleges he was not informed

of the additional fees associated with the offer of additional services for his new product idea and that he

was provided a positive evaluation of his idea. He is simply incorrect. As will be detailed below, he was

provided a complete disclosure of the types of services offered, and their related fees, as well as explicit

statements that Davison does not provide evaluations of new product ideas BEFORE any contract was

entered.

On 05 06/20 14, Mr. [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. Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic

signature, that he 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 of the various services and related fees. The

disclosure also explicitly states: “Davison does not offer evaluations of idea submissions for commercial

potential.” A copy of the disclosure, as provided to Mr. [redacted], is enclosed. Further, this information is

freely available on Davison’s website. To allege he was not provided this information is simply false.

On 05 30/20 14, Mr. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services which

obligated Davison to compile research data related to his product idea. These services were completed and

the research material sent to Mr. [redacted] on 08 13/20 14. The agreement contains the following

provisions;

“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.”

“Section hID. Disclaimers Client acknowledges that Davison has not made any

representations concerning the potential of Client’s Product to be marketed licensed patented or

to make a profit for Client. Davison has not evaluated the Product...”

On 08/21/2014, after completion of the initial pre-development services, Mr. [redacted]

was offered a contract for additional services for an additional fee. This offer is consistent with

the disclosures as well as the terms of the Pre-Development agreement. Mr. [redacted] has not

engaged these additional services, which is his prerogative.

As detailed above, Mr. [redacted] was informed of the additional services twice; the first

disclosure occurring BEFORE he entered any contract and the second disclosure occurring within

the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement. Also, he was twice informed that Davison does

not provide evaluations of product ideas. The allegation that he was not informed of these facts is

unjustified. The services for which there existed a contract have been performed. No additional

services have been contracted and no additional payments have been made. There is no basis to

warrant a refund for services rendered.

Review: I paid Davison Designs $9610.00 for them to to make a prototype of my invention, create attractive packaging & successful marketing. The prototype was not at all what I wanted. The packaging was undesirable & there was no marketing. They said the one company they contacted turned it down & if I wanted them to pursue it I would have to pay them another $385.00. I asked for a refund & they said no refund & they were done with me.Desired Settlement: I want a full refund of $9610.00 because what they promised & what I received were not even close.

Business

Response:

Review: My complaint is the same as everybody else,their promises and lead you to believe that my product is marketable and it will be a success.I gave them most of my savings ,total of $9,835.00.I send it to them my finished sample and they turned around and completely change it and I requested to return my product and till now I'm waiting.Then they asked for more money $2,000.00 so they can run an ad on TV and I didn't buy anymore.I want them to give me back my money.If they are dishonestly taking money from people,why are they still in business?Desired Settlement: I want full refund of my money,at the beginning they were so informative of what they could do to my product and I trusted them because did not understand the process and they took advantage of me.

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 03/12/2014. In her

complaint, Ms. [redacted] demands a full refund alleging she “did not understand the process”. As

will be detailed below, Davison disclosed its fees and services BEFORE any contract was

entered. The contracted services were performed with Ms. [redacted]’s express written approval and

authorization. The services were performed to her documented satisfaction. Unfortunately, the

corporation to whom her project was presented did not license her product idea. This fact,

however, does not provide a basis for a refund nor does is support her contention that she was

somehow misled.

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 that she

received and read these disclosures. The disclosures set forth, among other details, the types of

services offered and their related fees. Subsequently, Ms. [redacted] entered into a contract for the

design and construction of a product sample and presentation material based upon her submitted

idea.

It is important to note that Davison is not a prototype manufacturer that creates a product

sample based upon the client’s preconceived notions. Also, Davison is not a “marketing firm”

and does not provide evaluations of submitted idea. 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. The contract which Ms. [redacted] entered explicitly states the following;

“1. A. iv) Preliminary Product Design: Development Team “brainstorming” sessions will be held to uncover

product design solutions that blend with the targeted corporations manufacturing capabilities. The

ergonomics and aesthetics of the product are also taken into consideration. This subjective process often

results 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 proposed

design is not a cost effective solution to solving the problem outlined by the client, does not reflect current

manufacturing 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 and

submitted by Client is novel or feasible or that the design to be created by Davison will function in the

manner and with the attributes as originally conceived by Client.. This Agreement does not contain or

incorporate any specifications, performance characteristics or other qualities for the design or product sample

to be produced.”

Davison performed its initial design of the product sample and submitted an integrated

product rendering for Ms. [redacted] s approval, which she did approve in writing. A copy of her

signed approval is enclosed (note the actual approved design has been redacted for confidentiality

purposes). Pursuant to her approval, the physical product sample and packaging were constructed

and presentation materials, in the form of an Executive Briefing, were created. It is important to

note that the Executive Briefing contained an actual photograph of the physical product sample

and packaging. Ms. [redacted] authorized the presentation of her product idea and completed a

questionnaire about the Executive Briefing, providing positive feedback. A copy of her

authorization and the completed questionnaire are enclosed. The presentation was made to the

target corporation, who declined to license the product idea. During the course of her project,

additional services were offered, including the creation of a video demonstrating the product

sample and additional presentations. Ms. [redacted] has declined these additional services.

Accordingly, no additional services have been provided.

As the summary indicates, Ms. [redacted] was provided with a complete disclosure of

Davison’s services and fees BEFORE any contract was entered. The services which were

provided were provided with her approval and authorization, and to her documented satisfaction.

There is no basis to warrant a refund. However, in the interest of customer satisfaction, we

will offer to Ms. [redacted] two additional presentations at no cost to her. If she chooses to

accept this offer, she need only contact our Licensing Department who will proceed with

the necessary paperwork.

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: Here is exactly what was said via email.Me: Would we get a log or something showing us what companies have been approached and who the contact was? What they said? Why or why not did they like it?Them: [redacted] we will update you after every presentation that is not an issue.They claim to have contacted me ten times. Those contacts were from some Women reading the same line of text from her computer every time she called. It went something like. ( Hello [redacted] Im just calling on behalf of Davison for our monthly call. Im looking at my screen and it seems there is nothing new to tell you about your project.) Thats it. Not one piece of information of a company, a name, what they thought of it, or why they did not like it. They never one time had any kind of evidence in any form that they have even maid an attempt to get this idea in front of anyone. And trust me when I tell you I asked this person these questions and she would not answer anything. She just repeatedly said what she read off of the computer is all the information she had. I also asked to talk to someone that could give me some more information and she repeatedly said she was my contact on this project and that is all the information she had. I asked to talk to her supervisor and I was told once again she was my contact on this project and this is all the information she has at this time. I finally talked to someone above her with some creative calling. And they treated me like crap. Like me asking them these question was the wrong thing to be doing. Who am I to ask them to prove that they have done if anything with my invention. They were very rude. Still to this day they can't show me anything of what they did to promote my Invention not one single piece of evidence can they produce to show what they did with my money.Desired Settlement: $3,000 becuase they can't show me anything they did for me. $3,000 is only half of what I paid them and I feel this is more than fair.

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 11/13/2013. Please be advised that, prior to filing his complaint with your office, Mr. [redacted] filed a complaint through an online website. Davison has responded to him through that website, through e-mail and through the U.S. mail, setting forth the scope of his contract, the services that have been provided and even offering additional services at no cost to Mr. [redacted]. Despite these efforts, Mr. [redacted] continues to allege a lack of service, and to demand information that Davison simply does not have or can not provide. His complaint sets forth no basis to warrant a refund. Mr. [redacted] contracted with Davison for representation services. It is important to note that he did not contract for any product development services. The representation agreement details a range of services that would be provided for a flat retainer fee. A number of the services are direct to identifying and approaching possible companies to attempt to have a company license Mr. [redacted]’s product idea. The balance of the agreement is directed to services that occur once a company has expressed interest in the product idea. Specifically, Davison compiled a list of twenty-nine (29) corporations and contacted each about Mr. [redacted]’s product idea. On at least a monthly basis, Mr. [redacted] was updated by Davison on any response received by any of the companies. Unfortunately, no company expressed interest in the product idea. Mr. [redacted] does not dispute the details in the above summary. However, he has demanded that Davison provide a detailed explanation of why the companies chose not to pursue his product idea and he demands that Davison provide the specific identity of the contact at each company. With regard to the former demand, Davison can not provide information which is not provided to us. Simply put, many companies simply do not provide an explanation of their 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 a particular company. Corporations, in general, are hesitant to confidentially receive new product 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 requests and projects are rejected summarily or refused entirely. There is no ulterior motive to our maintaining this information confidential, 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. Following the posting of his online complaint, the above responses were provided to Ms. [redacted], and by way of a letter dated November 05, 2013, Davison made an offer of additional services to Mr. [redacted]. A copy of that letter is enclosed. He has declined, informing Davison that he has secured a license agreement on his own. In light of this information, we informed him that our offer would remain open should he choose to accept it in the future. There is simply no basis to warrant a refund. [redacted] Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I gave Davison 19,000 dollars 3 years ago to design a product. After being told it was on the fast track, after being told there were orders placed, after changing contacts, after being ignored, and after being told something to get me off the phone, I am at a loss for options. I have received 2,000 dollars in royalties since being in contract with these 2 companies. I was told [redacted] alone placed a 50,000 dollar order on the product; however, the royalties I have received are based on a total sales number of 38,000 dollars from all selling companies. Something is not right here. I know I am not the only one with issues with Davison. I know about the class action suits. Davison continues to tell me little to nothing. They tell me I cannot contact [redacted] Company. They tell me sales will be better next quarter yet they are low and continue to drop each quarter. My problem with Davison is their ability to talk when they are asking for money, yet inability to answer anything when it comes to the customers well-being. I am willing to accept I lost out on benefitting from a good idea because I went with Davison. However, I cannot accept assuming all financial responsibility. I want them and [redacted] Audited. I want to find out what my options are to get out of contract and find out what happens with the product already out thereDesired Settlement: An audit of both Davison Designs and [redacted] Company

A review of the practices of both Davison Designs and [redacted] Company

An explanation of how I can get out of the contract with [redacted] Company, what it will cost me and how it will play out for the near future.

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 02/29 2016.Davison would like to thank Mr. [redacted] for his complaint as it exemplifies the irrationalexpectations of many individuals in the product development industry. These irrationalexpectations are the fodder that underlies many complaints voiced within the industry.Countless numbers of individuals have an idea for a new product; have a passion for theirvision for the product; and a belief that “everyone” surely shares their views. The simpletruth is; innovation and new product development is not right for everyone. The newproduct development process is a high risk venture. It is a time consuming process andrequires adaptations to an initial concept that adjust for costs, technical constraints, andmany other factors. There is no guarantee that a particular product idea will be licensed,much less a guarantee of a financial gain.Davison goes to great lengths to disclose the risks to all individuals who maysubmit an idea for a new product. In addition to disclosing all of its services and feesupfront, the historical success rates of securing a license and of realizing a financial gainare provided. The contracts for services repeatedly provide disclosures that there is noguarantee that a product will be licensed, or that a client will realize a financial gain.Unfortunately, the reality for most individuals is that their product does not get licensed.When faced with an outcome not meeting their unrealistic expectations, too many clientsforget that they knowingly undertook a risk after being filly informed of the risk byDavison. Instead, they lash out, relying on a mistaken belief that their product ideas werespecial and should have prevailed where others did not.In Mr. [redacted]’s case, he beat the odds! After going through Davison’s process ofdesigning and constructing a product sample, creating packaging and presentationmaterial, and making a presentation to a corporation, his product was licensed. Not onlythat, his product made it to store shelves and is currently selling! Rather than beinghappy with the reality of having a product selling in stores, he posts this complaintcomplaining that the amount of royalties is not sufficient.Further, he threatens legal action, demands an audit, and states a desire toterminate the contract. Setting aside the illogical belief that demanding such actionthrough a complaint site has any legal effect; such demands highlight the reality that hesimply wants someone else to do the work, and will complain if it does not meet hisexpectations. The license agreement which he entered provides him with the authority toaudit the corporate licensee. If he wants an audit, he may exercise his contract rights andincur the time and expense. Similarly, his desire to “get out of the contract” highlightshis naïve view. The contract is a legally binding agreement. The corporate licensee hasexpended time, money, and resources in reliance upon the terms of the contract. Thecontract provides specific steps necessary to terminate the agreement. If he wants toterminate the license, then he may review the contract and exercise the rights detailedtherein.Despite its vehement disagreement with the grounds for his complaint, Davisonwill continue to abide by all of its obligations to Mr. [redacted] as a client.Sincerely, David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I went into Contract with Davisons April April 2014 of paying an extra $5,850.00 after the intial payment of $695.00. Upon our agreement which is rendering of a product conceived from my idea of technology presented to them. Before sending my the material for a proposed contract they sent me material to view of someone elses idea and how they went through the process with their invention. Explaining to me my product idea will go through the same process of rendering of a prototype to a targeted Coporation out of Hong Kong. Upon viewing information of confidentiality agreement of no disposing or getting in touch on a business level with the targeted corporation I agreed to pay them the fee of $5,850.00 to start the process which includes a 9 step Interval before targeting the proposed Manufacturer. No only did they change the layout of my idea of a product but they did not add any features that I had proposed.By time I got the actual package they surrendered to me I had visited [redacted] in hopes that they were legit and in fact a true company that markets other peoples inventions. I was very impressed to find a [redacted] such as like a small [redacted] inside a sliding door way where dreams become realities. I only hoped that what I was seeing that reviews and comments I had seen were not true and lacked some incredibility to the complaints written. It took from April 1st to July 30th for me to receive the final rendering of my package along with an application for a Provisional Patent. After carefull view I had concerns with the way the product look because it was actually two seperate papers with 3D designs of a product concept with very few words explaining what my product will actually do to further advancement with people who not only have disabilities but people who havnt got time to read can listen too texts of any standard. no less than a month has passed and the Licensing and royalty office contacted me with explaining that the Targeted Corporation was not interested at the time.Desired Settlement: I would like a courtesy call back proposing to answer some of my questions and I do not believe the money I paid for a product was fully satisfied when the last call did not include a follow up future call appointment. Upon receiving an email explaining to me after watching a video how funding more money would get my product idea out to another proposed corporation when for $5,850 I was only awarded for that cost a idea picture of a graphics representation and only two months for propositioning

Business

Response:

[redacted]

Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania[redacted]

November 17, 2014

Re: [redacted]

Your lD#: [redacted]

Dear [redacted];

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

against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 11/04/2014. Customer

concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication

enors 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.

It bears noting that her complaint makes numerous conflicting statements. She

acknowledges she entered into a contract for an Integrated Product Rendering of her idea (as

opposed to a contract for a physical product sample), yet complains her idea did not go through

the 9 step process for the construction of a physical product sample. Also, after the first targeted

corporation chose not to pursue her idea, she acknowledges that she selected the reactive

approach rather than incur the costs of proactively presenting to a new corporation. Under the

reactive approach, there are no updates provided to a client unless a corporation was to approach

Davison requesting product ideas similar to her idea. Yet she complains about this lack of

updates.

Earlier today, I have spoken with [redacted] and have addressed the issues she

presented in her complaint. Davison has offered to make two additional presentations of her

product idea at no cost to her. [redacted] agreed, and has further agreed to independently notil5’

your office of our resolution. In light of my conversation with [redacted] and our agreement on

the additional presentations at no cost to her, I request that her complaint be closed as “resolved”.

Sincerel

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Turning ideas

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Review: This Business has stolen my Email Address. and keeps sending out emails under MY email address. I have had this email address since 2009. I have told my email that I was hacked. & told the company I was writing you.

Just one example: of many...

From: [redacted] on behalf of Davison Invention ([redacted]) You moved this message to its current location.Desired Settlement: For them to Fix this and any other email addresses they have stolen. and to have their emailing abilities looked into.. as their business as well. Because if they have to steal others email address to get their info out. They have Issues that need Action!

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 11 142015.Please note that Ms. [redacted] is not a client of Davison. She has not entered any servicecontract or submitted any payment. The only contact of record is an e-mail from her on11 14 2015, advising of the matters in her complaint. Following an extensive search ofDavison’s records (including by name, address, phone and e-mail), there is no otherrecord of any contact with Ms. [redacted]. Per her request, a notice has been sent toDavison’s advertising firms and other affiliates to check for her contact information and,if located, to have it removed.The accusations in her complaint that Davison has “stolen” her e-mail address andis “sending out emails” from her account are defamatory, unsubstantiated, and blatantlyfalse. Davison does not purchase contact information from outside sources and does notacquire such information through imp[redacted] means. All contact information is eitherprovided to Davison directly by the individual or the individual has provided their contactinformation to one of Davison’s advertising affiliates and agreed to receive materialsthrough that affiliate. Further, Davison does not send any e-mail, or othercorrespondence, alleging to originate from an unaffiliated source.As stated, a notice has been sent to Davison’s advertising firms and otheraffiliates to check for her contact information and, if located, to have it removed. Itshould be understood that it may take several weeks for all affiliates to effectuate thesearch for, and removal of, her contact information.SincerelyDavid [redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: Davison is the claimed them self to the most efficient inventor in U.S.A since 1984 or 1989. They develop the idea for the invention. I was on lottery website checking my ticket when advertise pop up about and idea for invention. I had few, so I gave my first one which is odometer for the bicycle. I paid $795 for research and evaluation. They told me is good and They can make it for me and the well known company [redacted] is the manufacturer. And to make the odometer. The cost is $ 5850. I paid every month and they were calling to make the payment. They never missed the dates nor I missed the payment. I paid it off. Now, It is their time to sell it and make money for me. No one in the office won't call me back or give me information on what is going on. I started investigating them and They are bad guys in all. It is now almost a year since I paid all the money to them and They never contacted [redacted].Desired Settlement: If they can tell you that, they are going to make the my odometer work and I make money as they promised. Well, they better and Iam not sure if I trust them. There are a lot of people complaining on the website when I search their name. Also, I found out they were sued and settled for 10 millions by FTC Federal Trade commission. I also have Patent and I paid for it $85.

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 05/13/2015. 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. The contracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. Areview of Mr. [redacted]’s file indicates that Davison has performed all services with his approval andauthorization, and to his documented satisfaction. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] repeatedly claims he waspromised that he would “make money”. This is blatantly false. The disclosures and contracts explicitlystate that there is no guarantee of financial gain. There is no support for his complaint.Briefly stated, Mr. [redacted] entered into two service contacts. The first was for research which wasprovided to him and about which he completed a questionnaire providing positive feedback. The secondwas for 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 and completed questionnairesabout the rendering and presentation material, again providing positive feedback. Copies of his approvals,authorization and completed questionnaires are enclosed. His product idea was presented to the targetedcorporation on 09/09/2014. A copy of the e-mail documenting this presentation is enclosed. (Note theactual design and details regarding the product idea have been redacted from the documents forconfidentiality purposes). The corporation chose not to license his idea. An offer to make additionalpresentations was made to Mr. [redacted]. He has declined this additional service.Mr. [redacted]’s complaint contains numerous mischaracterizations and false statements that need to beaddressed;1. He states that he paid for an “evaluation” of his product idea. This is false. Davisondoes not offer evaluations of idea submissions for commercial potential. Thedisclosure provided to Mr. [redacted], BEFORE he entered any contract, states thisexplicitly, as do the contracts he entered.2. He claims Davison was to “make it [his product idea] for me” and that KettleInternational was the manufacturer. This is false. His contract was for the creation of arendering depicting his product idea; not for the construction of a physical productsample. [redacted] was the target corporation to whom his product idea would bepresented in an effort to secure a license agreement.3. He claims Davison never contacted [redacted]. This is false. As the enclosed e-maildocuments, Mr. [redacted]’s idea was presented on 09/09/2014. Follow up contacts with[redacted] were made on 11/10/2014 and 02/11/2015.4. He claims Davison has not followed up with him. This is false. Davison’s recordsdocument no less than eight contacts (calls or e-mails) with Mr. [redacted] during the periodof 11/17/2014 to 05/01/2015. As stated above, Mr. [redacted] has declined any additionalservices.5. He claims he was promised that he would make money. This is false. Davisonprovides disclosures to its clients, before any contract in entered, that detail thehistorical success rates for securing a license agreement and for obtaining a financialgain. Further the contracts explicitly state that Davison does not guarantee that aparticular product idea will be licensed or will result in a financial gain.6. Mr. [redacted] raises the issue of the FTC case as grounds for his complaint. This isbaseless. The FTC case was from 1997, nearly eighteen (18) years ago and fifteen (15)years before Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison. As noted above, when Mr. [redacted] firstcontacted Davison, he was provided with, and signed, the Affirmative Disclosurerequired by the Court as part of the FTC case. As such, that case does not provide anyvalid basis to support his complaint.As stated, all services have been performed with Mr. [redacted]’s express written approval andauthorization and to his documented satisfaction. While it is unfortunate that the targeted corporationchose not to pursue his product idea, that fact does not negate the provided services. The simple fact is thatthe product development process provides no guarantees of financial gain. Our contracts and disclosuresare 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 financial gain tothe client does not invalidate the services that were provided. However, in the interest of customersatisfaction, we will offer two additional presentations at no cost to Mr. [redacted]. If he chooses to accept thisoffer, he need only contact our Licensing Department who will coordinate the necessary paperwork toauthorize the presentations.Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

They are liars, They appointed another person to work with me and I told him that I don't trust them. And if you think , you can. Then go ahead. Also, they wanted me to pay $ 395 per presentations and I refused and that when they did not call to update nor returning my calls. They are the scammers. Don't listen to their lies. I told the new guy, [redacted]. you better make it work. This is the on going process.

Review: I have a new product sample agreement with Davison Design. And

Per the new product sample agreement section 7 Revocation states the client

may revoke by written notice this Agreement within seven (7) business days

from the day the Agreement was signed by both. Our agreement was signed on

Monday Feb 9th, 2015. Due to unforeseen personal circumstances I am

unable to proceed with the agreement. Per section 7 Revocation, I have provided

a written notice of cancellation of the New Product Sample Agreement on

(Feb 15th 2015) and I have requested a refund of all payments made to

Davison in connection with this specific Agreement. Davison will not respond

with direct contact about the revocation of the agrremont. Only an email telling me about a phone

meeting, 5 weeks away.Desired Settlement: refund of all payments made to Davison in connection with this specific Agreement

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 about03/14/2015. Please note that Ms. [redacted] has been refunded her payment in full. A copyof the refund receipt is attached hereto.In light of the refund, I kindly ask that her complaint be closed as “resolved”.Since ly,[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.EnclosureDavison

Review: the davison company 5800 and did nt fulfill there dodilagents they sent my inevention [redacted] they do not deal in marine product I call them they say they never heard of them they laid about all of it I want my retirement money back,they said they would send it maultpal companys they laid . you can call me for more details I cant sorry . I even sent them a proto type they didn't even take it out of the plastic, they did send it back I had to scream at them it worked they got sick of me call and demanding my money back.Desired Settlement: 5800.00

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. Chris

[redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 09/19/20 14.

Contrary to Mr. [redacted]’s allegation that Davison did not fulfill its obligations, as will be

detailed, we provided our services with Mr. [redacted]’s express written approval and

authorization, and to his documented satisfaction. In fact, Davison has gone beyond its

contractual obligations in providing its services.

We understand that customer service is vital in all businesses and is imperative when

operating a successful business. 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, through the research and development of a new product idea, to the presentation of a

client’s 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.

Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularly when

their product ideas are not licensed. That appears to be the simple truth with Mr. [redacted].

A brief summary of the services provided to Mr. [redacted], and his documented approval,

authorizations, and stated satisfaction follows;

1. 01 22 2012 Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison with a new product idea and

he signed a disclosure of Davison’s historical statistics regarding the product

development process and the securing of license agreements.

2. 02 2012 He entered an agreement for research services which were

performed and provided to him.

3. 11/042012 - He entered an agreement for the design and creation of an

integrated product rendering and presentation materials.

4. 01/21/2013 - He approved the design and completed a questionnaire about

the design giving positive feedback.

5. Based upon his approval, the presentation materials were finalized and an

Executive Briefing was submitted to him.

6. 02/08/2013 - He approved, in writing, the presentation and completed yet

another questionnaire about the Executive Briefing, providing positive

feedback.

7. 04/23/20 13 - the presentation was made; unfortunately the corporation chose not

to license his idea.

8. Mr. [redacted] provided three corporations that he wanted Davison to contact

to make a presentation of his product idea. Though not contractually obligated,

and at no cost to Mr. [redacted], Davison contacted these companies.

Unfortunately none were willing to review his presentation.

9. Mr. [redacted] requestedthe return of his prototype that he had submitted to

Davison. Again, though our contracts explicitly indicate the Davison has no

obligation to retain or return any material submitted to it by our clients, the

prototype was returned at no cost to Mr. [redacted].

Copies of the referenced documents are enclosed (note the actual approved design has

been redacted for confidentiality purposes).

In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] alleges the company to which his idea was presented

was inappropriate, as it does not deal with marine or aquatic products. He is mistaken. Initially,

he was provided the identity of the corporation well in advance of the creation of the presentation

material and before the actual presentation. If he had an issue with the selected company, he

could have, but did not, raise any concern. It is only after the fact that he is attempting to

manufacture an issue. The targeted company was [redacted]. It is apparent that Mr.

[redacted] has confused this company with the [redacted]. [redacted]

Products is in the marine industry and was an appropriate company for his product idea. A copy

of their website is enclosed.

As stated, the design of the presentation material, and presentation of Mr. [redacted]’s

product idea have been performed with his express written approval and authorization, and to his

documented satisfaction. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered. The simple

fact is; the product development process provides no guarantees 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 financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that were

provided.

Despite the fact that Davison has already gone above and beyond its contractual

obligation in providing services to Mr. [redacted], in the interest of customer satisfaction, we

will offer two additional presentations at no cost to him. The additional services anticipate Mr.

[redacted]’s cooperation in providing the prototype in the event a corporation makes a request

for it. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contact our Licensing Department who will

proceed with the necessary paperwork.

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

they didn't go above and beond, they would not return any of my phone calls not even the president of the company I made calls the other companys they never heard of the dsavison company I new right there this was a take the money and run company ,that was my retirement money ,in the contract I have it state maltupale companys ,in the beginning [redacted] demanded money other wise some one elsa would take .the companys track record shows they sould be out of bussness.please help me get my money back thank you

Review: I paid Davison the sum of $695.00 to help me develop a product. Before I paid this sum of money I discussed it one of his agents and clealy stated asked if I paid this money would months down the road would they request Thousands of dollars that I did not have. [redacted] Hunter assured me that this would not be the case and I would at least get a product sample. I had telephone conferences with Davison and his teams for at leat three months every tuesday and thrusdays, I sent many designs and descriptions of my idea this started in September 24, 2008 and continued through January 2009. I was advised that I could not take my idea to anyone else I would be sued, and around March [redacted] asked me for $14,845.00, that I did not have. By December 2010 Conair my product and even the descriptions that I gave Davison was on the packaging. I gave him three to 4 different designed and I have seen them all on TV and on the internet and none was developed prior to the brainstorming sessions I have with Davison. Every year I contact this company, [redacted] no longer work there. They took advantage of me and I know my product has been developed and I want to know who is getting the profit, it's sadDesired Settlement: I want my royalities, at least 85% of whatever he has made. He could get half of his cost for developing or selling the Idea.

Business

Response:

Ms. [redacted]’s complaint is contradicted by her communications with the company. On September 19, 2008, five years ago, Ms. [redacted] emailed the company the following:

"I wanted to touch base with you again, my lawyer contacting me again and advised me to apply for a patent independently, by using a patent attorney that could perform my patent research. He said he did some digging. He said the Revdex.com in the State of PA. said that Davison's business practices are unsatisfactory and that I would be looking to spend 10,000 by phase two of my idea. Thus, when Ms. [redacted] entered into a contract with Davison five days later, she did so with full knowledge, and legal counsel’s advice, concerning the future costs of her project. Davison has not licensed any idea that Ms. [redacted] disclosed to the company. The company has kept all information from her in strict confidence."

Thus, no royalties have been generated and none can be provided to her. As a final note, her assertion that she was told that she would be sued if she took her product to another company is rank fabrication.

The contract with Davison expressly permitted her to take her idea to others for development. Her only “exclusive” obligation with Davison was to share a portion of royalties, if Davison was able to license her product idea.

Regards,

[redacted]. [redacted]

General Counsel

LEGAL DEPARTMENT

Review: I inform the company to immediately terminate the agreement and relationship between myself and the company davison reason being this company has not done anything they promise to do for me and some of the other clients I no of personally. I decided to discontinue this agreement with and to walk away with no one hard or harmed, but they are trying to hold me still in an agreement for 15 days, but refusing to refund my 1.800 dollars back. I feel this company played a serious roll of negligence and a serious of scam also the people that I also know of.Desired Settlement: All I ask of this company is to refund my 1.800 dollars back so we can move on with our life.

Business

Response:

See attached File

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 07/31/2013. Mr. [redacted] alleges Davison “has not done anything they promise...”, alleges Davison is “trying to hold me still in an agreement for 15 days”, and demands a refund. As will be detailed below, Mr. [redacted] entered into two service contracts; the first was performed to his documented satisfaction and the term on the second has not begun, thus services are not due to be performed. Davison has no knowledge of any 15 day period that Mr. [redacted] may be referencing, and there is no basis for a refund, as the revocation period on the second contract has expired as of 03/21/2012, more than a year ago. Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison in December of 2011. As with all potential clients, he was provided two disclosure forms, in a printable and savable format, and he acknowledged that he received and read the disclosures. These disclosures outline, among other details, all services and related fees offered by Davison. Mr. [redacted] entered into the initial Pre-Development Agreement for custom research services on 01/12/2012. These services were performed and Mr. [redacted] completed a questionnaire about the research portfolio in which he provided positive feedback. A copy of his signed questionnaire is enclosed. Following completion of the initial services, Mr. [redacted] entered into a second contract for the design and construction of a product sample and the preparation of presentation materials. This second contract was entered on 03/12/2012. Mr. [redacted] made a partial payment toward this contract fee. The contract provided a seven (7) day revocation period during which the contract could be terminated and Mr. [redacted] could receive a refund. He did not invoke this provision. Services under this contract are not due to be performed until full payment of the fee has been received. To date, Mr. [redacted] has made no payments other than the initial nominal payment in April 2012. His current notice of cancellation, received more that a year later, is ineffective to warrant a refund pursuant the revocation provision. As stated, Davison is unaware of any 15 day period which Mr. [redacted] references in his complaint. His project will be closed, though there is no basis to warrant a refund.

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I submitted an idea to this company in 2015. They were to research my prototype for its' marketability. After a few months they informed me that they found a potential company interested in my product. The company forwarded to me the name of EURO/Pros Paris. a company that has nothing to do with my invention. I informed them that if they couldn't find a more appropriate venue that I want the prototype returned to me.

I had no intention of investing over $12,000 to have them produce a product to present to a company that mainly deals with all sorts of winter specialties. That would include shovels, sleds and snow blowers.

I have sent them e-mail and certified letters requesting my items back but to date, since the end of 2015, they have ignored my request. Every so often they keep sending me e-mails stating that I should not lose the momentum of having my product out in the market.

I have filed a complaint against them to the Federal Trade Commission and was only given a complaint number with the promise that when they accumulate enough complaints then they would act on my behalf.Desired Settlement: I want my two prototypes returned to me ASAP. I have NO desire to deal with them any longer. I paid/designed/made my prototypes, it is NOT Their property.

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 03/05/20 16. Davisonunderstands that customer service is vital in all businesses and is imperative when operating asuccessful business. Customer concerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initialcontact, through the research and development of a new product idea, to the presentation of aclient’s idea, they try to maintain an open channel of communication, disclosing our services andfees upfront and securing the clients’ approval and authorization throughout the process.Ms. [redacted] submitted an idea for a new product, and entered the initial Pre-Development(PD) agreement. Those services were performed and additional services were offered. She hasdeclined those additional services. The concerns raised in Ms. [redacted]’s complaint demonstrate amisunderstanding on her behalf of the services provided by Davison. As will be detailed, thismisunderstanding is not due to a lack of disclosure.Initially, she alleges the pre-development services for which she contracted “were toresearch my prototype for its’ marketability.” This is incorrect. Ms. [redacted] was apprised onmultiple occasions, BEFORE any contract was entered, that Davison does not evaluate ideassubmitted to it. Specifically, when she submitted her idea, she was provided with, andacknowledged that she received and read, two disclosures. Following her acknowledgment of thedisclosures she entered the PD agreement which is simply written with no “fine print” provisions.The disclosures and contract contain the following statements;1. Inventor Information Disclosure: “Davison does not offer evaluations of idea submissions forcommercial potential...”2. Affirmative Disclosure Statement: “Davison does not provide evaluation of commercialpotential;”3. Confidentiality submission document; “Davison does not evaluate product ideas and does notrepresent that any idea will be licensed, patented or profitable.”4. Pre-Development and Representation agreement, section lll.D.: “Client acknowledges thatDavison has made no claim or warranty that Davison will be able to consummate a LicenseAgreement, or find a Licensee willing to compensate Client for his or her product andlordesign. 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 for Client.Davison has not evaluated the Product;To the extent Ms. [redacted] believes her idea was researched for “marketability” she is mistaken,through no fault of Davison.Second, she alleges that Davison had “found a potential company interested in myproduct.” To the extent this statement implies Davison had disclosed her product idea to theselected corporation, she is mistaken. When she submitted her idea, she did so by entering aConfidentially Agreement. Under the express terms of the Agreement; “Davison will not use,disclose, license or sell this idea with out my [Ms. [redacted]] express written permission.” Davisontakes the obligation of confidentiality seriously, and abides by the terms of the Agreement. Whena corporation is selected and identified to a client, there is no product sample or presentationmaterial created as yet, and no authorization has been secured from the client to disclose theiridea. As such, the designated company can not express interest in a specific product that has notyet been presented to them. The letter identifiing the corporation contains the statement;“Davison has not provided to it [the selected corporation] any information concerning your ideaat this stage.” Again, to the extent Ms. [redacted] believes the targeted corporation had expressed aninterest in her specific product, she is mistaken, through no fault of Davison. Further, she allegesthe selected company was inappropriate as it sells products dissimilar to her idea. Again, she ismistaken. The selected company has a wide ranging product line which does include the productslisted in her complaint. However, her list is not an all inclusive list. The company also produceskitchen and houseware products, which is appropriate for Ms. [redacted]’s product idea.Finally, Ms. [redacted] raises a concern over the return of her prototype material. Again, shewas informed on multiple occasions that Davison has no obligation to retain or return anymaterial provided to it by its Clients. Ms. [redacted] submitted her idea by entering a ConfidentialityAgreement. The Agreement expressly states; “1 [Ms. [redacted]] will not send Davison materials orprototypes that I want returned because Davison will not return any materials submitted to it byme concerning my idea.” Further, the PD agreement which she entered contains the followingprovision; “E. Client Materials. Davison is not responsible for the loss, maintenance or return ofprototypes, drawings or any other materials submitted by Client to Davison.” It is not reasonableto require Davison to serve as a permanent repository of any item any person decides to send.That is the express reason the above language is part of the Confidentiality Agreement and part ofthe service contracts.Despite having no contractual obligation, Davison will attempt to locate her prototypeand, if it is located, will make arrangements for its return.