Davison Design & Development, Inc.

Review: I contacted [redacted]son to see about getting my invention idea to market. I paid $100 towards the project and then wanted more information on the company and to ensure that they could perform the service. I requested to be shown proof of an invention similar to mine as the inventions I was being shown were totally different. When I emailed the questions to my rep, [redacted], the email bounced. I emailed again and it bounced again. I called and left a voice message but didn't receive a response until 8 days later from Jason Michalski advising he was [redacted]'s manager. I advised him of the above and he said that my emails didn't return undeliverable and that all emails were forwarded. I requested Jasons email and sent him the bounced messages I had received. That was on October 10th & I haven't heard one word from Davison; today's date is October 21st!!! I want my $100 refunded to my card NOW and all information obtained regarding my invention forwarded to me by mail; DO NOT KEEP A COPY OF ANYTHING.I don't need any attempts to discuss this as there has been no communication thus far. Give me my money back and stop doing business. I was sent videos by [redacted] WITH DAVISON where clients weren't receiving what they requested and then the product was submitted to potential licensees who asked for the very thing that the inventor requested on their product but [redacted]son didn't include. I URGE EVERYONE TO AVOID DAVISON!!! I decided to give them a shot in error and I regret that I didn't back off when I started reading all of the negative reviews. Call myself reviewing Davison for myself but I should've listened!!Desired Settlement: I want my entire $100 paid refunded immediately and all information regarding my invention mailed to 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 10/21/2013. As Ms. [redacted] notes in her complaint, she entered into a contract for services and made an initial partial payment. The contract provided a three (3) day revocation period which she did not invoke. Our records indicate multiple attempts to contact Ms. [redacted] following her initial payment, the attempts were unsuccessful. When contact was made, she terminated her relationship with Davison. The contract does not provide for a refund of payments for cancellation made beyond the stated revocation period. However, Davison has no interest in retaining fees for services which will not be performed. Accordingly, her payment has been refunded in full. Enclosed, please find a copy of the refund receipt. It should be noted that the credit card used to make payment, and thus the card to which the refund was processed, was issued in the name of [redacted]. As for Ms. [redacted]’s request for the return of materials submitted to Davison, our records indicate all information received from her was electronic in nature. As such, there are no materials to be retuned. Her file will be closed and she will be placed on our “Do Not Contact” list. Sincerely Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I am writing you this letter regarding a dispute of $695.00 which needs to be returned

to my [redacted] account, because it has been taken without merit.

On or about Iebruary 4th, 2014, [redacted] called me regarding, advertising my

patent, “[redacted]” in various plant stores for $695.00 for a 10% royalty. I agreed

to that but later without advertising my invention in any plant stores he sent me a form

asking me for thousands of dollars to pursue my patent. I informed him right away that I had

a non-Provisional Patent pending and this was not our agreement and I asked him to please

return my money right away back to my [redacted] account. He has refused.Desired Settlement: This is the reason that I am writing to you.

There is no record that he has advertised my invention in any plant

store and this was our verbal agreement and since he had not done any of this, please return my money to me.

Business

Response:

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

[redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 10/07/20 14. At the

outset, Ms. [redacted] alleges she hired Davison to “advertise my [product]... in various plant

stores”. Davison does not “advertise” our clients’ 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. There is no basis for a refund.

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.

Following her acknowledgment of the disclosures, on 05/08/20 14, 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 05/29/20 14.

The Pre-Development Agreement states in relevant part;

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

packaging 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 at all. However, materials obtained elsewhere or

made by Client are subject to Davison’s approval prior to submission to a Licensee by Davison. If

Davison does not approve the materials made by Client or obtained elsewhere by Client, and

Client is unwilling to make such changes to the materials as required by Davison, or if Client does

not make or obtain presentation materials and a sample acceptable to Davison, this Agreement will

be terminated without refund of any amount paid by Client.

Agreement, on 06/11 2014 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. She has declined this service, which is her prerogative.

Davison has attempted to work with Ms. [redacted] to address her concerns. She has spoken

with the product director in charge of her project, as well as with a representative of our Office of

the President. In both situations Ms. [redacted] had become verbally abusive. I spoke with Ms.

[redacted], and her bank representative, earlier today. Ms. [redacted] acknowledged that she has not

provided a physical product sample to Davison, as required by the contract. She continually

referenced a “verbal agreement” which is not supported by Davison’s practice or the terms of the

written contract. Davison is willing to complete its representation service and present her product

idea to the identified target corporation. However, this is contingent upon receipt of a product

sample, packaging and presentation material acceptable to Davison. Ms. [redacted] has not provided

these items and has not engaged Davison’s services for the creation of these items. If she

provides these items, in an acceptable format, we can proceed. If she can provide some of the

items, then the additional services offered can be modified to account for the items she will have

provided.

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.

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

First of all, I advertised, on the internet that I was seeking a U.S. Manufacturer and

Marketer; one in which would advertise my “PottedPlant Holder” invention in various stores

such as Lowes or the likes. He said yes “Spring Your Idea Into Action”. This was said on April

28, 2014. I also asked [redacted] if he wanted to advertise my “[redacted]s in

these stores, and what was the precentage cost that he would charge for advertising on my

behalf?” He said, $695.00 and 10% Royalty fee. HE answered my advertisement thru my

computer and so did others and he asked me to contact him by phone. Before then, I had

never heard of him or his company. So he should stop pretending memory loss.

Enclosed is a copy of the connversation that was sent to Davison by computer on April

28, 2014, and now he says that he does not “advertise”. Then, Why would I talk about

advertising? See, my message to him, enclosed on a separate sheet. Shortly thereafter,

Davison asked me to send him $695,00. I sent him $695,00 thru my Credit Card. Weeks

passed by and then I became suspicious, not hearing from him after he received my money

and I called him and that is when he sent me a additional papers later, seeking more money.

(Enclosed). He did not send me the papers that he is mentioning BEFORE I sent him the

mnnnw H~ cant mA nthor innnrc AP~FR ran;znctnt~ mu mnn~u k~ rAt,,rnn,~ tn m~ thrn,,uh mu

— _,——.———...————.~.—&...⇄ />
HSDC Dank because he had not attemped, to market or advertise my invention as said. He

1

certainly told me that he would ADVERTISE my invention in stores, BUT NOW HE IS

RETRACTING THIS. Hetold methis by phone, also. Please read my computer message to him.

(Enclosed). Unfortunately I didnot record ourphone conversation.

In the next paragraph, I am speaking of what I was so-called obligated to send to

him, and it was not a physical patent sample, because we were initially brainstorming on the

phone, and this was NEVER MENTIONED in the phone conversation.

Also, you will note in the document in which I signed and sent him the money, it

clearly states in DOCUMENT #2, Davison’s Obligations; Paragraph Three.

“Typically, presentation first involve emailed or MAILED

DESIGN IMAGES and communication is conducted

primarily via telephone. A SAMPLE IS SHIPPED ONLY

UPON REQUEST OF A LICENSEE. UNLESS A LICENSEE

PROPOSES A LICENSE AGREEMENT OR WANT TO DISCUSS

POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE PRODUCt.”, ETC. We had not EVEN gotten to this

stage in which I was requestling a License Agreement. I only wanted my product advertised in

Plant Stores and for him to inform me of the stores or give me some sort of feed back for my

money that I had sent But the only feedback that he sent was asking me for more money, of

which I was not willing to engage.

PART B. #1. AND #2. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY UPON RECEIPT.

I mailed him design images at the time that I sent him the money and a website for

his use. I also advised him that I had an attorney appealing my non-provisional patent of

which another attorney advised me to hire since he was retiring. However, the question is,

what did Davison do on my behalf all those weeks that he had my money. The answer is

NOTHING. Which caused me to ask for the return of my money. There is nothing that this

company can concretely tell me what they did on my behalf but take my money, and refuse to

send it back to my bank. This is quite disturbing.

My, Bank [redacted] made awful mistakes also, by returning my money back to your

company without my input, but this is some what another matter that I will deal with later.

Also, if you were only brainstorming, as was said, why would you ask for a physical

product sample? This was never the issue when we were communicating by phone.

Davison, if you did the right-thing,-you would return my-$695,00 back to my account.

I certainly believe that you have done this to other clients, because you have gotten quite

good at distorting-the-facts-and conversations. No I would never go into business with your

company, and YOU have NO BASIS for keeping my money. l am a retired Senior Citizen with

a fixed income, so why would you Davison want to keep my $695.00 dollars. l do hope that

your company is not doing that bad. I have a lot of friends on Face Book and I want to let

them and others know about you. I will continue with my invention, but no thanks to you,

Review: I was informed by Director of New Products that the cost would be over $800. I let him know I was two months behind on my mortgage (soon to foreclose) and had bills piling up. He offered a 10% discount to bring the total down to $795. Since I was behind on bills I got reassurance that would be it for charges.I made an initial payment of $25 on August 30 to "lock in" that rate. I had to pay or the rate would have gone up, according to the rep on the phone. On November 12 I made a second payment of $125. On November 22 I was going to make a third payment, but decided not to after reading a few things.When I Googled "Davison" to get to the website I saw a lot of complaint websites below. I decided to read them over and found out a lot of information. Most the complaints had a common theme saying the cost will be from "$8,000" and I read one persons complaint saying he was gong to be charged over "$15,000." There is no way I would have proceeded with the process if I knew it would cost over $8k.On November 22 I wrote to the rep saying, "I've decided to put my idea to rest" and explained to him what I found. His reply on the same day was "we need to have a quick call." I wrote back and said I would rather communicate via email now that I can. I have not heard from him since.Desired Settlement: In fairness, I would like $300 to settle this. The rep knew I had no internet, tv, and was way behind on bills. Unfortunately, he had to follow script and make the sale. I've had to drive 15 miles (one way) on numerous occasions to check my Davison account and emails from Davison.

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, which is twice the amount that he paid to Davison. When Mr. [redacted] submitted his idea to Davison, he was informed in writing of the company’s typical contracts and prices. This document informed him how much development could cost and the typical contracts offered to customers. All prospective clients receive this information prior to contracting with Davison. The company has a record of Mr. [redacted]’s electronic acknowledgment of the receipt of the information. Moreover, the contract that Mr. [redacted] signed gave him three business days to cancel the contract and receive a full refund. His demand for a refund was not made until three months after he signed the contract. His untimely demand to cancel the contract and to refund to him twice what he paid down is unreasonable.

Regards,

General Counsel

Consumer

Response:

Davison says that the document informed me of how much development could cost. This is a false statement.

II-B says "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"

Nothing here says it could cost thousands, all it says is "fee." I had to find out on my own it could cost $8k or more. Filing this complaint more than three months after initial contact is irrelevant. I would have found out this information down the road anyway, which would have cost Davison a larger reimbursement.

I feel manipulated after informing [redacted] (Director of New Products) of my situation. After he knew I was behind on my mortgage, didn't have internet, or tv, he withheld information to make the sale. I let him know that I had to use my Moms computer in another town.

Lastly, I'm not filing this complaint because of my "situation." My mortgage is caught up and I'm writing this from Wi-Fi in my home. I have the money to pay the remaining upfront costs in full. I'm choosing not to because of the outrageous future costs that was not mentioned to me verbally or in the agreement.

Regards,

Business

Response:

This is a response to the supplemental submission of Mr. [redacted]. The company ?? believes that he misunderstood Davison’s original response and, hopefully, this letter will clarify the company’s position. When Davison responded that Mr. [redacted] was informed in writing of the company’s typical contracts and fees, it was referring to the disclosure document that was provided to Mr. [redacted] as part of the online process through which he submitted his product idea. A copy of that disclosure document is enclosed. Please note that it informed him that it was Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea and that the typical second phase fee ranged between $8,000 and $15,000. All prospective clients receive this information prior to contracting with Davison. The company has a record of Mr. [redacted]’s electronic acknowledgment of the receipt of the information. The language that he quotes is from the contract with Davison, which he received after being informed of the range of costs for all of Davison’s typical contracts. His untimely demand to cancel the contract and to refund to him twice what he paid down is simply unreasonable. Regards, [redacted] General Counsel Enclosures LEGAL DEPARTMENT

Review: I was contacted by Davison to development a product. I was sent information and was told the research and development would cost $795. I made installment payments until it was paid then Ryan M[redacted] of Davison told me that I would need to pay an additional $8740 for additional research and work I assume. I contacted Ryan to let him know that I could not afford that payment without a guarantee that my product will be on the market and he suggested I send in at least $5 a month until it is all paid. After some thought I just did not want to wait that long to see if my product will market so I contacted Ryan and requested a refund and he laughed and said they have already done all the work. I then emailed Ryan at m[redacted].[redacted] with no response back. He stop accepting my phone calls.Desired Settlement: My $795 back

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 01/18 2016.Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them socommunication errors are kept to a minimu** From the time of an initial contact andthroughout our process, we maintain an open channel of communication, disclosing ourservices and fees upfront and securing our clients’ approval and authorization throughoutthe process. Our contracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is notpossible to be more upfront with our clients about our services and fees. As will bedetailed below, Ms. [redacted] received the services for which she paid in full and wasprovided, on multiple occasions, explicit, clear disclosures of the relevant fees for furtherdevelopment of her project.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 received andread 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 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 our services.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].The Pre-Development Agreement states in relevant part (emphasis added);“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaininga product sample, packaging and relevant information about the product ina 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 creatingthe sample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is a[redacted]that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain the**”Consistent with the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement and the disclosuresprovided to Ms. [redacted], Davison offered additional services for the development of herproject. Apparently satisfied with services provided under the Pre-DevelopmentAgreement, Ms. [redacted] entered into a second contract, the New Product SampleAgreement, for the design and construction of a product sample. This contract provided aseven day revocation period which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She selected a paymentoption and has made a partial payment toward the fee. The contract provides that noservices are due until full payment has been received. Davison is willing to proceedunder the terms of the contract; however there is no basis for a refund if the contract iscancelled after expiration of the revocation period.Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refund, Davison has nointerest in retaining fees for services that will not be performed. Davison will agree towaive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund 8000 of the monies paid toward theNew 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 toaccept this offer, she need simply contact our legal department and the paperwork will beforwarded to her attention.Sincerely,David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosure

Consumer

Response:

I do not agree with this statement because it is not true. Ryan has not provided me with any proof of this pre -development phase and I do not know what it is. I have asked Ryan many times if I had to pay any additional fees and he said no. The only information I got from ryan were emails of similar products that made it look as though my product was not worth it. I have NEVER talked to or came in contact with David ** D[redacted], the person who wrote the previous statement, and Ryan kept telling me that there was a need for my product for about 2 weeks until he just stop calling but provided me with no proof. I asked him 3 times for refund and all he said was well there is a need and we did some of the work. I would at least accept $600 back.

Regards,

Review: Mike B[redacted] (MB) with Davison Design (DD) originally called me ask what caused me to no proceed with the 2008 development I shared with you because of the financial burden of the project, you said not to worry about that, since I last talked to the past representative things had change and the Davison had developed a way to absorb cost by increasing the amount for development, but I just need to do the pre-development stage to get to that point.

I asked for total cost of services and you assured me that Davison would be able to be able to make adjustments from the current 10% Davison, 90 % royalties to cover cost of addition cost for the development of the idea. I requested that in writing however, however I was told that he was not able to do emails, which was before I received the contract. I was left with the belief that the project would be fully funded after the pre-development which lured me to make a quick decision to move forward with payment of $745 for my idea of INTER-LOCK CHANGEABLE HEEL pre-development of my ideas. I was so impressed with this opportunity that decided to include a second idea, and [redacted] make it very clear that I was not going to be investing any additional funds toward the two ideas. However now almost a month into the project I was just informed that it would take between $1115- $2000 for each idea to complete the development stage of the ideas. MB was well aware that it was not in my plans to invest additional funds toward the ideas, based my reason to move forward on pre-development of his original statement of the ability to absorb any additional fee in the royalties of the ideas as he stated when he lured me into moving forward with pre-development of each of the ideas.

After getting and reviewing the paper on Friday, I notice that it appeared to be a template and all the information was basically the same so I wanted to try to speak with you before going to work on Monday. I called MB, got voice mail, I wanted to find out if you were in the office so I made several call back to see if an operator would answer because on other occasions when I called there was an operator, which I expected since it was after 10 am your time. Finally MB called me back upset that I had called numerous times, that my project wasn't the only one you work on, and that you were in a meeting. I stated that it did concern me because my son had just told me to be careful because of scams and I certainly didn't want him to think that. MB became raged and very defensive at the thought of it being stated that it was thought to be a possible scam, so we agreed to talk at 1pm later that day. This concern me because I didn't understand being in the business as such why the defense so, when I knew that couldn't have been the first time that statement had been used.

I shared with MB that my decision to do business with DD was based on the fact that the logo of Revdex.com (Revdex.com) was on your website, however the Online Better Business (OBB) and had nothing to do with Revdex.com. OBB stated there were no complaints while Revdex.com indicated over 200, making that a fraudulent account of your business practices for DD. Failure of disclose information about its business practice during the past five years. Therefore resulting in misleading statement being made to lure me into a contract agreement regarding

We were scheduled to review the review and discuss the results of the pre-development during this time set aside due to time differences. However MD spent 50 minutes of our reserved hour trying to defend the reason for the complaints against DD and when I told him if there would be a problem with getting my money refunded MB told me that I would not be able to get my money back, the project was in the second phase of the pre-development process. I stated to MB that I paid for the pre-development for each idea and if he wasn’t going to provide a refund, pre-development then MB needed to be completed and everything agreed upon in the contract for pre-development because I was not going to be paying any additional money toward development of both ideas submitted.

However MD stated that he did not want to continue on the project because he felt it was no longer feeling the desire and excitement to continue working on each of the idea because it was not worth his while. Failure to totally represent my ideas to the best of MB ability has been expressed as being totally impossible, a violation of the contract agreement.

MB then stated that, he didn’t want to continue working on the project to complete the pre-development. He stated in order to complete the second phrase that we needed to discuss the results of the patent search and materials for development, however he didn’t have time to go over that information with me other than his time of 8am to 5pm his time, which is 4am to 1pm my time. He stated that either I could talk with him before work only, however when the time agreed to communicate was 1pm Alaska time, 5pm MB time, however I contact DD and their working hours are 8am-6p**MD stated he had to pick up his child and could not communicate with me at the established time any longer.

I made the suggestion that someone else take over the project since he didn’t feel that he could complete the process, MB stated that was not possible. I made the suggestion that we communicate via email, in order to avoid miscommunication such as expectations regarding the agreement, MB stated that was not possible, he would not be able to communicate with me in writing via email.

Result of this is that the Patent Review, Corporate Review, Production Planning Sessions, Portfolio will not be able to be completed as agreed upon in the contract agreement for both ideas. Therefore making the contracts agreement between Davison Design and [redacted] for pre-development of [redacted] and [redacted] null and void and released of all obligation contained within the agreements.

Damages sought is full refunds for contract agreements in the amount of $745 for Pre-Development of the [redacted], and Pre-Development fees for $745 for [redacted], totally $1490 immediately from Davison Designs. (See Exhibit A).

Please see attached documents regarding this violation of information regarding of information that was not disclosed before signing of the contract agreement of both ideas.Desired Settlement: Damages sought is full refunds for contract agreements in the amount of $745 for Pre-Development of the [redacted], and Pre-Development fees for $745 for [redacted], totally $1490 immediately from Davison Designs

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 08/03/2015. Customerconcerns upset everyone and Davison’s staff works very hard to troubleshoot them socommunication errors are kept to a minimu** From the time of an initial contact and throughoutthe process, Davison maintains an open channel of communication, disclosing its services andfees upfront and securing its clients’ approval and authorization throughout the process. Thecontracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is not possible to be more upfrontwith their clients about the services and fees. Ms. [redacted]’s contention that she was notinformed of the various fees simply ignores the disclosures she acknowledged having read, andignores the clear terms of the contract that she entered. Davison provided its services per theterms of the contract. Davison offered additional development services which Ms. [redacted] hasdeclined. There is no basis for a refund for services rendered.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 submitan idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format,and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. On 08/28/2008, Ms. [redacted]acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she received and read the two disclosurestatements. Enclosed, please find a copy of the disclosure detailing the services and fees as it waspresented to Ms. [redacted] in 2008. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFOREthe 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 connectionwith a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing the various services and relatedfees.Following her acknowledgment of the disclosures, Ms. [redacted] entered into twoseparate agreements for Pre-Development services which obligated Davison to compile researchdata related to her product ideas. Davison completed the Pre-Development services andforwarded the compiled research, for both submitted ideas, to Ms. [redacted] on 07/21/2015. ThePortfolios were shipped via the United States Postal Service, tracking # ’s9114999944314481050971 and 9114999944314481050551, and delivered on 08/06/2015.Enclosed, please find a copy of the delivery confirmations from the Postal Service.Subsequently, Davison offered additional services, under a separate contract, which Ms. [redacted]has declined.The Pre-Development Agreements, which Ms. [redacted] entered, state in relevant part(emphasis added);“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample,packaging and relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to aLicensee, at Client's sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further developmentservices, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the sample andpresentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materialselsewhere or not to obtain the**”The Agreements, in conjunction with the disclosures, are clear that additional developmentservices would be offered under a separate contract. To the extent Ms. [redacted] was unaware ofthis fact; it is not due to a lack of disclosure by Davison.Also, Ms. [redacted] alleges misrepresentation on Davison’s behalf for citing, on itswebsite, its membership with the Online Business Bureau. This allegation is purely withoutmerit, and is clearly an attempt to falsely bolster her unsubstantiated complaint. Simply put,Davison is a member in good standing with the Online Business Bureau. The inclusion of theOnline Business Bureau’s logo on the website is authorized by Davison’s status with thatorganization.Finally, Ms. [redacted]’s complaint details her position of demanding that allcommunication be in writing. Setting aside the practical complications that such a policy wouldinvolve, it is curious that she takes this position given her apparent disregard for the writtendocuments relevant to her project. She was provided written disclosures of Davison’s fees andservices before entering any contract, and she acknowledged having received and read thesedisclosures. She entered into written contracts with clear, simple language and no “fine print”provisions. Yet in her complaint she simply chooses to ignore such written documentation.As stated, Ms. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offeredby Davison, BEFORE she entered into any contract. The services for which there existed acontract have been performed. No additional contracts have been entered and no additionalpayments have been received. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered.Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosures

Consumer

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by myself Ms. [redacted] againstDAVISON Design and Development, Inc. (DAVISON) on or about 08/03/2015. In order to address eachparagraph, I have numbered the original documents via paragraphs, 1-7, my response and attachmentsare Pl-7=Paragraphs, related for clarification.As a customer with concerns I found it very difficult to get straight answers to my questions socommunication errors were kept to a minimum, (See attachments PI- A4, A9, B3, B5, B6- Dl, D2)referring further discussion on our conversation regarding the use of royalties to completed thedevelopment part of the ideas with Mike B with DAVISON stated then retracted that we had thatconversation. However it is mentioned in our first communication with the agreement of both ideas aswell as other agreements noted with the attachments indicated above, therefore making DAVISON inviolation of please note all information is in chorological order by date of events. From the time of aninitial contact and throughout the process, DAVISON representative, Mike B was very misleading,deceptive and illusory, making it very difficult to maintain an open channel of communication, regardingdisclosures of services and fees upfront when securing my approval and authorization. The Pre-Development was introduced then mention of stage two, Development. However the focus by Mike Bbecame just focus on the Pre-Development and he wouldn't address questions asked regarding theDevelopment stage, mainly because I did not want to find myself getting deep into debt regarding theproject after finding out there would be additional cost attached, since Mike B refused to put ourconversation in writing for clarification which was confirmed via the DAVISON office as something theypreferred. (See attachment P1-B6, P3-A6, A7, A8, A9, and A10).Although contracts were simply written, it appeared that Mike w/DAVISON had difficulty followingprovisions of the contract, (See attachment PI- Dl, D2) because only the patent search was slightlydiscussed however none of the other parts of the development were discussed, therefore I had no inputin the final product regarding both of my ideas submitted and paid for. This was a violation of thecontract agreement. It was stated the projects where completed during my last conversation with MikeB, he stated that the project could not be completed until we spoke to have my desired input for thefinal project. Mike B stated he was not interested in presuming the ideas any further and that he wasdone he was done. 1 shared with him that I had paid for the research and development of the Pre-Development and Mike B stated that would no longer be available for the time we had agreed on due tothe time differences because he had to pick his child up from daycare. I asked if there was someone elsethat could take over, and that request was denied. It was at that point I was contacted and told by Mikethat he had some possible option for manufactures. I requested that the information be emailed to mebecause it was obvious that Mike was no longer interested in working on the projects which he hadbeen paid to do.Regarding the contact of 2008 (See attachments P2- Al, A2,) there was no contract, but another followup from DAVISON in March 2011. At that point I inquired about the information being referred to in theemail because it was just a free inquiry as stated on the website for DAVISON. The information includedin the response letter from DAVISON Attorney from American Inventor's Protection Act of 1999 I hadnever seen, there was not reason because the conversation never went that far. Had I had thatinformation I would not have submitted information on American Inventor's Protection Act of 1999when I submitted documents to Mike B earlier requesting a refund for failure to disclose theinformation. I also found it interesting that Mike B submitted (Attachment P2-A3,A4,) via email on8/3/15, after the final portfolio was mailed to me, information I should have had prior to signing thecontract agreement according to the American Inventor's Protection Act of 1999 (See attachment P2-A6, A7).My contention is that I was not properly informed about the next stage of Development stage, (Seeattachments PI- A4, A9, B3, B5, B6- Dl, D2) which Mike B indicated was the new change with DAVISONto help get the idea to the Development stage after completing the Pre-Development stage. At no timewere fees for the Development stage. Mike only wanted to talk about the Pre-development stage,stating it all takes time and to be patient. I did not ignore the disclosures regarding the Pre-Development which I acknowledged having read, nor did I ignore the clear terms of the contractsregarding Pre-Development, however it appears that Mike B felt that the terms of the contract onlyapplied to me when he stated that he no longer wanted to finish the Pre-Development stage inaccordance to the contract agreement with was binding to both of us. Once I questioned (AttachmentsP3- C3, C4, and C5) after reviewing the Pre-Development Services 1. Product Related Data (AttachmentP3-A1, A2,) I shared with Mike B that I was not interesting investing any additional money, which Ishared with Mike B from the very beginning, he made it clear that he was not interested in completingthe additional steps required to create the final Portfolio, which required my input. Mike B contactedme stating he had a interested manufacture he wanted to discuss, however we had not done therequired communication needed before that stage of the Pre-Development so I was not comfortablewith having a verbal conversation with him until he wanted to schedule a time to discuss the additionalinformation required from me before submitting to a manufacture, the product was not ready topresent. After reviewing the Profile documents for both ideas I was being ask to sign information whichI was not comfortable with, I needed additional information, because at this point my ideas were beingmoved forward without my permission or input. I then notice that the final Portfolio that wascompleted before I received the Project File on each ideas which was received on 7/24/15 { P3-B1, B2,B3, then the was the final Portfolio was sent on 7/22/15 prior to the Projects File information, not theway DAVISON account of documents is being stated. I never received a hard copy in the mail aspromised by Mike B, regarding the Project Files for each ideas, just emails. The items received in themail submitted with DAVISON reply was for the final product, the Portfolio.Regarding the statement that on 08/28/2008, Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature,that she received and read the two disclosure statements is untrue, first it was a conversation wasstrictly a free consultation as indicated on your website is free. The [redacted] was never discussedand no information was provided regarding the [redacted]. Enclosed, please find a copy of thedisclosure detailing the services and fees as it was presented to me in 2008 and my follow up 5/19/11from an email from DAVISON after being contacted on 5/19/11, regarding the INTER-LOCKABLE Shoe,note the name that is used is not the real name I use for the idea and the reason being is that I haddecided that I was going to take on the financial obligation to take the idea to the Pre-Developmentstage. I therefore requested a copy be mailed to me, which I never received referring to in the email. Iat no time received the American Inventor's Protection Act of 1999 nor reviewed this informationbecause once again, the idea didn't go that far in the conversation as is being referred to by DAVISONattorney. Once again, another form of deception on behalf of. (See attachments P2-A1, A2, A3, A4, A5,A6, and A7). Mike B was totally unaware of my second idea, however based on our first conversationregarding the use of royalties to cover the Development stage I eagerly shared the second idea withMike B. based on the use of royalties to complete the Development of both ideas, I not only got takenonce but twice with both ideas which Mike B later retracted.I acknowledge entering into two separate agreements of Pre-Development services based on our initialconversation, however DAVISON failed to complete both Pre-Development agreements in accordance tothe contract agreement is a violation of the contract agreement (P3 - Al, A2). Failure to allow me haveinput on the outcome of my ideas during the Pre-Development process as stated in the contract is analteration of the contract agreement, which makes the information for the final Portfolio unauthorizeddata in the completion of the final Portfolio which was sent via 2 DVDs, which is a breach of contract.This breach of contract was done even after I ask Mike B, to complete the service required to completethe process correctly. (See attachment P4-A7, A8, A9 Also as I stated it was interesting was the ProjectFile for each ideas was sent via email on 7/24, (See PI - Cl, C l part 2) the compiled information for thePortfolio was mailed on 7/22/15 (See P3 - Bl, B2, B3, B4, therefore the final Portfolio was done beforethe Portfolio making it impossible for me to have any input before the final Portfolio was completed andsent to me.The enclosures from the Postal Service made it clear that information for the Portfolio was completedprior to the Profile documents being completed, without my input in accordance to my signed contractagreement, contract breach.Subsequently, DAVISON did not offer additional services under a separate contract, because it wasnever completed in the manner specified in the contract agreement which I was not allowed to acceptor decline due to failure to communicate any further once Mike B realize that he would not be receivingany additional money from me. I requested that the Pre-Development be completed with data based on my Input, which had already paid for however he made it clear that he was not at ail concerned aboutthis resulting in a breach of contract.The Agreement for Pre-Development was understood, the second stage regarding Development wasnever fully disclosed in conjunction with the disclosures of the Pre-Development.My allegation regarding misrepresentation on DAVISON's behalf for citing on its website, regarding itsmembership with the Online Business Bureau does in fact have merit when at first sight it resembles theRevdex.com. The fact that OBB indicated no concerns and the Revdex.com provides information ofmany complaints is in fact deceptive. (See attachment P5- Al, A2, A3) Simply put, if I had theinformation from the Revdex.com I would not be dealing with this situation right now. The fact that OBB had notcomplaints, and Revdex.com had DAVISON with an "F" is truly a red flag in anyone eye. The inclusion being thatthe Revdex.com provides a much better status on your business practice, which I am nowfinding myself understanding even more with this situation. DAVISON HAS AN F ON THE Revdex.comFinally, in my complaint I requested communication be in writing, which is what I was informed on bythe business office was the desired method of communication, (See attachment PI- B6), had that beendone this current situation and Mike B would have been in compliance with DAVISON corporateprocedures.Secondly if Mike B apparent disregard for the written contract agreement regarding both ideaspresented regarding completing the Pre-Development projects in accordance to the contractagreement, which required my input for the final product, is in fact a breach of contract.Contract1) n. an agreement with specific terms between two or more persons or entities in which thereis a promise to do something in return for a valuable benefit known as consideration. Since thelaw of contracts is at the heart of most business dealings, it is one of the three or four mostsignificant areas of legal concern and can involve variations on circumstances and complexities.The existence of a contract requires finding the following factual elements: a) an offer; b) anacceptance of that offer which results in a meeting of the minds; c) a promise to perform; d) avaluable consideration (which can be a promise or payment in some form); e) a time or eventwhen performance must be made (meet commitments); f) terms and conditions forperformance, including fulfilling promises; g) performance. A unilateral contract is one in whichthere is a promise to pay or give other consideration in return for actual performance. (Associated concepts: acceptance of a contract, accessory contract, action on contract, adhesioncontract, aleatory contract, alteration of a contract, alternative contract, anticcpatory breach ofcontract, assent to a contract, assignment of a contract, bilateral contract, breach of a contract,breach of contract, cancellation of a contract, A contract requires a knowing acceptance of the terms it contains. Typically, acceptance is madeby the parties signing the contract. If acceptance is lacking, such as by a forged signature, a validcontract cannot be formed. A party may not unilaterally change the terms of a contract withoutthe acceptance of the other party to the contract.Breach of contract is a legal cause of action in which a binding agreement or bargained-forexchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance orinterference with the other party's performance. If the party does not fulfill his contractualpromise, or has given information to the other party that he will not perform his duty asmentioned in the contract or if by his action and conduct he seems to be unable to perform thecontract, he is said to breach the contract.Nonperformance is the failure to fulfill your obligations under a contract. A breach of contract isalways a nonperformance of duty, but not every nonperformance of duty is a breach ofcontract.Finally, DAVISON failed to complete the Pre-Development Contract Agreement as stated in the contractagreement. DAVISON made unauthorized alterations to the agreement without my acceptance,therefore establishing a breach/nonperformance of contract duty make regarding both Pre-Development Contract Agreements null and void and warrants a full refund for services regarding theINTERLOCKABLE HEELS, and [redacted] for services not rendered in accordance to the original contractagreement in the amount of $1490.Investor: INTERLOCKABLE HEELS and [redacted]

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the supplemental comments submitted by Ms.[redacted] in regard to the above referenced complaint. Her comments reference threeareas of concern; the disclosures required by the American Inventor’s Protection Act of1999 (AIPA), the disclosure of the further development services and the completion ofservices under the Pre-Development Agreements. Without an exhaustive restatement ofthe details provided in the response of 08/13/2015, the three areas will be addressed.Ms. [redacted] is correct that when she first contacted Davison in 2008, she did notengage a service contract. The initial response of 08/13/2015 does not claim she did.However, her contention that she was not provided the AIPA disclosure is false. Aspreviously stated, Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea throughDavison’s website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes itimpossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures(the AIPA disclosure and the Affirmative Disclosure) displayed in a printable and savableformat, and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. On 08/28/2008,Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that she received and read thetwo disclosure statements. Enclosed, please find a copy of the electronic signatureconfirmation data, documenting her acknowledgment on 08/28/2008 at 02:59:12 from IPaddress proxy-3243.bay.webtv.net. Note: the specific idea submission has been redactedfor confidentiality purposes. The prior response provided a copy of the AIPA disclosureas it would have appeared at the time.The final two areas of dispute are interconnected. Ms. [redacted] alleges she was“not properly informed about the next stage of Development...” and alleges the servicesunder the Pre-Development Agreement were not completed, specifically the ProductPlanning Sessions. She claims she did not have any input into the creation of the ProductPortfolio. The Product Portfolio is merely the format in which the pre-developmentresearch is provided to the client. There is no “input” from a client that would impact thisresearch. The Product Planning Sessions occur after the client has received the predevelopment research material, and the discussion involves the possible offer ofadditional development services. As previously stated, both the disclosures and the termsof the Pre-Development Agreement explicitly reference the offer of additionaldevelopment services under a separate contract for a separate fee. The researchmaterials were shipped to Ms. [redacted] on 07/21/2015. She terminated her relationshipwith Davison on or about 07/27/2015. Accordingly, there was no detailed discussion, oroffer, of additional development services. Her citation to the textbook definition of acontract, and of a breach of contract, ignores the application of the factual context.Within the facts, there is no breach of contract by Davison.Ms. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered byDavison, BEFORE she entered into any contract. The services for which there existed acontract have been performed. No additional contracts have been entered and noadditional payments have been received. There is no basis to warrant a refund forservices rendered.David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: Signed a contract with Davison on 11/20/2012 to start my company, [redacted]. April 2013 received a sample which was nothing like we had talked about. The company agreed and said they would get right back on it and that was the last progress I have seen. They called in July saying it was coming along great. Asked for a refund in August, got a flurry of phone calls saying it would be any day. Heard from them in November saying fill out some papers, which I had already done and that was the last I heard from them. Wrote another letter April 26, 2013 asking for a refund and they never responded. Called on April 19th and was told that the President of the company would call me on Wednesday. Needless to say I have not heard from them.Desired Settlement: I believe that Davison owes me a refund. I have been more than patient with them.

Business

Response:

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

Review: on August 1, 2013 I paid Davison $800.00 to process my invention Rail Fastener Unit.To date they have done nothing and are demanding $6,000.00 to continue.This company is not to be trusted with anyone's money for they are thieves and liars. AVOID AT ALL COSTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Desired Settlement: $800.00 returned NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Business

Response:

See attached Document

Mr. [redacted] Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania [redacted] September 09, 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 08/28/2013. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] alleges he contracted with Davison to “process my invention” and that having “done nothing”, Davison is “demanding $6,000.00 to continue”. While it is unclear what Mr. [redacted] means by “process my invention”, a review of his file indicates that he contracted for initial research services which were completed. Further, Davison has not “demanded” any additional money; to the contrary, Mr. [redacted] has merely been offered additional services, which he has declined. There is no basis to warrant a refund. Mr. [redacted] submitted an idea to Davison through its 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. In fact, Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison twice through the website; on 03/28/2008 and 05/22/2013. Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that he received and read the disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. The disclosure statements set forth, 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 08/01/2013. These services were performed and the research material, comprising nine (9) U.S. Patent documents and information on eight (8) products similar to Mr. [redacted]’ submitted idea, was sent to him on 08/15/2013. On 08/21/2013, following completion of the initial services, Mr. [redacted] was offered a second contract for additional services related to the development of his new product idea. He has declined these additional services, which is his prerogative. As stated, Mr. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered by Davison, BEFORE he 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 hired Davison under the pretext that they would represent my best interests in creating a product idea that I had. Instead of representing me and my idea I became aware that they actually misguided me into believing my product was original and would be a big hit. They redirected me by telling me to not research my idea online as there ae ways people capitalize on this. Well to my dismay after several months and thousands of dollars I finally went against their advice and did research my idea only to find there were alreay patents and products out there like my idea. I would never had spend my life savings ifI had not been misled about my idea. They also ram roded andpushed me into using a design I was uncomfortable with. They final issue is that they claim to continue to represent me and my idea but I had coorispondance in a year. I feel that I was nothing more than scammed by this company by misrepresentaion and not told the truth from the beginning.Desired Settlement: I would like a refund of my money in full or at least a majority.

Business

Response:

Dear *r. [redacted]; This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by *s. [redacted] Aim [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 12/21/2013. In her complaint, *s. [redacted] raises three areas of concern; that she was not advised of existing competitive products, that the developed product sample did not meet her approval and a lack of response regarding the status of her project. As will ne detailed below, Davison has provided its services with *s. [redacted]s approval, there is no basis to warrant a refund. Initially, *s. [redacted] entered into the Pre-Development Agreement for custom research services. 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 uncommon for multiple people to conceive of the same or similar products independently. Because of this fact, Davison requires all of our clients to undergo the initial pre-development research so that some level of knowledge may be secured as to what is in the prior art. In fact, the Pre Development Agreement has a notice outlining Davison’s view of the necessity of this service. A copy of the Notice, as it appeared in *s. [redacted] contract, in enclosed. These services were performed and the research material, comprising nine (9) U.S. Patent documents and information on six (6) products similar to *s. [redacted]’s submitted idea, was sent to her. Following receipt of the research material, *s. [redacted] entered into a second contract for the design and construction of a product sample and presentation material. She approved the design of the product sample, and authorized the presentation. The presentation material, in the form of an Executive Briefing, contained an actual photograph of the constructed product sample. *s. [redacted] also completed a questionnaire about the Executive Briefing in which she provided positive feedback. Copies of her signed approval of the design (the actual design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes), her authorization of the presentation and her completed questionnaire are enclosed. Unfortunately, the corporation did not license her product idea. *s. [redacted] then paid for, and authorized, two additional presentations which were also unsuccessful. On 03/05/2012, *s. [redacted] directed Davison to take a reactive approach with her product sample, i.e. to wait until a corporation approached Davison seeking a product similar to her product idea. To date, that has not occurred, thus there has been no requirement to contact *s. [redacted]. A copy of her signed directive to take the reactive approach is enclosed. [redacted]. [redacted] Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

In response to the reply from Davison I find that were not forth right in their response. I never received any information from them informing me of other patents or patents pending by other individuals with like inventions or ideas. I point blank asked [redacted] if there was anything out on the market like this and he was adimate about there being no such idea. Secondly I was basically forced into Davison's design of my idea by the head of the design department who spent well into an hr. on the phone with me arguing his point that he knew what he was doing and that by making the changes I asked for I would be wasting their time as if a company were to buy my idea they would probably redesign it anyhow. I argued that it was my idea and I felt like it should be done in my vision but he rebutted that that would cost extra and also take additional time which would through them out of their time frame for the project. Finally on my evaluation of Davison it is what I refer to as southern polite not to totally bash an evaluation of something however Davison did not send you a copy of the one which did have all of the disagrees marked on it as it is the one concerning their design and my marking all over it with disagreeing remarks. They said they can't show that do to privacy but it is also a lud point in my argument. Davison did show that I didn't think the company they wanted to approach was a right fit and with this it is just a glimpse of how they operate. I strongly feel Davison misrepresented themselves to me and I do deserve monetary compensation in the form of a refund.

Regards,

Review: This is a very dishonest buisness. I had a contract with them to build a prototype product but all you get from them is excuses and lies. The person I dealt with there is apparently no longer there because their phone # and e-mail doesn't work any more. They pretty much dropped me when I refused to pay another $2,000 for advertising. A very shady and dishonest buisness.Desired Settlement: Finish the job or refund the fee.

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 11/05/2015.Davison understands that customer service is vital in all businesses and is imperativewhen operating a successful business. Customer concerns upset everyone and the staffworks very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum.Mr. [redacted] has been a valued client since first contacting Davison in April 2012. It bearsnoting that the performed services were completed by July 2012. Now, more than threeyears later, Mr. [redacted] has decided to post this complaint using unsubstantiated andinflammatory comments. The significant delay bears on the credibility of his position.As will be detailed, all services were completed with his express written approval and tohis documented satisfaction. The remaining service of presenting his product idea has notbeen performed due to Mr. [redacted]’ failure to provide his authorization. Davison remainswilling to complete the service pending receipt of Mr. [redacted]’ authorization. With regardto the services that were provided, a brief summary follows.Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison in April 2012. He subsequently entered into acontract for the design and construction of a product sample, packaging and presentationmaterial. Davison submitted a design of the product sample to Mr. [redacted] which heapproved, in writing, and about which he completed a questionnaire providing positivefeedback. A copy of his signed approval and completed questionnaire are enclosed; notethe approved design has been obscured for confidentiality purposes. In reliance upon hisapproval of the design, Davison constructed the product sample, packaging and createdpresentation materials. An Executive Briefing was created which contained an actualphotograph of the constructed product sample. This Executive Briefing, along with aShipping Procedure Form, was provided to Mr. [redacted] on or about 07/13/2012. Davisonwill not disclose a client’s product idea without express written authorization from theclient. The Shipping Procedure Form is the document that provides that authorization.To date, Mr. [redacted] has not returned this authorization form.In the complaint, Mr. [redacted] alleges his project was “dropped” when he “refusedto pay another $2,000 for advertising”. This allegation mischaracterizes the facts. On orabout 07/31/2015, Davison offered the additional service of creating a video presentationof his product idea. Mr. [redacted] entered into this contract and made a partial payment ofthe fee. This contract was terminated before performance of the service and Mr. [redacted]has received a return of his payment. This exchange has had no effect on his projectother than the video will not be created.As stated, the design and construction of Mr. [redacted]’ product sample has beenperformed with his express written approval and to his documented satisfaction. Thepresentation of his product idea can, and will, be made upon receipt of the ShippingProcedure Form. There is no basis to warrant a refund.Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: Id pay them $750.00 to do research on a invention I made and every month a different person is handling my invention.I found out that they are being sued for 27 million dollars.They have not contacted me in months regarding my invention and I lost hope and no longer want them to work on my invention.I want a refund and every time I call no one answers.Desired Settlement: I want my complete refund back.

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 0 1/20/2014. 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 response to our receipt of the complaint, a representative of Davison reached out to

Mr. [redacted] on 01/23/2013. Through that conversation, Mr. [redacted]’s concerns were

addressed and he has decided to continue with his project. Mr. [redacted] informed our

representative that he would be contacting your office directly to withdraw the complaint.

In light of his decision to withdraw the complaint and to continue with his project, I

request that Mr. [redacted]’s complaint be closed as “resolved”.

Sincerely

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: IN BEGINNING THE OFFER THAT MR. [redacted] APPROACHED ME WITH SOUNDED TO GOOD TO BE TRUE. ONE DAY I WAS ON LINE AND I GOT A POP UP FROM DAVISON &DESIGN INC ABOUT A PRODUCT THAT COULD ONE DAY MAKE ME A MILLIONAIRE. HE SENT ME VIDEOS OF THE RICH PEOPLE AND BOY DIDN'T IT LOOK REAL. WELL I TRUSTED THE COMPANY AND AGREED TO GIVE IT A TRY. ATER THE 3RD TRANACTION I DECIDED TO LOOK IT UP ON THE Revdex.com, BUT COULD NOT FIND THE COMPANY. SO I SENT THE Revdex.com A MESSAGE AND THE NICE REP GAVE ME THE CORRECT LISTING. I did not authorize this company to take A TOTAL OF 695.00 from my account. I looked Davison Design & Development Inc up on the Revdex.com and seen that they were rated an F ON THE BUSINESS SCALE, and I was no longer interested in their business. On October 4, 2013 I noticed that 100.00 was taken from my account from DAVISON DESIGN THAT I DID NOT AUTHORIZE. I then went to my bank and file a DISPUTE, AND CLOSED MY ACCOUNT. AFTER IGNORING SEVERAL CALLS FROM MR. [redacted], I KNOW SEE THAT ON FRIDAY OCTOBER 25,2013 HE WITHDRAWN 295.00 FROM MY ACCOUNT. IT SHOULD BE A LAW AGAINST PEOPLE DOING THESE TYPE OF THINGS.WHEN I ASKED HIM TO SENT ME SOMETHING IN THE USPS, MR. [redacted] SAID HE COULDNT DO THAT. I AM ASKING FOR ALL OF MY MONEYS BACK, AND I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT [ THIS COMPANY IS A BIG SCAM] PLEASE HELP ME TO GET MY MONEY BACK. I REALLY LEARNED A LESSON WITH YHIS SITUATION. THANK YOUDesired Settlement: I WANT ALL MY MONEY BACK.I REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. I HAVE TO NOW TRY TO BORROW MONEY TO GET MY MORGAGE PAID ASAP.

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 10/26/2013.

At the outset, his comment that he was provided with marketing materials suggesting Davison

would “make me a millionaire”, are unfounded. Our marketing materials simply do not make such a claim,

nor do they imply such a claim. To the contrary, our disclosures and contracts are replete with explicit

statements about the high risk of new product development and the fact that there are no guarantees of a

license or financial gain.

Secondarily, Mr. [redacted] alleges that he did not authorize the multiple partial payments toward his

contract. He is mistaken. It is Davison’s practice to secure explicit authorization from our clients before

each and every payment is processed. In the period of June 06, 2013 to October 29,2013, our records

indicate no less than thirty-five (35) days in which Mr. [redacted] was contacted. During this timeframe, he

authorized, by phone, each of the six partial payments toward his contract.

As Mr. [redacted] is an Ohio resident, the contract that he entered provided a four day cancellation

period, which he did not invoke. Davison’s performance obligations did not become due until full payment

had been received. Mr. [redacted] finalized payment and the services have begun. There is no basis to

warrant a refund.

Sincerely

[redacted]. [redacted]

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

Dear *r. Baker; This letter is an answer to the response to the above reference complaint filed by me [redacted]

[redacted] from Davison Design & Development, Inc.

*r. [redacted] was correct about the phone calls before each transaction until the Sept. 27,2013

transaction that I did not authorize. If you noticed on my account *r. [redacted] would take

100.00 from my pay once a month for the first three transactions THAT I DID AUTHORISED.

SEE ATTACHMENT: 1

After looking at the company on the Revdex.com SITE and I seen that they were RATED an “F” on the

scale, and After I read most of the complaints filed against them, I WANTED OUT. On or around

Sept.23, 2013 I told Mr. [redacted] that I was no longer interested. Well he took it upon himself to

Withdrawal ANOTHER 100.00 from my account on Sept. 27, 2013, and ANOTHER 100.00 on Oct. 7, 2013,

and ANOTHER 295.00 ON Oct 25, 2013 WHICH CAUSED MY ACCOUNT TO BE OVERDRAWN. SEE ATTACHMENT: 2

Secondary, I refused All of Mr. [redacted] calls because I was NO LONGER INTERESTED.

As you can see from the E-Mails that Mr. [redacted] had sent me with him telling me to call him

and that he hadn’t heard from me. So ask him how I could have AUTHORIZED those last

transactions if he had not heard from me. SEE ATTACHMENTS: 3

Also after that Transaction on Oct 25, 2013 which caused my account was to be OVERDRAWN really

hit the Nail on the head. Why would I authorize that?

As Mr. [redacted] said in the Last Paragraph of their answer to my complaint I am an Ohio Resident

and the contract states that I have a FOUR DAY cancellation period, which I sent a CERTIFIED LETTER of my

cancellation that they received on October 28,2013 which was THREE DAY Prior to the payment paid in

full. SEE ATTACHMENT: 4-5

And just for the record, I really need to know what services they feel that they rendered. NOT ONE

THING BUT TOOK MY MONEY FOR WHAT.

With being said, I am asking for a FULL REFUND ON THOSE BASIS, AND FACTS.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the supplemental comments filed by Mr. [redacted] in regard to the above referenced complaint. Initially, **. [redacted] is incorrect in his assertion that the contract’s four day cancellation period begins after payment is made. Enclosed, please find a copy of the relevant section of his contract which clearly states the four day period begins when the contact is signed. Accordingly, there is no dispute that Mr. [redacted] did not cancel the contract within the applicable period. Second, as stated in our initial response, performance of the services had started by the time Mr. [redacted] filed his complaint. The services have now been completed and the research materials sent to Mr. [redacted]. His response acknowledges the delivery of these materials, though he has refused receipt. The contracted services were for custom research relevant to **. [redacted]’s submitted idea. As such, the research is not capable of being “un-done” or re-inventoried. His refusal to accept delivery of the research does not invalidate the fact that the services have been performed. Sincerely, [redacted]. [redacted] Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

This message is in regard to the letter that I received from you on 12/05/2013 regarding complaint ID #[redacted]. I disagree with Davison Design & Development Inc. response. If you look at all the information that I sent you regarding this case you will see that I was honest about the entire situation. I did agree with the first 3 transactions. But, after **. [redacted] took the UNAUTHORIZED PAYMENTS from my account that is when this whole problem started. I SENT YOU INFORMATION TO HELP ME. Please look over the information again and you will see that I have E-Mails from [redacted] saying that he hasn’t heard from me. You will see that he sent those messages after I told him that I was no longer interested. And that will show you that I did not authorize those last 3 transactions. NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE HE SENT ME A MESSAGE. AND AFTER ALLTHE INFORMATION I SENT TO YOU, I NOW SEE THATTHERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO THAT WILL HELP ME. Can you please tell me if the TITLE IV—INVENTOR PROTECTION can help me? Look at the attachment I sent you. Look at the HIGH LIGHT SECTIONS. However this may turn out, I know one thing for sure, and that is DAVISON DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT, INC IS A FRAUD. And I WILL PRAY FOR THEM. Thanks [redacted]

Business

Response:

This letter is in follow up to the above referenced complaint, which your office advised on 12/18/2013 was closed as “unresolved”. Please note that after further review of Mr. [redacted]’s project, the disputed charges have been refunded. A copy of the refund receipts are attached hereto. In light of the refunds, I kindly ask that his file be closed as “resolved”.

Review: Davison company is misleading people. I have been promised to get the pre-design and pre-development information about my idea, but I have never received this service , company sent me 2 CDs about old existing patent search in the market . Salesman fool me and convinced me to pay the money for pre-development step, this is fake and scam company taking people money and selling market and patent data. They have fancy website and few simple products, they promises people to develop their ideas and steal all idea and information, I have sent them all my data and design about my idea. I need to be protected and get my money back at least. this company is selling existing patent data and there is no development and design and they just take money from people in a very professional way. Davison is misleading people and promising things that they can not perform. I just want to file complain so at least other people can realize and never give them their money. This is fake scam company which they get people's money.Desired Settlement: I need my money being refunded to my account

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 05/29/2015.Unfortunately, Mr. [redacted]’s complaint contains numerous false and defamatory comments. Heprovides a gross mischaracterization of Davison’s services, and simply ignores the disclosures heacknowledged having read, and ignores the clear terms of the contract that he entered. Davisonprovided its services per the terms of the contract. Davison offered additional developmentservices which Mr. [redacted] has declined. There is no basis for a refund for services rendered.Customer concerns upset everyone and Davison’s staff works very hard to troubleshootthem so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact andthroughout the process, Davison maintains an open channel of communication, disclosing itsservices and fees upfront and securing its clients’ approval and authorization throughout theprocess. The contracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is not possible to bemore upfront with their clients about the services and fees.Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website. Thesystem Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit anidea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, andthe person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. On 04/22/2015, Mr. [redacted]acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that he received and read the two disclosurestatements. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client enters anyservice contract or 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 submittedidea.” The disclosure then provides a listing the various services and related fees. Following hisacknowledgment of the disclosures, Mr. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Developmentservices which obligated Davison to compile research data related to his product idea. Davisoncompleted the Pre-Development services and forwarded the compiled research to Mr. [redacted] on05/21/2015. Subsequently, Davison offered additional services, under a separate contract, whichMr. [redacted] has declined. The Pre-Development Agreement states that the services to be provided included: acompilation of Product Related Data, a Patent Review, a Corporation Review, a Product PlanningSession and that the compiled information was to be provided to the client in a Product Portfolio.The purpose of the Pre-Development research is to collect information relevant to the furtherdevelopment of the client’s product idea. To blindly assume that no individual has previouslythought of a similar product idea is simply naive. Further, the Agreement states in relevant part(emphasis added);“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample,packaging and relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to aLicensee, at Client’s sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further developmentservices, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the sample andpresentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materialselsewhere or not to obtain them.”The Agreement, in conjunction with the two disclosures, is clear that the Pre-DevelopmentAgreement was for research services, and that additional development services would be offeredunder a separate contract. To the extent Mr. [redacted] was unaware of this fact; it is not due to alack of disclosure by Davison.Addressing Mr. [redacted]’s specific concerns, he first alleges he did not receive the servicesfor which he contracted. He is mistaken. His complaint confirms his receipt of the services. Theresearch services for which he contracted were the prior patents and other similar productinformation that he complains about receiving. Next, he alleges that there is “no developmentand design”, this is a misstatement. As stated, Mr. [redacted] contracted for Pre-Developmentservices. As the name indicates, theses are services offered before design and developmentservices are offered. The design and development services were offered to Mr. [redacted] and hedeclined. Finally, Mr. [redacted] raises a concern over the confidentiality of his idea. When hesubmitted his idea, he did so by entering a Confidentially Agreement. Under the express terms ofthe Agreement; “Davison will not use, disclose, license or sell this idea with out my [Mr. [redacted]]express written permission.” Davison takes the obligation of confidentiality seriously, and abidesby the terms of the Agreement. However, Davison can not account for similar, or the same, ideasthat may be submitted by other clients, or that may be disclosed to the general public throughother avenues. It is not uncommon for multiple people to conceive of the same, or similar,products independently.As stated, Mr. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered byDavison, BEFORE he entered into any contract. The services for which there existed a contracthave been performed. No additional contracts have been entered and no additional paymentshave been received. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered.David * D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

This

letter is a response to the above letter from Davison Design and Development,

Inc. (Davison)

First

of all, the sales happened on the

phone by promised statements by salesman and based on the trust to the

company (salesman) and charge of the amount happened based on the exact

promised statements.

I,

[redacted], did not agree to pay for the old market and patent research-data.

I paid on the phone and agreed to pay for the development and initial design

of my idea.

I

am not, and I was not interested to pay that huge amount for getting old market

and patent data. So, from the first point, it was a huge misleading and then

salesman promised to send initial development and initial design of my idea,

also he asked from me to send him any scratch and design of my idea to him through

email and I did sent him with the mind that I am supposed to get development of

my design.

So

question here is:

Why

Davison asked me to send them my design if they want to send me the old patent

data (Patent research data)? I was told to get some development and improvement

on my initial design on the phone that is why I sent them my design and all

scratch I had. Email can be sent to prove that I have sent my initial design.

I

was convinced by salesman to get development and initial design of the idea,

and I paid for this service on the phone and waited 3 weeks and got the CD with

old patent data.

Second

question, why should they use general word “Pre-development” for selling “old Patent

search data”. This is very general word which can be any step before

development. This misleads client such as me who are looking for development

and design.

In the response to Davison statement: “Davison provided its services per the terms of the

contract.”

To

address this part, Davison sold the service on the phone and never performed

the promised services on the time of the sales (payment).

In the response to Davison statement: “It is important to note that the disclosures are

made BEFORE the Client enters any service contract or makes any payment to

Davison.”

To

address this part, this is completely wrong and false. I paid on the phone and

never seen the contract before paying the fee. I clicked on the link and went to the website

around 7 or 8 hours later, and I was expecting to see my idea and some

information on the website, so I clicked on yes to terms and conditions section

and then nothing was on my account except acknowledgment at the initial part,

this has never been explained that this portal is for signing the contract

only. I signed to the website after I paid on the phone and can prove this

statement. So statement below by Davison is completely wrong.

“It

is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client enters any

service contract or makes any payment to Davison.”

In the response Davison to statement: “Davison offered additional services, under a

separate contract, which Mr. [redacted] has declined.”

I

have never declined anything and never declined any services, if yes, I would defiantly

decline it after not getting my promised services on the phone through

salesman.In the response to Davison

statement: “As statement, Mr.

[redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered by Davison,

BEFORE he entered into any contract.”

This

is completely wrong statement. I have never seen and read the contract before

being charged. I have been charged first on the phone then received the email

containing the portal and I logged in to the portal exactly after 7 or 8 hours

when sales had been performed already. So this is wrong information provided by

Davison to you.

In the response to Davison

statement: “On 04/22/2015, Mr.

[redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that he received and read the

two disclosure statements.”

This

is completely wrong information and I am glad Davison mentioned this, I got the

email regarding portal access on 5/5/2015 and I have never got any portal

access to read and acknowledge the disclosure on Aprl 22nd. So, this

is again another wrong response from Davison. Email can be provided as a proof.

Review: I email an idea to Davison with no high hopes. I get a call back from them and they say they want to help me develop this idea. They tell me the processes that they will have to go through. Then they tell me that the process will cost me $795.00. I ask them, (Is that the only money that you will need from me and you wont need anymore after this?). They tell me NO and send paperwork to my email with a link. I read over the paperwork online and check a box saying I read the document. After paying them the money in four months, they tell me I have to pay them another $10,000 for my idea to be developed and presented to a buyer. This is after they told me they wouldn't need anymore money after the $795, they also said it was in the paperwork they sent me and I have read over it and it doesn't say that I would have to pay or even owe money to them after the $795.00. I read the reviews after this situation and I saw that some people are or were in the same boat as me. So obviously they are telling us(the customers) false information and putting us into these situations were we spend what money we got to hopefully get more money and this company doesn't give all the information to us and now we don't have any money and cant make ends meet just because they couldn't tell us all the information from the beginning.Desired Settlement: To at least get 80% of the money that I gave to Davison back.

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 07/07/2015. Customer concerns upset everyone and Davison’s staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact and throughout the process, Davison maintains an open channel of communication, disclosing its services and fees upfront and securing its clients’ approval and authorization throughout the process. The contracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is not possible to be more upfront with their clients about the services and fees. Mr. [redacted]’s contention that he was not informed of the various fees simply ignores the disclosures he acknowledged having read, and ignores the clear terms of the contract that he entered. Davison provided its services per the terms of the contract. Davison offered additional development services which Mr. [redacted] has declined. There is no basis for a refund for services rendered.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. On 02/18/2015, Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that he received and read the two disclosure statements. Enclosed, please find a copy of the disclosure detailing the services and fees, and a copy of the data record documenting Mr. [redacted]’s acknowledgment on 02/18/2015 at 18:26:16 from IP address 73.203.53.50 (note his submitted idea has been redacted for confidentiality purposes). It is important to note that the disclosures are made 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 more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing the various services and related fees. Following his acknowledgment of the disclosures, Mr. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services which obligated Davison to compile research data related to his product idea. Davison completed the Pre-Development services and forwarded the compiled research to Mr. [redacted] on 05/26/2015. Subsequently, Davison offered additional services, under a separate contract, which Mr. [redacted] has declined.The Pre-Development Agreement states that the services to be provided included: a compilation of Product Related Data, a Patent Review, a Corporation Review, a Product Planning Session and that the compiled information was to be provided to the client in a Product Portfolio. The purpose of the Pre-Development research is to collect information relevant to the further development of the client’s product idea. Further, the Agreement states in relevant part (emphasis added);“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample, packaging 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.”The Agreement, in conjunction with the disclosures, is clear that the Pre-Development Agreement was for research services, and that additional development services would be offered under a separate contract. To the extent Mr. [redacted] was unaware of this fact; it is not due to a lack of disclosure by Davison.As stated, Mr. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related fees offered by Davison, BEFORE he 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 CounselDavison Design and Dev

Review: [redacted] the new product manager sale pic was a lie his main mission was to get my money of $795.00 for the new product invention and feed me a line. He knew all the time that I didn't have the cash flow that it would take to make this product come to full time term. But he strung me along by telling me the company has investor that would put up the money that I would need, that was another lie then the 8 percent of 10,000.00 to get the product in front of may be buyer that was another lie. People like this group shouldn't be allow to rip people off like this it a darn shame. Now they will not stop sending me e-mail requesting my tax refund to promote how they can help me to move forward with invention do you see the nerve of these lowlife greedy dogs. They steal my money and now show me they really don't give a dam and still want to try and get more!!Desired Settlement: I would really would love to get my $795.00 back that would be a blessing. They need to be held accountable of their action what happen to honor.

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 03/16/2015.Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them socommunication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact andthroughout our process, we maintain an open channel of communication, disclosing ourservices and fees upfront and securing our clients’ approval and authorization throughoutthe process. Our contracts are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is notpossible to be more upfront with our clients about our services and fees. In her statement,Ms. [redacted] alleges she was misled about the costs associated with the development of herproject. As will be detailed below, Ms. [redacted] was provided explicit, clear disclosures ofthe relevant fees.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 received andread 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 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 our services.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] on 10/22/2014. The Pre-DevelopmentAgreement states in relevant part (emphasis added)“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaininga product sample and relevant information about the product in aprofessional 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 creatingthe sample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is awarethat 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 disclosures thatMs. [redacted] acknowledged, Davison offered additional services for the development of herproject. She had declined these additional services, which is her prerogative.As stated, Ms. [redacted] was fully informed of all services and their related feesoffered by Davison, BEFORE she entered into any contract. The services for which thereexisted a contract have been performed. No additional contracts have been entered andno additional payments have been received. There is no basis to warrant a refimd forservices rendered. Per her stated request, Ms. [redacted]’s project file has been marked as“Do Not Contact”.[redacted]. [redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosure

Review: I signed up for Davidson invention trying to get my idea invented I talk to [redacted] about getting my idea he said that it would be $795 to get it producted after paying the $795 he sent me a portfolio with all the information regarding my invention and then they wanted me to pay them $5000 to produce the ideathey never say anything about that all they said was the 795 would cover all of it I asked them for a refund and now they won't return any of my calls I told him if I knew it was going to cost that much I would never went to them in the first place I would have done it all by myselfI'm just wanting them to refund my $795 they haven't done anything except ignore my phone callsI've asked him time and time again to this what do I need to do to patent my idea they say I have to pay them $5000 before they can tell me anything I told them I don't have $5,000 for this and I wasn't wanting to produced my day I was just wanting to sell my idea if you could call me at [redacted] I can explain it better over the phone then I can't writing it down thank you and I've also heard I'm not the only one that's had this issue with them I would just a refund thank youDesired Settlement: I would love a refund and be done with Davidson altogether I would not recommend this company to anyone

Business

Response:

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

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

11 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, disclosing our fees and services in advance. 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. 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 an explicit statement that it is Davison’s normal practice to seek

more than one contract for a submitted idea BEFORE any contract was entered.

On 12/09/2013, 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. 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 12/17/2013, 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

02/06/2014. He has acknowledged receipt of these materials in his complaint. 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.”

On 0314 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. In his

complaint, he requests to “be done with Davison”; accordingly his project file has been

closed.

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. 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 to his documented satisfaction.

Sincerely

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Enclosures

Turning ideas

Consumer

Response:

[redacted] I just wont a refund I've called several times and they ignore my calls this is why I wont a refund just please give me a refund that's all I ask they have lied from the start I don't wont to have to get a lawyer but I can if they would answer I would have kept going with what I was inventing but its hard when they don't communicate with you and ignore your calls and I told mr. kapps that ive all ready researched what I was wonting to do and I was going to get a working model I was just wonting them to help me with the patting process and mr. kapp said it was 795.00 and fill out the paper work they sent and he would take care of the rest a few months went by and never herd from them or talked to them since 3 months went by and I got a cd and paper work of everything I already knew I thank this is a scam all I wonted from Davison is help with what I all ready have I did not wont them to make or build anything they misunderstood from the start and kept asking for money so all I ask is a refund for something im not happy at all thank you and hope this is all you need and I know im not the only one they have done this to just pleas all I ask is a refund so I can be done with all this

Review: On or about January 2012, I went under contract with Davison and they committed to creating a working prototype with engineered specifications. Davidson collected 9,840.00 and to date did not produce an actual working product nor have they provided the engineered specifications. Davison also committed to providing a presentation to manufacturer [redacted] located in Commerce, CA and collected funds to do so, however never followed through with presentation. After I contacted the Manufacturer, they explained that they refuse to do business with Davison due to their deceptive and misleading practices. At this point, I am requesting a full refund for 9840.00 for services that were not provided.Desired Settlement: We are requesting a full refund of 9840.00

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 11/12/2013. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] states that he contracted for the construction of a working prototype, engineering specifications and a presentation of his product idea. As will be detailed below, Mr. [redacted] received each of these items. There is no basis to warrant a refund. On or about 07/18/2012, Mr. [redacted] approved the design for his product sample and completed a questionnaire about the Integrated Product Rendering. In reliance upon his approval, the physical product sample was constructed and presentation materials prepared. Mr. [redacted] was presented an Executive Briefing, which included a photograph of the physical product sample and all relevant engineering drawings. It should be noted that his product sample incorporated OEM parts. The contract explicitly states; “Davison is not required to produce production drawings, CAD drawings or G-Code files for OEM parts.” Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation of his product sample and completed another questionnaire about the Executive Briefing presentation materials. On 01/31/2013, his product idea was presented and unfortunately the target corporation chose not to license his idea. Additional presentation services were offered, though he has declined. At Mr. [redacted]’s request, a brief video was created demonstrating his product sample in use. This video was provided to Mr. [redacted] on 11/21/2013. Copies of the various approvals, authorizations, and signed questionnaires are attached (note the actual approved design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes). Having completed all the services with Mr. [redacted]’s express written approval and authorization, there is no basis to warrant a refund. [redacted] Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: I spent over $14,000 and 15 months on developing a product with Davison which they did not build correctly. I've asked for the president to contact me since June 2013 and as of today have not received a return call. I asked for paper proof beyond the words of Davison employees that they in fact presented my product to a manufacture who throughout the entire process was very impressed with the product and all of a sudden after giving Davison $10,000 for this process the company was no longer interested with no explanation. Davison said they would present my product to another company for an additional $400. When I first looked Davison up on the internet, I didn't see complaints. After I've spent $14,000 I see there are several complaints listed online very similar to mine. Davison promotes how this is a one stop shop for an inventor and sends you success stories that either were edited or one-hit wonders.Desired Settlement: I would only want my money back if Davison would not build my product as I presented it to them - would not provide proof that they did not just take my $10,000 and tell me the company decided not to go with my product - would receive a call from the present of Davison as I've requested - provide the proto-type of my product as promised and have some integrity and give people what they promote.

Business

Response:

See Attached File

July 29,2013

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 07/22/2013. Ms. [redacted]’ complaint alleges that she was misinformed as to the success rates for new product submissions and the fees for re-packaging her product sample, her product sample was “not built correctly”, Davison failed to make a presentation of her product idea, and she demands that the President of Davison personally contact her. As will be detailed below, Ms. [redacted] was apprised, BEFORE any contract was entered, of the high risk of new product development as well as all relevant fees, her sample was constructed according to her express written approval, and to her documented satisfaction, and the presentation was made with her authorization. Her demand to be personally contacted by Davison’s President is simply unreasonable. Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison on 03/22/2012. As with all potential clients, she was provided two disclosure forms, in a printable and savable format, and she acknowledged that she received and read the disclosures. These disclosures outline, among other details, the success rates of Davison in securing licenses, as well as a listing of all services and related fees. Copies of these disclosures are attached. Ms. [redacted] entered into an agreement for the design and construction of a product sample and the preparation of presentation materials. A proposed design was submitted to Ms. [redacted] and she provided her approval of the design. Enclosed, please find a copy of her signed approval of the design (the actual design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes). Also enclosed is a questionnaire in which Ms. [redacted] provided positive feedback about this design. In reliance on her approval, the physical product sample, packaging, and presentation material were created. An Executive Briefing, which contained an actual photograph of the product sample, was provided to Ms. [redacted]. Enclosed please find a copy of a questionnaire about the Executive Briefing in which she again provided positive feedback. Ms. [redacted] authorized the presentation of her product idea to the targeted corporation. A copy of her signed authorization is enclosed. This presentation was made on 01/25/2013. Unfortunately the corporation chose not to license her product. Enclosed, please find a copy of the e-mail accompanying the presentation and the corporation’s response. (Note the actual contact person has been redacted.) In summary, Davison had performed its services with Ms. [redacted]’s written approval and authorization. There is no basis to warrant a refund. In the interest of customer satisfaction, Davison will offer to make one additional presentation of her product idea at not additional cost. If she wishes to accept this offer, She needs only contact our Licensing Department who will make the necessary arrangements.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Review: on 11/20/2013 I contacted this company to inform them not contact my phone number 4[redacted] . They are doing business with my spouse [redacted]. I explained that this was not [redacted]'s Phone, that this Number is registered and paid for by me [redacted] and I'm demanding that they not contact my number anymore and that if they wish to continue to do business with Mr. [redacted] to please find other means of communication besides calling my phone everyday even multiple times a day. which I consider harassment. I was told by the young lady that answered the phone that the removal of my phone number was not an option and that they will continue to call. For them to tell me that they will not remove my number and that they will continue to call is in direct violation of state and federal guidelines created to protect consumers against unwanted solicitation calls. This company is in direct violation of the Federal Trade commission as well as the state legislation that created the Do Not Call List. They are a scam and take your money without providing anything in return. They sell dreams. this company is scam artist telemarketers who will not give you anything they promise the only thing you will get is demands to pay more money to get results which never happens.Desired Settlement: Remove my number from your contact list

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint. The company’s

records reflect that the phone number ###-###-#### was placed on the company’s “do

not call” list on November 20, 2013 at Ms. [redacted]’s request.

If Ms. [redacted] receives any further calls from the company, she should contact

this office directly so that the matter may be investigated and remedied.

I request that his file be closed as resolved.

Review: I retained Davison development services to design, fabricate/create a product, and deliver that product as a working prototype. After paying over $15,000 in fees to contract their services they guaranteed the product they will generate will be proprietary to my requests and won't be taken from any other products on market. Davison sent us two different prototypes that were identical to a product already on market for $125 retail. They simpy packaged another product and sent it to us as our prototype and invention. The two prototypes they sent us for OVER $15,000 are IDENTICAL TO EXISTING PRODUCTS ON MARKET. They truly repackaged the existing product and sent it to us.Desired Settlement: Davison Development should be monitored and affairs looked into as to what they are providing as a product for the high costs they are taking from people. Other people that aren't in the financial position I am in are very badly damaged by these people. I myself am very upset and would like to see a return of my own finances into this project. This is very borderline to a scam from my shoes. I own and operate two separate businesses in Southern california and this conduct would never be tolerated out here.

Thank you.

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 1 2 /1 3 /2 0 1 5 . Weunderstand that customer service is vital in all businesses and is imperative when operating asuccessful business. Customer concerns upset everyone and our sta f f works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time o f an initialcontact, through the research and development o f a new product idea, to the presentation o f ac lien t’s idea, we try to maintain an open channel o f communication, disclosing our services andfees upfront and securing our c lien ts ’ approval and authorization throughout the process.Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularly whentheir product ideas are not licensed. That appears to be the simple truth with Mr. [redacted].Mr. [redacted] first contacted Davison in August 2 0 1 0 by submitting an idea for a newproduct. He entered the initial pre-development contract which obligated Davison to compileresearch on U.S. Patents and products, on the market at that time, which were similar to his idea.This research was completed in 2 0 1 0 . In March 2 0 1 1 , he contracted for the design andconstruction o f a physical product sample. A design was created and submitted for his approval.He provided his signed approval o f the design in August 2 0 1 1 . A copy o f this approval isenclosed; note, the actual design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes. Based on hisapproval, the physical sample was constructed and presentation material created. In January2 0 1 2 , Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation o f his new product idea. Enclosed please find acopy o f his signed authorization. The new product idea was presented to the designatedcorporation who declined to enter a license.Following the rejection o f his idea by the corporation, Mr. [redacted] raised concerns overthe design o f the product sample. Davison’s Office o f the President worked closely andextensively with Mr. [redacted] to address his concerns. Despite having no contractual obligation todo so, Davison agreed to re-design the product sample. A revised design was created andsubmitted for Mr. [redacted] ’s approval. On or about January 11, 2 0 1 5 , he approved this seconddesign and completed a questionnaire about the design in which he provided positive feedback.Enclosed is a copy o f this approval and completed questionnaire. Again, based upon thisapproval, a second product sample was constructed. This second product sample was provided toMr. [redacted]. Following his receipt o f the second product sample, he again raised concerns overthe design, alleging similarities with existing products. The Office o f the President has requested he return the sample along with any comments he may have so that there could befurther discussions to address his concerns. There has been no response from Mr. [redacted], otherthan the current complaint.It bears noting that Mr. [redacted]’s project has been developing over the course o f morethan five years. Davison is not, and can not, be aware o f every idea for a new product thatanyone, anywhere might have or develop. It is not uncommon for multiple individuals toconceive o f the same or similar idea independently. The contracts which Mr. [redacted] enteredexplicitly state;M. Davison cannot be aware of, and is not responsible for, the existence o f every similar productor idea that may already be in the global market, in development by others, or introduced by othersat a later time.O. Client acknowledges that there have been no representations by Davison that the Idea asconceived and submitted by Client is novel or feasible...Davison developed both designs and subsequent product samples with Mr. [redacted]’sexpress written approval and authorization. Davison has gone above and beyond its contractualobligations to address any concern o f Mr. [redacted]. While it is unfortunate that the targetedcorporation did not license his idea, that does not provide a basis for a refund. The fact that otherproducts have been developed by others which are similar to his idea does not provide a basis fora refund to Mr. [redacted]. Davison remains willing to work with Mr. [redacted]. I f he chooses tocontinue to pursue his project, he may contact the Office o f the President at his convenience.Davison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosures

Consumer

Response:

Hello,

Review: I EXPLAINED TO DAVISON IDEA INVENTIONS THAT I HAVE AN IDEA THAT WILL WORK. [redacted]. DAVISON SENTED ME A PRODUCT OF A PICTURE A BASE OF [redacted] THAT I NEVER SEEN IT WAS NOT MY IDEA I CALLED DAVISON AND SENTED HIM A LETTER STATED THIS NOT MY IDEAS. MY VISA FRIST PAYMENT STARTED JULY 4 2011 ---- OCT.8 2013 A TOTAL OF $7130.00 I WANT MY MONEY BACK I HAVE NOT HEAR FROM DAVISON PLEASE HELP 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 08/31/2015. Customerconcerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communicationerrors are kept to a minimum. At the outset, it should be noted that the last contact with Ms.[redacted] was on 11/19/2013, nearly two years ago. The significant delay in her submitting acomplaint bears on the credibility o f her position.From the time o f an initial contact and throughout the process, Davison maintains anopen channel o f communication, disclosing its services and fees upfront and securing the clients’approval and authorization throughout the process. The contracts are simply written, with no“fine print” provisions. It is not possible to be more upfront with its clients about the services andfees. As will be detailed below; Ms. [redacted] selected the payment terms; performance o f theservices has begun; the services provided to date have been performed with her express writtenapproval and to her documented satisfaction; there remains an outstanding balance due; and atMs. [redacted]’s specific request, her file was closed. Davison remains willing to complete allremaining services upon final payment. There is no basis for a refund.Ms. [redacted] submitted an idea to Davison through its website. Subsequently, sheentered into a contract for the design and construction o f a physical product sample, packagingand presentation material. When the contract was presented to Ms. [redacted], there were four (4)fee structures offered; three included varying retainer amounts and associated royalty percentagerates, and one was an hourly rate. Ms. [redacted] was free to select any o f these options. Thecontract provides that no services are due to be performed until full payment o f the agreed fee ispaid. Ms. [redacted] selected a payment structure and has made payment o f 60% of the contractfee, the remaining 40% being outstanding.Understanding that the retainer amounts are sizable sums, Davison does, voluntarily,begin the design phase o f the services when 60% o f the agreed fee has been paid. Accordingly, aproposed design was developed and submitted to Ms. [redacted] for her approval. She approvedthe design and completed a questionnaire in which she provided positive feedback. A copy o f hersigned approval and the completed questionnaire are attached. (Note the actual approved designhas been redacted for confidentiality purposes). To date, Ms. [redacted] has not fulfilled herpayment obligation, and no further services are due to be performed until payment in full hasbeen received.In her complaint, she alleges the proposed design “was not her idea” . It is important tonote 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 which Ms. [redacted] entered explicitly states the following;“1. 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. Theergonomics and aesthetics o f 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. O. 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 function 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.”The design created by Davison was approved by Ms. [redacted], and she completed aquestionnaire documenting her satisfaction with the design. To now allege disapproval isdisingenuous.Ms. [redacted] also alleges “I have not heard from them”; implying a lack ofcommunication from Davison. This too is disingenuous. The last contact with Ms. [redacted] wason 11/19/2013, nearly two years ago. At that time she indicated her desire to end her project andher file was closed. There was no basis for a refund as the revocation period had ended, serviceshad begun and the services were performed to her documented satisfaction. In her complaint, shealleges she made contact with Davison on 08/13/2015. A review of Davison’s phone recordsshow no calls received on that date, or at any other time in 2015.Davison remains willing to complete all services under the terms o f the contract,provided full payment is received. As the services provided to date have met with Ms.[redacted]’s documented satisfaction, there is no basis to warrant a refund.Davison Design and Development, Inc.