Davison Design & Development, Inc.

Review: I was told by Gregg M[redacted] verbally over the phone that the $795 I paid would take care of a provisional patent. Two week ago I learned that I would still have to pay out of pocket to to Davison more money for the patent along with a pre-development product in which they are two entirely different things.

I was never sent any paperwork to fill out to be sent to the U.S. Patent Office for my idea which I was under the impression it was already paid for.

Instead I was sent papers to fill out for various different plans to choose from that I would be comfortable with paying combined with royalties.

I feel that the money I paid already only paid for 3 discs (2 dvd's about half hour long per disc, and 1 computer only disc half hour long) and paperwork. It was roughly between 1/4 - 1/3 of paperwork their company's propaganda in regards to other clients of Davison's ideas that made it to a company shelf or floor. So far I feel as though I was ripped off for nearly $800.

I noticed everything that required my signature clearly stated that all transactions were non-refundable when involving anything of monetary value.

I do not think none of this was fair to me, or anyone else in my position who live pay to pay. I first thought very highly of this company being as though someone from Davison's Company was on a daytime talk show promoting their products that was once an idea.

Now, I have been overwhelmed with a great deal of sadness due to the fact that my idea I had for nearly 10yrs will not reach the next plateau unless I take out a personal bank loan between $11k-$13k, and send it to either Gregg M[redacted] who is the Executive Vice President of New Products, or Davison with no guarantee that I would see any kind of return on my investment.

I did not take out the bank loan; however I would like a full refund of $795.00Desired Settlement: A full refund of $795.00

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 06/06/2016.Customer concerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard to troubleshoot them socommunication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact and throughoutthe development and presentation of the idea, Davison maintains an open channel ofcommunication, disclosing, in advance, its services and fees, the risks of new productdevelopment, and providing contracts that are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. Itis not possible to be more upfront with its clients about the services, fees and the development oftheir project.Ms. [redacted] initiated contact with Davison by submitting an idea through its websiteon 03/03/2014. The electronic submission system utilized by Davison makes it impossible for aclient to submit an idea without having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable andsavable format. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client entersany service contract or makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is the statementthat “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with asubmitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing of the various services and related fees aswell as the historical licensing data. Enclosed, please find a copy of the disclosure detailing theservices and related fees as it was presented to Ms. [redacted]. She acknowledged, via anelectronic signature, that she both received and read these disclosures. Enclosed is a copy of thedata record confirms her acknowledgement on 03/03/2014 at 23:19:59 EST. Note the submittedidea has been redacted for confidentiality purposes.Subsequently, on 02/12/2016, Ms. [redacted] entered the initial pre-developmentcontract which obligated Davison to compile research on U.S. Patents and products, on themarket, which were similar to her idea. This research was completed and the material provided toher in a Product Portfolio on 04/05/20 16. She acknowledged receipt in her complaint.The contract for the pre-development service contains the following provision;“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample, packagingand relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to a Licensee, at Client’ssole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further development services, under a separatecontract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the sample and presentation material for thetargeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtainthem.”Consistent with the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement and the disclosures provided to Ms.[redacted], Davison offered additional services for the further development of her project. Shedeclined these additional services, which is her prerogative.Ms. [redacted]’s complaint makes numerous misstatements. Initially, she alleges shepaid for a provisional patent. This is incorrect. Davison is not a law firm and does not providepatent services, or any other legal services. The disclosures which she acknowledged having readdo not list any patent or legal services. The contract she entered does not provide for any patentor legal services. In fact the contract explicitly states; “Davison is not responsible for applyingfor or obtaining intellectual property protection on the Product or Design including but notlimited to patents, trademarks or trade names.” Secondly, she alleges the Portfolio (3 discs) shereceived was “propaganda”. This is false. The Portfolio contained the custom research regardingher idea and comprised information on eighteen (18) similar products and seventeen (17) U.S.patent documents. Thirdly, she alleges the contracts state that all payments are non-refundable.This is false. Every service contract contains a revocation provision which details the procedurefor cancelling the contract and receiving a refund. However, the contracts are not for thepurchase of an item which can be returned and re-inventoried. The contracts are for theperformance of custom services. As such, there is a limitation on the ability to cancel and receivea refund. This is a reasonable, and clearly explained, limitation. Finally, her complaint states shewants a “guarantee” of a financial gain. This is simply unrealistic. The reality is that the productdevelopment process provides no guarantees of financial gain. The contracts and disclosures areexplicit in this regard.There is no factual basis to support Ms. [redacted]’s complaint. As stated above, shewas fully informed of the services, fees, and risks, BEFORE she entered any contract. Theservices for which she contracted have been performed. Her decision to not pursue the furtherdevelopment of her product idea does not negate the initial service which was completed. Thereis no basis for a refund.David M. D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

There were some facts that were true in the business's response; however on May 11th I have a missed call from Greg M[redacted] at 3:05pm. On May 12th I returned Greg's call at 12:40pm and the call lasted between 10-11 minutes during my lunch hour. In that conversation we discussed a few different things. We discussed going further with the project and I told him that I read over the royalty information along with the 3 payment options he made available for me knowing my financial situation and how it would be easier on me. I also stated I do not have that kind of money and went on to say I already live pay to pay as you can see how my payments were made listed in the file above. I made more frequent payments after I received my income tax. I further said I would have to take out a small loan from the bank. Greg stated "when you go to a bank and ask for a loan do not tell them what it is really for because they will not give you a loan your best bet would be to ask for a personal loan or something to that affect". During this conversation I asked about the patent. Yes I do know they do not mail paperwork from their office for a patent. What I initially said in my complaint " I was told my idea would be sent to the U.S. Patent Office and they would send me paperwork for a provisional patent". I asked specifically do I have to pay additional money for the patent? He said "NO it has already been covered with the $795.00 you paid" I said okay cool. That pretty much wrapped up our conversation that day.

It has been a great experience working with Davinson Design & Development,and very exciting. From the very beginning, at time that I submitted my idea, up until now, the people at Davinson Design has been very professional ,honest,and helpful every step of the way,as well as encouraging & motivating to remain optimistic. Jason Z. (V.P. of new products) has been upfront with me from the very beginning,never pressuring me to do anything I was not sure of,and he always took the time to ensure me that I knew exactly what was being talked about. At no time did I feel obligated. I came to Davinson with My idea,and MY dream. They did not not chase me down and force me to do anything I was not willing to do,so I do not understand the bad reviews against Davinson. I believe they are there to help,and thats exactly what they have done in my case. Thanks for letting me share.

Review: On or about 08/25/2014 I contacted Davison online about an invention idea named [redacted].

Had came up with the idea on or about 05/09/2012 after the [redacted] on the one owned by my mother; [redacted], who passed away on 03/25/2015, started to come unglued from its base & quit coming on entirely within a month.

I then looked at it to find it had shorted out & had received no recall notice of any kind from the manufacturer.

A replacement was found & was installed.

I contacted the manufacturer about my idea & was contacted by them asking me to sign a waiver

Which I did not.

After contacting Davison; I began making payments to them, as much as I could afford, with me being on a veterans disability pension until the $795 initial amount asked for was paid

My project manager; Rebecca M[redacted], is in charge of my [redacted] idea.

She informed me she does not reply to emails; yet she sends me receipts of payments made that way, she however has yet to send me a copy of the $795 I paid while using a different email that I no longer use because it had become hacked, entire bodies of emails vanished so I quit using it & only use the one inputed here to you. Have emailed her 3 times about this & have also asked about patents. All she told me about that is that they will send me an application after I pay them $5850

Have also gotten sevreal letters from Ms. M[redacted] one dated 04/10/2015, a thank you letter, another dated 05/01/2015, from Mr. Davison himself, naming a target company of [redacted]. stating Davison had made 53 presentations & have secured 0 licensing agreements.

Further down in that letter is the mention of the provisional patent being forwarded to me upon completion of the product sample & communication with the targeted company will not begin until a copy of the provisional patent is on file with the United States Patent & Trademark Office.

On 05/12/2015 Ms. M[redacted] sent me another letter informing me that the [redacted] was my idea & to keep it confidential, along with that was another 4 page letter signed by her naming the target company [redacted].

Was unable to send the entire amount of $5850 due to my pension amount of $1072 monthly, that & the fact my mother's death left me with all the bills to pay that she use to including the amount she was paying to me for the rent that I then paid to my brother who lives in the state of Washington

To date have paid to Davison $1171.25 not including the $73.75 just mailed to them which I put a stop payment on after reading a few of the complaints against the**Desired Settlement: My desired outcome would be for a class action suit filed against Davison for a full refund of my money paid to them so far which is $1171.25

I know from reading other complaints no refund will I receive unless they are sued

I no longer want to be contacted by Ms. M[redacted] other than for her to send me my receipt for the $795

Am supposed to call her on 06/16/2016 at 1:30

After filing this complaint I seriously doubt if I will call her as I now feel as though I have been lied to & stolen from by Davison

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 06/03/2016. Customer concerns upset everyone and the 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 development and presentation of the idea, Davison maintains an open channel of communication, disclosing, in advance, its services and fees, the risks of new product development, and providing contracts that are simply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is not possible to be more upfront with its clients about the services, fees and the development of their project.Mr. [redacted] initiated contact with Davison by submitting an idea through its website. The electronic submission system utilized by Davison makes it impossible for a client to submit an idea without having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the client acknowledging that they have received and read the disclosures. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client enters any service contract or makes any payment to Davison. The disclosures provide a listing of the various services and related fees as well as the historical licensing data. Following his acknowledgement of the disclosures, Mr. [redacted] entered the initial pre-development contract which obligated Davison to compile research on U.S. Patents and products, which were similar to his idea. This research was completed and provided to hi** He completed a questionnaire acknowledging that the service was professional and performed in accordance with the contract. A copy of the signed questionnaire is enclosed. Subsequently, he entered an Integrated Product Rendering and Presentation (IPRP) agreement for the design of a rendering of his product idea and creation of presentation material. Mr. [redacted] has made partial payment toward the fee, though a balance remains. Service is not due to be performed until receipt of the full fee.Mr. [redacted]’s complaint makes numerous misstatements. Initially, he alleges he received a letter from Davison indicating that a provisional patent would be forwarded to his attention. This is incorrect. Davison is not a law firm and does not provide patent services, or any other legal services. The disclosures which he acknowledged having read do not list any patent or legal services. The contracts he entered do not provide for any patent or legal services. In fact the pre-development contract explicitly states; “Davison is not responsible for applying for or obtaining intellectual property protection on the Product or Design including but not limited to patents, trademarks or trade names.” Also, the IPRP contracts states: “Davison is not responsible for applying for, assisting with, or obtaining any intellectual property protections on the Product or Design, including but not limited to patents, trademarks and trade names. The Inventor is solely responsible for the completion, sufficiency and timeliness of any application.” The letter to which Mr. [redacted] refers, states that Davison will provide information that he may find useful in filing a provisional application. Secondly, he alleges the payment receipt for the predevelopment contract was not sent to hi** This is false. The records indicate the receipt was e-mailed to both his prior and current e-mail address. However, in light of his complaint, the payment receipt has again been emailed to his current e-mail address. Finally, he alleges an entitlement to a full refund. There is no basis for this position. The initial pre-development services have been performed to his documented satisfaction. The IPRP agreement provided a seven day revocation period in which it could have been cancelled and a full refund provided. Mr. [redacted] did not invoke this provision. The contract further states; “If the Agreement is cancelled, revoked or terminated after the seven business day period, there will be no refund of any amount paid towards the contract fee.” There is simply no basis for a refund.There is no factual basis to support Mr. [redacted]’s complaint. As stated above, he was fully informed of the services and fees BEFORE he entered any contract. The pre-development service has been performed to his documented satisfaction. The IPRP contract was not cancelled within the stated period, thus there is no basis for a refund. Based upon his expressed desire to terminate his relationship with Davison, Mr. [redacted]’s project has been cl[redacted]d.Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refund, Davison has no interest in retaining fees for services that will not be performed. Davison will agree to waive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund 80% of the monies paid toward the IPRP agreement. There is no basis to refund any monies on the pre-development agreement as these services have been performed to Mr. [redacted]’s documented satisfaction. If Mr. [redacted] desires to accept this offer, he need simply contact Davison’s legal department and the paper work will be forwarded to his attention.Sincerely, David ** D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

I talk to Francis K[redacted] on 08/23/2016 he send me idea security agreement and I told him the idea and then he told me you think you have this idea may be someone else have this idea because I waited long to take action on my idea. I asked him how you know that just because it has been one year someone else would just steal it from me. I started to ask him question then he said you know it is not going to work I will close this case. Of course after he took my idea he close the case, before they called me everyday. I called the president of the company and I have not heard anything from them. Pleas beware that they are just getting your idea!

Review: Please help me get my $795 back from Davison.com

In March, 2016 I contacted Davison.com with help for a product idea. I wanted a schematic drawing to attached to a US Patent application. Davison presented several options to me. I told them I could not afford any of their options. Davison said, I could give up 20% of my royalties with a down payment of $795 to proceed. I agreed and allowed them to debit my checking account for $795. (Dumb I know. But, this decision was made over a period of about 10 to 15 days. I read all their documents. There was nothing that was alarming. There paperwork was generic business promotion)

This relationship ended, when Davison finally admitted that they will do nothing for me until I gave them $10,000! I asked “What was the $795 for”? He replied "For the 2 Advertising Disc they sent me". I repeated "So, my $795 was for two disc"? He replied "Yes". I ended the call. I typed a letter requesting a refund of my $795 be returned to me within 30 days. I placed the letter in the original 2 Disc box and returned it via Certified Returned Receipt. (This is the letter - I am returning to you the attached two disc. Following our conversation last week, in which you finally and clearly explained that my initial payment of $795 was these two disc. Mark, this is not a situation I want to enter into. Therefore, I am returning these two disc and expect a full refund. Mark, I am deeply disappointed that my initial payment was not for a schematic drawing of my Umbrella Can idea. Remember, my desire was for a schematic drawing we would attached to my US Patent application. Mark, I am deeply disappointed that my idea of [redacted] is no longer kept in your confidence and could now be exploited. Mark, please return to me my $795 within 30 days as I have now returned to you the attached two disc.)

On July 11, 2016 Davison sent me this email-I was looking through our file on your idea and was wondering if you've done anything with your idea. Have you been able to get someone interested in paying for it? If not, I'd like to talk with you about it. We have payment options that may help you get your idea back on track and in front of a company! When you have a minute, give me a call at the number below or provide me with a number where I can reach you later today.

On July 19, 2016 I replied-Please send me my refund of $795. In May, I've returned your 2 DVD which cost $795 and requested you send me my refund within 30 days. So, please send me my $795 at your earliest convenience. Mark, my property taxes for the first half of this year is $3,942.92. Mark, I've since given up on my idea. Also, I fear you will not refund my $795 and will exploit my idea of [redacted]. [redacted] c. Revdex.com of Western PennsylvaniaDesired Settlement: I returned the 2 DVD's to Davison. Davison now has both their product and my $795. I believe this is wrong. I want my full refund of $795 please.

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 07/22/2016. Customerconcerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communicationerrors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contact and throughout the developmentand presentation of the idea, Davison maintains an open channel of communication, disclosing, inadvance, its services and fees and providing contracts that are simply written, with no “fine print”provisions. It is not possible to be more upfront with its clients about the services, fees and thedevelopment of their project. Ms. [redacted]’s contention that she hired Davison for a schematicdrawing is not supported by the evidence. She contracted for research services which wereperformed. There is no basis for a refund, nor support for her complaint.Ms. [redacted] initiated contact with Davison by submitting an idea through its website on01/17/2016. The electronic submission system utilized by Davison makes it impossible for aclient to submit an idea without having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable andsavable format. It is important to note that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client entersany service contract or makes any payment to Davison. The disclosures provide a listing of thevarious services offered and the related fees. Enclosed, please find a copy of the disclosuredetailing the services and related fees as it was presented to Ms. [redacted]. She acknowledged, viaan electronic signature, that she both received and read these disclosures. Enclosed is a copy ofthe data record confirms her acknowledgement on 01/17/20 16 at 10:18:48 EST. Note thesubmitted idea has been redacted for confidentiality purposes. Subsequently, on 01/22/20 16, Ms.[redacted] entered the initial pre-development contract which obligated Davison to compile researchon U.S. Patents and products, on the market, which were similar to her idea. This research wascompleted and the material provided to her in the computer disks referenced in her complaint.Following completion of the initial service, Davison offered additional services for the furtherdevelopment of her project. She declined these additional services, which is her prerogative.There is no factual basis to support Ms. [redacted]’s complaint. She states that she read allthe documents and that nothing was alarming. However, she contends she hired Davison for aschematic drawing for a patent application. These statements are conflicting. Nowhere in thedisclosures, which detail the services offered, nor in the terms of the pre-development contract,the belief that was the service she contracted for, she is mistaken. Such a mistaken belief is notdue to a lack of disclosure by Davison. She also claims she returned the disks and is warranted arefund. This is not reasonable. The contract was for a service, specifically the compilation ofresearch regarding her submitted idea. The compiled data included eleven (11) U.S. patentdocuments and information on six (6) similar products. The research material is customized, andrelevant only to her product idea; as such, it not capable of being returned and re-inventoried.Ms. [redacted] also raises a concern over the confidentiality of her idea, claiming her idea“is no longer in your [Davison’s] confidence and could now be exploited.” Her concern ismisplaced. All idea submissions to Davison are made pursuant to a Confidentiality Agreement.Davison adheres to this obligation of confidentiality for all submitted ideas, including Mr.[redacted]’s idea. However, Davison is neither aware of, nor responsible for, any and every newproduct idea that might be conceived of by anyone, anywhere. It is not uncommon for multiplepersons to have the same or similar idea.As stated above, she was fully informed of the services offered by Davison BEFORE sheentered any contract. The services for which she contracted have been performed. Hercontention that she contracted for a different service is not supported by the facts. Her decision tonot pursue the further development of her product idea does not negate the initial service whichwas completed. There is no basis for a refund.

Review: I had submitted an idea for an invention and Davison prepared my material for presentation to possible clients. I had paid $800.00 upfront. I want proof that they did that. They keep coming back for more money without providing proof of the presentation. Asking me for $10,000 more dollars to get my product manufactured.Desired Settlement: I would like my $800.00 dollars plus $200.00 for the time and effort I put into working with Jermaine H[redacted] at Davison.

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 about07/24/2016. Customer concerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of aninitial contact and throughout the process, Davison maintains an open channel ofcommunication, disclosing its services and fees upfront, and providing contracts that aresimply written, with no “fine print” provisions. It is not possible to be more upfront withits clients about the services and fees. A review of Mr. [redacted]’s file indicates that allservices, for which he contracted, were completed by March 2015. Now, more than ayear later, he has filed this complaint. The significant delay in presenting his concernsbears on the credibility of his contentions. There is no support for his complaint.Briefly stated, Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison in August 2014, and entered intothe initial Pre-Development and Representation agreement in November 2014. Thisagreement obligated Davison to compile research material relevant to his submitted idea.This service was completed and the research material was shipped to Mr. [redacted] inMarch 2015. The representation services were contingent upon Mr. [redacted]’s obtaininga product sample and presentation materials. The Pre-Development Agreement states inrelevant part;“Section II: Client Obligations, B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining aproduct sample, packaging and relevant information about the product in a professional format forpresentation to a Licensee, at Client’s sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide furtherdevelopment services, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating thesample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtainsuch materials elsewhere or not to obtain them at all. However, materials obtained elsewhere or made byClient are subject to Davison’s approval prior to submission to a Licensee by Davison. If Davison does notapprove the materials made by Client or obtained elsewhere by Client, and Client is unwilling to make suchchanges to the materials as required by Davison, or if Client does not make or obtain presentation materialsand a sample acceptable to Davison, this Agreement will be terminated without refund of any amount paid byClient.On April 10, 2015, consistent with the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement,Davison offered additional services for the creation of the product sample andpresentation materials. Mr. [redacted] declined these additional services, which is hisprerogative. Davison’s last contact with Mr. [redacted] was on June 22, 2015. Now, morethan a year later, the complaint was filed.In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] alleges a presentation of his product idea wasmade by Davison. This is not accurate. As detailed above, the presentation wascontingent upon Mr. [redacted]’s securing a product sample and presentation material. Hedeclined Davison’s offer of services for the creation of these items and has not otherwiseprovided the material. Accordingly, there has been no presentation of his product idea.The services for which there was a contract have been performed. Additionalservices were offered, but declined. There is no basis for a refund.

Review: I payed $75 dollars for my invention. I personally made myself and worked. I Showed drawings pictures told Davison verbally what made, they loved the idea said they can make it better and present it to a company. Davison pressured me to go threw the new development process costing $5,691for a rendering and 9,485 for the prototype that I already perfected but had to do for the preliminary patent to get it sold and patiented . Davison sent me there rendering after I payed $5,691 and wanted me to sign it off as my own it looked like a 5 year old made it and they said it's universal. Plus they alreaIy had something better made so I didn't sign off to it cause it wasn't unique like my idea and it wasn't what I payed for. I told them to make my idea they side it's to costly to make (I payed $75 to make mine and I payed 5,691 for them to make theres so far) . I told them refund me or make my idea Davison said they'll get back to me but never did and ignores my calls and emails to this dayDesired Settlement: I payed 5,691 he wasted my time a total of 7,392 hour we started in October 2012 and it's now September that's the days they wasted, I get payed $20 an hour total of $147,840 they owe me for wasting my time on a product they said they can make and then later on saying it's to complicated and costly for there experts. Refund of $147,840 for wasted time + $5,691= $153,459 they owe me

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 09/19/2013. Please be advised that Mr. [redacted] did contact me directly on 09/30/2013. I attempted to contact him earlier today; however I was unable to reach him and was unable to leave a message as his voicemail was not functional. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] states the proposed product sample design prepared by Davison does not meet his approval and he demands an exorbitant refund. As will be detailed below, Mr. [redacted] has not made full payment of the agreed fee, as such no services are due to be performed. Further, the proposed design meets Davison’s obligation to create a cost effective solution to the problem identified by Mr. [redacted]. There is no basis to warrant a refund. At the outset, Mr. [redacted] makes a misstatement of fact in his complaint that should be clarified. He alleges a fee of “$5,691 for a rendering and 9,485 for the prototype.” This is inaccurate. The agreed fee, selected by Mr. [redacted], is the latter amount. The $5,691 represents the amount of his partial payment. There are not two distinct fees. As there remains an outstanding balance, there are no services contractually due to be performed. Davison does voluntarily begin the design process when a client has paid 60% of the fee, as Mr. [redacted] has paid. It is important to note that Davison is not a prototype manufacturer that creates a product sample based upon the client’s preconceived notions. Davison is a design and development firm whose goal is to create a product sample that is a cost-effective solution to the problem identified by the client. The contract which Mr. [redacted] entered explicitly states the following; “1. A. iv) Preliminary Product Design: Development Team "brainstorming" sessions will be held to uncover product design solutions that blend with the targeted corporation's manufacturing capabilities. The ergonomics and aesthetics of the product are also taken into consideration. This subjective process often results in the Development Team making modifications and ....________ enhancements, which are sometimes substantial, to the proposed solution or the preliminary_______ design submitted by Client, particularly if Client's proposed design is not a cost effective solution to solving the problem outlined by the client, does not reflect current manufacturing techniques or may be in conflict with products patented or on the market.... 1. A. vi) Integrated Product Rendering:.. .Unless requested by a potential licensee, no changes will be made to the product and package design after Client has approved them. 4. O. Client acknowledges that there have been no representations by Davison that the Idea as conceived and submitted by Client is novel or feasible or that the design to be created by Davison will function in the manner and with the attributes as originally conceived by Client.. .This Agreement does not contain or incorporate any specifications, performance characteristics or other qualities for the design or product sample to be produced.” Davison performed its initial design of the product sample and submitted an integrated product rendering for Mr. [redacted]’ approval. There is no contention that the proposed design does not solve the problem the identified. Despite this fact, Mr. [redacted] has refused to approve the design. It is important to clarify that this is only the initial stage of services, which did include the engineering of the proposed product sample. Subsequent services under the Agreement include the construction of the physical product sample, construction of the packaging material, creation of the presentation material, as well as any modifications proposed by a corporation who may chooses to license the product, including all engineering modifications. The fee charged by Davison covers the full range of services detailed in the Agreement, not merely the initial stage of services. In the event Mr. [redacted] believes the proposed design does not solve the problem he identified, or if he believes there is a more cost-effective method to solve the problem, he may provide written details to Davison of the modifications, which will be considered. Further, if Mr. [redacted] were to provide thorough detailed instructions, including all necessary engineering specifications, as to the precise design he desires, Davison will review those specifications. As there are no contractual services due to be performed, and as the proposed design addresses the problem identified by Mr. [redacted] in a cost effective manner, there is no basis to warrant a refund. Certainly there is no basis to support Mr. [redacted]’ demand for payment in excess of $150,000.00. Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

This letter is in response to the letter written by Davison on the details Davison failed to mention. I have numbered each sentence so it would be easier to refer to them. Sentence 1-3: I’ve seen very faint effort if any by the Davison Company. I have tried multiple times to contact Davison and may I add there voice mail states how professional they ought to be when getting a missed call. I’m paraphrasing and it says if Davison misses your call your call WILL be returned before 5:00pm, if after 5:00pm they will return your call the next business day. According to my call history Davison did not respond 9-5-13 I called at 12:47pm and 1:16pm 9-10-13 I called twice 9-11-13 I called twice 9-12-13 I called once 9-13-13 I called 9:39am, 9:41am, 10:12am I left a message, 11:07am, 2:25pm 9-13-13 at 9:49am I sent an email and it read like this Hey [redacted] been trying to reach you all week wana know whats happening with my project get back to me asap please my it thank you 9-17-13 I called 9:08am, 9:11am 9-19-13 I filed a complaint 9-30-13 I called 10:16am 10-1-13 Davison called me at 9:45am I got out of the shower and called 10:08am, 10:21am, 10-3-13 I called 10:38am, 11:09am, and 11:10am I spoke to a lady named Beth I asked her to not to transfer my call but to see if [redacted] is at his desk, she replied yes because his line was busy. So I was able to get a hold of Davidson threw Beth. He said he’s been busy lots of work I seen you called twice today and I’m transferring your file to the president it’s no longer in my hands I’ll let you know what happeneds in two days I asked him if he can send a copy of my file to me he replied that’s impossible. 10-7-13 I called 12:30pm, 12:31pm, and 12:37pm 10-8-13 Davison called at 10:14am I called back 10:15am [redacted] said he’s got no word on what is happening and that he will call soon to keep me updated call me in two days. 10-10-13 I called 8:45am, 8:52am 10-18-13 Barbara [redacted] called me said she got my file. I asked her what was in it and according to her answer there were missing files that I sent them. So I sent the video and pictures of what my rendering should signify. And she said she will investigate my file to see if they will redo the rendering. Barbara [redacted] gave me no clear answers and no indication that they will do my product sample like they should have done. She gave no indication of working with me. She added on the 10-22-13 she will be busy but will ? try to get back to me if not for sure 10-23-13. To this day I haven’t received any phone call from her to this day and today is 10-28-13. Davison is very hard to SentenceS: They said at 60% they will start my rendition. But first they needed me to sign off and approve their rendition of my idea. Davison presented to me on 8-13-13 at 12:40pm via email their rendition. When I seen the picture of their rendition, it looked like aS year old pieced the parts together with my invention absent from the picture. Therefore making this rendition theirs not mine. So I refused to sign off on their idea because I paid 60% for my idea not this substandard thing they came up with. After I didn’t sign they stopped contacting me until I contacted the Revdex.com. In the new product sample agreement under 1. Services provided A. Creating presentation materials: vi) Integrated Product rendering: In this paragraph it states rendering needs my approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld by client. What I’m asking for is well within reason. Sentence 6: They failed to meet their obligation of cost effectiveness and failed to produce my product which I conveyed to them threw drawings, pictures, parts needed to build my product before the contract was made. In reply Davison said they can make my idea better because they have professionals. So taking from what I seen on their rendition I priced out the parts vs the parts I used to make my prototype. Davison’s Team. Me. $44.99 $44.99 $30. $30. $100. $20. $142.07 Total cost: $317.06 $94.99 Plus man hours) Davison’s team: On June 10, 2013 I hit 60% and on August 13, 2013 I got the email they finished the rendering and is ready for viewing and its uninstalled. Me it took me three hours and is installed and working. Sentence 7-12: There’s no misstatement of fact on my part, Davison says I’m calling $5,691 A fee for the rendering and that’s not so. I’m saying according to what Davison told me they conveyed once I hit 60% Davison was going to start the rendition with my idea and have it sent for my approval. So they made theireasy way out and didn’t approve their substandariattemptat making my invention and that’s what happened. Sentence 13: Davison is the one calling the 60% a fee. Sentence 14: In other words Division states after I sign the contract I have no say in what they do therefore showing they take peoples money and waste peoples time. Sentence 15: My product sample is cost effective shown in my reply sentence 6 and again what is the problem I identified? Sentence 16-19: Davison did not do what the contract says they would do that’s why the rendering looked like a kid did it. My product is more cost effective than Davison’s and all the parts are found with the targeted company’s materials, furthermore my product passed the patent search. So my invention is within contractual standards. Sentence 20: I did not approve of Davison’s rendition and that’s why Davison is upset. Sentence2l: If there design is better than my idea then they should guarantee me its success. My Dad was able to get in contact with Davison because I was unavailable on 8-16-13 at 9:20am. Davison said they cannot guarantee anything on their rendering. Which shows they acknowledge how poorly made and embarrassing their rendition is. Sentence 22: In sentence 21 it says Davison will function in the manner and with the attributes as originally conceived by the client. Davison failed to do any of this that’s why I didn’t sign. Sentence 22 sounds to me they don’t have to produce anything that has to do with my idea therefore sentence 21 and 22 contradict each other. Sentence 23-25: Davison submitted their design of the product. lam contending that the purposed design made by Davison does not do what my invention was made to do. Davison knows their rendition is far below any standard of any idea and nothing like I presented to them? For example if I invented an orange juice squeezer that squeezes oranges to make juice, and I present this to Davison blue prints, pictures, video, how to make it, how it works, how it fits in a small space. Davison comes out with the rendition and it’s a Tupperware bowl, instructions: 1.place orange on table 2.Put bowl on orange 3. Push down heavily on orange until juice is extracted. Davison says it’s made from the same material, it’s cost effective, it does the job, here is your invention sign it. This illustration is exactly what Davison has done to me no effort no thought no work was done on there be half and they expect me to embrace their sorry rendition because their experts and their team is professional with years of experience. This is why I refused to sign off on their rendering because they left my invention out of their rendering. Sentence 26-28: In order for the initial stages of service to begin Davison must first do as they said they would do and” make MV IDEA into a reality.” Sentence 29-31: believing? It’s not a matter of believing the purposed “their purposed” design is morerostly, is embarrassing, outlandish and completely opposite of my idea. I showed Davison my rendition “they said they would make it better.” My invention is more cost effective and I made other solutions to make my rendition cheaper with written detail and video of it working and installed parts to makes it which I sent to [redacted] representing Davison. Still Davison deliberately ignored and said they have experts to take care of this, when in fact Davison did the opposite violating sentence 29 stating if I come up with a more cost effective solution Davison will consider the proposed design. In sentence 30. I provided multiple detailed instructions, and Davison not considering my invention said they would make my invention better. In reality made it look like a kindergartenes project. Sentence 32-33: If Davison cannot make my idea they should admit they are incapable of making my invention as I have laid out for them. They need to refund all that’s due to me patent search and all (everything) plus interest. I believe I have shown that Davison has not lived up to their end of our agreement and contract and on that basis warrant a full and complete refund. [redacted]

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the additional comments submitted by Mr. [redacted] in the above referenced matter. His comments do not raise any new issue that was not addressed in our initial response. Rather, Mr. [redacted] has taken phases from the response out of context in an attempt to substantiate his positions. In an effort to be [redacted] responsive, I will address the misstatements. On page two of his supplemental comments Mr. [redacted] states; “Sentience 22: In sentence 21 it says Davison will function in the manner and with the attributes as originally conceived by the client. Davison failed to do any of this.. .“ As stated in the initial response, in the actual provision 4.0. the language is predicated with “there have been no representations by Davison that...” Also on page two, Mr. [redacted] states: “after I sign the contract I have no say in what they do...” This too is inaccurate. As stated in our initial response, section 1. A. vi) states Unless requested by a potential licensee, no changes will be made to the product and package design after Client has approved them. As stated in the initial response, Davison remains willing to receive input on changes toward the agreed goal a cost effective product sample that addresses the problem identified. Mr. [redacted] also raised concern of the “cost effectiveness” of the proposed design and cites his cost of creating his prototype. The actual cost of constructing a product sample or prototype has little to do with the “cost effectiveness” of a design. The cost which is the basis of concern is the manufacturing, production, marketing and distribution costs that a potential licensee may need to consider before licensing a specific product idea. As there are no contractual services due to be performed, and as the proposed design addresses the problem identified by Mr. [redacted] in a cost effective manner, there is no basis to warrant a refund.

Consumer

Response:

This letter is in response to the second letter written by Davison on the unsettled issues. (Response to paragraph 2) .Let me clarify so that 4.O. is crystal clear Davison DID NOT MAKE MY IDEA AT ALL Davison made their Idea and want’s to call it mine and insist that I accept it. Therefore Davison is the one violating the 4.O. in our agreement and are in breach of contract. (Response to paragraph 3) . I AM NOT INACCURATE I have sent videos, and pictures of my invention made and working, I have sent pictures of the individual parts to make my idea including instructions on how to build and to install it. Fact: Davison has not incorporated any of it as stated in the third paragraph. I’m at a loss at how this great company DAVISON "full of innovative and creative people…" is unable to keep their own contract; and to produce and follow simple instructions that I have given them and said "THEY CAN MAKE AND MAKE BETTER". And like Davison says in our contract 1. A. vi) states unless requested by a potential licensee, no changes will be made to the product and package design AFTER Client has approved them. Davison I HAVE NOT APPROVED OF YOUR INCOMPATENT, LOUSY, SHAMEFULL, AND STUPID DESIGN. Therefore Davison has violated and is in breach of contract. Because they refuse to make my product to begin with 1. A. vi). Again Davison I HAVE NOT APPROVED YOUR RENDITION DESIGN. Davison says that the basis of concern is the manufacturing, production, marketing, and distribution cost that a potential licensee may need to consider before licensing a specific product idea. To make this portion clear the marketing and distribution of both ideas will be the same. Manufacturing and production will be less expensive for my invention than Davison’s rendition because my invention is one major piece and several smaller parts in contrast their rendition is a combination of multiple major parts and several smaller pieces. My invention is lighter and substantially less bulky than their massive convoluted mess of parts. Being that these are the only issue’s Davison brought up it is safe to conclude that Davison agrees with all the other issues I clarified previously and are now closed. If Davison cannot make my idea they should admit they are incapable of making my invention as I have laid out for them. They need to refund all that’s due to me patent search and all (everything) plus interest. I believe I have shown that Davison has not lived up to their end of our agreement and contract again and on that basis warrant a full and complete refund. Factually [redacted] P.S. Davison was kind responsive answered my phone calls the same day, professional as long as my money was going into Davison’s pocket. The moment I disagreed on their rendition they did not answer any of my phone calls, emails, messages and became impossible to get a hold of. I changed my account to prevent Davison from taking any more money out of my account.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the additional comments submitted by Mr. [redacted] in the above referenced matter. Without reiterating our position as fully set forth in our prior responses, please note that I have reached out to Mr. [redacted] on 12/03/20 13, by phone and e-mail, and presented Davison’s offer to [redacted] address his concerns. Mr. [redacted] has declined to accept, or refuse, this offer. Davison remains willing to pursue his project. However, in light of Mr. [redacted]’ failure to render a decision regarding the offer, there is nothing further to pursue. Accordingly his project will be closed until such time as Mr. [redacted] advises Davison of his desire to proceed. I kindly ask that his complaint be closed as Davison has demonstrated a good faith effort to resolve his concerns. Associate Counsel

Review: I contracted with [redacted] at Davison to develop an idea that I submitted in great detail. December 2011. I was told that I would be notified of any changes to the product and have the right to approve or disapprove. I was never contacted. When I received the product rendering after a year and many calls to find out where we were in the process, the overall package design was not what was discussed. During the pre-design process, I was told by my director that I would be allowed to give feedback for each stage of development, in which Davison would then use to make adjustments. A client/designer communication would be established and a two-way street of feedback/implementation would continue until the client is satisfied and thus could proceed to the next step. This was a critical point in my decision to work with Davison, as I was willing to supply my additional drawings, which I did to [redacted], Managing Senior Director of Licensing by email and fax. However, this communication turned out not to be true. After speaking to [redacted], she confirmed that the design process was designed specifically for the company which they targeted. Davison provides what they think is best and there is no option to rework a project if the customer is dissatisfied. I was also told that my idea would be presented to the target company in person, so that it could be explained and demonstrated with me in attendance. This also turned out not to be true. The only initial piece of information the target company received was a virtual rendering by email. The images on the product packaging themselves were photo-shopped and the working product depicted on the image was grossly enlarged, completely misrepresenting my product I initially submitted.Desired Settlement: It is my request after several attempts by email and phone calls with no results from anyone in the Davison Camp to receive a full refund of monies paid in the amount of $10,231. I am not disappointed over the result of my idea, but the design process in which Davison attempted to represented themselves it the contract presented to me. Davison and staff are paper bullies after they receive your money, and trick you into thinking you have no other choice but to adhere to their thoughts.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. Roderick[redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 06/12/2013. Inhis complaint Mr. [redacted] makes several inaccurate statements including; “I received theproduct rendering after a year.. .the overall package is not what was discussed.. and “I was toldI would... have the right to approve or disapprove. I was never contacted.” The general complaintappears to be with the design of his product sample, the timeliness of performance and themethod of presentation of his product idea to the targeted corporation. As will be detailed below,Davison performed its services in a prompt and professional manner, with Mr. [redacted]’swritten approval and authorizations. While it is unfortunate that the targeted corporation chosenot to license his ides, that fact does not warrant a refund for services rendered.Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea in September of 2011. At that time he entered into a Pre-Inventegration Agreement for the completion of research relevant to his product idea. On 11/29/2011, following completion the research services, Mr. [redacted] entered into an agreement for the design and construction of a product sample and the preparation of presentation materials. No services were due to be performed under this agreement until fullpayment was received. Mr. [redacted] made final payment on 01/17/2012. A proposed design was submitted to Mr. [redacted] on 03/23/2012 - barley more than three months after payment was received. Mr. [redacted] did not approve this initial design, and he supplied comments about proposed changes on 05/01/2012. Based upon his additional input, the product rendering was redesigned; the revised rendering was sent to him on 08/27/2012. Mr. [redacted] approved this redesigned rendering. Enclosed, please find a copy of his signed approval of the design (the actual design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes). In reliance on his approval, the physical product sample, packaging, and presentation material were created. On or about 12/01/2012, Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation of his product idea to the targeted corporation. A copy of his signed authorization is enclosed. The presentation of his product idea was made on 02/27/2013. Unfortunately the corporation did not license his product idea. Mr. [redacted] has not authorized any additional presentations. With regard to the form of presentation, there are two relevant provisions. First, in the representation Agreement, it explicitly states; “Davison, in its sole discretion, will determine the method of communication with a Licensee concerning Client's product, which depends largely upon the practices and preferences of the Licensee.” Second, in the authorization to make the presentation, (a copy of which is enclosed), it explicitly states; “I authorize Davison to ship visual information prior to shipping product sample materials.” These two provisions are necessary a search corporation has its own policy and procedure concerning the submission of new product ideas. At all times, Davison endeavors to present a client’s product idea in a manner that will allow a full and fair evaluation from the targeted corporation. As the above summary indicates, the services rendered by Davison were prompt, and in accordance with Mr. [redacted]’s written approval and authorization. Further, the summary indicates not only the opportunity for him to have input into the product design, but his actual involvement in the design process. While it is unfortunate that his product idea has not been licensed, the product development process provides no guarantees of financial gain. Our contracts and disclosures are explicit in this regard. While this is of little comfort to a client who has expended considerable time, money, effort and emotion into a project, the fact that a particular project does not bring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that were provided.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted]2, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]

Regards,

Roderick [redacted]

@font-face {

font-family: "Times New Roman";

}@font-face {

font-family: "Calibri";

}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri; }table.MsoNormalTable { font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.NoSpacing, li.NoSpacing, div.NoSpacing { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

July 2, 2013

Rejection to Answer of Davison Counsel

Dated June 24, 2013

There is no dispute that yes, I did make first contact and yes I did sign the initial contract dated November, 2011.

My dispute is with what was to be considered the “Final Design” of Profession Razor, dated September 12, 2012. I did sign the rendering in August, 2012 but there were verbal communication made between myself and [redacted], yet again about my disappointment of what the outcome of the design. I was then told that I would hear back from Autumn Luniewski, Director of Licensing who would discuss with me my continued concerns regarding the product,( i.e changing the name without consent, the look and packaging, the presentation).

During that time several calls were made to Davison for updates, and they went un-responded. What I didn’t know is that during this time, my design (Davison design) had already been submitted to the “Target Company” without my consent and then it wasn’t done in person as first stated. This is when things went sour with regard to my continued distrust with what I was being verbally told and what was actually happening. I requested several times to be present at the time of the presentation.

Attached is what supposed to be the Rejection Letter submitted by BIC. What I noticed first is the heading or lack thereof, there is no signature of any representative and if indeed Davison is to have such a great relationship with this company, why was the letter so informal. I believe that BIC would agree that what is attached is not legitimate.

I was then told that the design would be introduced to a new company, but of course there would be more funds associated with this if I wanted to continue with the changes I wanted. What is ironic is that most of the conversations are done by phone so there is no paper trail. But I’m sure if the calls are indeed recorded as the recording states then there should be several conversations with several departments about my disappointment and there intent to hold true to what was first stated in the contract. Attached is another contract dated March 19, 2013 naming the new “Target Company [redacted]”. After looking into the company, [redacted], myself, it was discovered this company closed its doors November, 2012, prior to the contract sent to me for new targeting. This information was clearly stated on the website, surely Davison's Licensing Department should know what companies are in business to initiate future ideas and business opportunities with regard to new products.

Summary: There were too many inconsistencies with what was being said over the phone and what was being done on the surface. I’ve yet to receive the 3D Version of what my product was to look like or never received a physical prototype of the product. Everything was done by email. This is the basis for my request of a refund.

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the additional comments provided by Mr. [redacted] regarding the above referenced complaint. Each of his concerns will be addressed individually.

Modification of Design after approval. Mr. [redacted] alleges a verbal agreement that his product sample design would be modified AFTER he provided his signed approval of the design. This allegation is in direct conflict with the terms of the contract. The contract states; "Unless requested by a potential licensee, no changes will be made to the product and package designs after Client has approved them."

Presentation. Mr. [redacted] alleges the presentation of his product idea was made with out his consent. That is inaccurate. As stated in our initial reply, Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation, in writing, on or about 12/01/2012 and the presentation was made on 02/27/2013. Also, as stated in our initial response, the contract provided; "Davison, in its sole discretion, will determine the method of communication with a Licensee concerning Client's product, which depends largely upon the practices and preferences of the Licensee."

Product Sample. Mr. [redacted] asserts that he did not receive the physical product sample.

That is true. The contract explicitly states; "The items to be delivered for Client's possession pursuant to this Agreement are the Integrated Product Rendering and the Executive Summary. Client intends that Davison will retain possession of the product and packaging sample, unless Client requests otherwise in writing." Mr. [redacted] never made such a written request. We will treat his supplemental comments as his written request, and have our Licensing Department contact Mr. [redacted] to make arrangements for the shipment of his product sample.

The services rendered by Davison were prompt, and in accordance with Mr. [redacted]’s written approval and authorization. While it is unfortunate that his product idea has not been licensed, the product development process provides no guarantees of financial gain.

Consumer

Response:

August 21, 2013

As this letter is in response to Mr. [redacted], Counsel for Davison, his accounting of details has been misstated. And also, there were items in my last response that he did not address, i.e. (Fraudulent letter from BIC and new target company “[redacted]” (whose doors were already closed prior to in November 2012).

My disappointment is not that my idea had not been licensed but the mere fact that Davison has this juggling affect to shuffle individuals around, use quick and fast language verbally and in writing, having people think there is movement in their product, when all along there is nothing going on lies being told to keep you at bay of the truth. Davison keeps you on board with all the terminology and DVD’s they send while at the same time prying you for more money.

Mr. [redacted] did not address the changing of my product name as I did not give anyone approval verbally or written to do such. And as I stated before there were many conversations by phone and agreements made that was not put in writing from Davison. They state that all phone calls are being recorded and those recordings would be proof of the communication between myself and [redacted] (no longer employed with Davison) and [redacted] .

Also, it was not until this inquest began that Davison has engaged in sending me the physical product sample. But what I don’t get is that you want me to sign a consent stating that you are not responsible for the delivery of the product. Since this begin, you have not been accountable for anything. I just need for Davison to be held accountable for their lack of communication and services to the public and, taking of funds for services not rendered.

After several attempts to speak with the actual owner of Davison and to no avail, here were are now. I would like for my money to be returned, if not granted all of the funds then more than half for work not done.

Review: Davidson said that they were interested in my idea. I spoke to [redacted] on the phone, he called a few times as I was having severe issues with stabalizing my WiFi Connectivity that I am using my phone line through.

All (he) told me was that I'd have to call a Company for myself to "sell my product". I told my Mother about this who then informed me that Davidson are [redacted] according to the [redacted] and so I didn't respond to the last call I recieved from Davidsons. AS few days ago I recieved an email from, [redacted] They are offering me $50 off of a "Pre-Development amount" that I will owe at a later date!! IThis Company hasn't done anything for me at all, other than to take my idea, should they Genuinely decide that its good. I do not owe them anything at all.Desired Settlement: I want Davidson to leave me alone and to never email me again.

Business

Response:

[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania[redacted]February 20, 2015Re: [redacted]Your ID#: [redacted]Dear [redacted];This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 02/14/2015.At the outset, it should be made clear the **. [redacted] has not engaged any services withDavison, nor has she made any payments to Davison.On 0119/2015, **. [redacted] initiated contact with Davison by submitting an ideafor a new product through Davison’s website. She made this contact by entering aConfidentially Agreement. Under the express term of the Agreement; “Davison will notuse, disclose, license or sell this idea with out my [**. [redacted]] express writtenpermission.” Davison takes the obligation of confidentiality seriously, and abides by theterrm of the Agreement. Representatives from Davison have been in contact with her todiscuss her idea and to offer Davison’s services. **. [redacted] has not engaged any services.At her request, as contained within her complaint, she has been placed on our “DoNot Contact” list. In light of the fact that no service contract was entered, no paymentswere received, and no future contact with **. [redacted] is anticipated, I kindly request thather complaint be closed as “resolved”.Sincere[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Review: Hired Davison to invent and patent my invention and that it would only take a few weeks to get on the market and only a few hundred dollars to have it patent. After several weeks of call back and forth to a man named [redacted] states that it will cost us $699 to have the producted started. Then after several more weeks of call he states that I must pay another $1000 to get the development and my product patent and in front of a store. Nick then sends me a DVD that was suppose to have my invention development on it, but it did not have my invention on it it had someone elses invention it. Nich then reguested more money for them to proceeded with the invention and stated that it would cost an additional $10,600.00 more with 5% rolyalties to Davison. He then stated that nothing would be done until the money paid and that is not what he originally agreed on when we first hired him. Davison has over 250 complaints of stealing peoples inventions and money. I want my money back and and for the stress that I have had to deal with his on going calls every day that have stressed me out some compensation. I also want to make sure that Davison does not steal my invention.Desired Settlement: I want a complete refund and compensation for the stress and agreement that they will not use my ideal.

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

08 27 2014. At the outset, please note that I have attempted to contact Ms. [redacted] to

discuss her concerns, but have been unable to reach her. In her complaint, Ms. [redacted]

makes numerous statements that mischaracterize the services offered by Davison. As

will be detailed below, Davison has provided the services which were contractually due

and Ms. [redacted] has failed to meet her obligation of full payment in order for any

outstanding services to become due. Accordingly, there is no basis for a refund.

Ms. [redacted] alleges she hired Davison to “patent my invention”, “that it would

only take a few weeks to get on the market” and she makes defamatory statements

alleging theft of ideas. Initially, Davison is not a law firm and we do not advertise that

we provide patent services or any other legal services. The contracts for services that we

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

explicitly state that Davison is not responsible for applying for or obtaining any

intellectual property protections on the Product or Design, including but not limited to

patents, trademarks and trade names. To the extent Ms. [redacted] believes our services

include patenting of product ideas, she is mistaken, through no fault of Davison.

Secondly, her contention that the product development process from an initial idea,

through research, design, construction, presentation, licensing, manufacturing and

distribution would only take a few weeks is simply wrong. Finally, Davison is bound by

an obligation of confidentiality for all ideas submitted to us. We take this obligation

seriously and abide by its requirements for all clients, including Ms. [redacted]. Her

defamatory comments about the theft of ideas have no basis in fact.

Ms. [redacted] entered into two separate contracts for services. The first, the Pre

Development Agreement was entered on 04/30/20 14 and obligated Davison to compile

research data relevant to her submitted idea. This service was completed and the research

was sent to Ms. [redacted] on or about 06/16/2014. Following the completion of the first

contract, on 08 05 2014, Ms. [redacted] entered into a second contract, the New Product

Sample Agreement for the design and construction of a product sample. This contract

provided a seven day revocation period which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She selected

a payment option and has made partial payment toward the fee. The contract provides

that no services are due until full payment has been received. Davison is willing to

proceed under the terms of the contract; however there is no basis for a refund if the

contact is cancelled after expiration of the revocation period.

Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refund, Davison has no

interest in retaining fees for services that will not be performed. Davison will agree to

waive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund 80% of the monies paid toward the

New Product Sample Agreement. There is no basis to refund any monies on the Pre

Development Agreement as these services have been performed. If Ms. [redacted] desires

to accept this offer, she need simply contact our legal department and the paper work will

be forwarded to her attention.

Consumer

Response:

I never said they would steal my Invention I just stated that I am afraid they may steal it since I have read many complaints that they have in the past to other clients. And the first $800 was a retainer not a research fee. My sister was a witness to this who help pay for it. Then they said that I need to pay another $1000 to start the development of my Invention and to this day they haven't shown me any thing about my ideal except other people stuff. I have contact a patent lawyer who told me that a research of invention ideals costs only $199.00 so what was the other $600 I paid them for? I want all of the $1600 and they can keep the $199.00.

Thank you.

Business

Response:

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

regarding the above referenced complaint.

First, her contention that the payment for the Pre-Development services was

anything other than a fee for service is incorrect. The contract language states:

“Consideration. The Client agrees to pay $795.00, which is due prior to the performance

of any service by Davison.” She paid $695.00, having received a discount of $100, and

the services were performed. Second, she alleges an unnamed patent attorney informed

her that “research of invention ideals costs only $199.00”. I can not comment on the

availability of other services, the scope of other services, or the benefits of other service

providers. Davison’s Pre-Development contract sets forth the explicit scope of the

services to be provided which include: Product Related Data, Patent Review,

Corporation Review, Product Planning Sessions, a Portfolio, and Presentation services.

Finally, Ms. [redacted] makes a counter offer of resolution. Davison stands by its offer as

set forth in the initial reply. However, it should be pointed out that Ms. [redacted] has filed

a dispute through her credit card company challenging the validity of the charges.

Davison’s offer is now contingent upon Ms. [redacted]’s withdrawal of her credit card

dispute.

Davison will agree to waive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund 80% of

the monies paid toward the New Product Sample Agreement, provided Ms. [redacted]

withdraws her dispute. If Ms. [redacted] desires to accept this offer, she need simply

contact our legal department and the paper work will be forwarded to her attention.

Review: I hired Davison Design & Development for assistance in patenting my product idea. The contracted agreement between myself and Davison stated that the company would provide assistance in regards to patent research, product design & development, as well as targeting a potential company as a buyer. The product idea was to be pitched to the potential buyer, who would then take license over the patent and I would receive a royalty commission from the sale proceeds. I paid the total service fee of $715.00 based upon the expectation that Davison would fulfill their contractual obligation. However, in return for my money, I only received information regarding patent research on the product and the name of a potential target company. The company failed to pitch the product idea to the potential licensee, although the original contract states that they would pitch the idea without details or samples, but with only emailed design images. I was told that this pitch method would save me the loss of investing, should the potential licensee not want to purchase the product idea. However, I was recently informed that I would need to produce a product sample to present to the potential buyer; which would cost an upwards of $8k-$10k depending on the type of product development that is agreed upon. When I asked about the change in the agreement, I was told that changes in the contract occur at their discretion and that they did not even expect to get a response from the potential licensee without a product sample. I expressed confusion and frustration to the company because I feel that they pulled the old bait and switch on me. Had I known that a product sample would have been needed I would have never paid the fee of $715. When I requested a refund I was told they would not refund my money.Desired Settlement: I would like a full refund of the $715 fee because Davison engaged in false advertisement and deceptive business practices in this matter.

Business

Response:

See attached

July 25, 2013This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 07/18/2013. In her statement, Ms. [redacted] alleges she was not informed that a product sample would be needed and demands a refund for services rendered. As will be detailed below, Ms. [redacted] was fully appraised of the types of services offered and their related fees BEFORE any contract was entered, and the contract which she did enter explicitly notes the need for a product sample. Her complaint provides no basis to warrant a refund.

Initially, Ms.[redacted]’s complaint states she hired Davison for “assistance in patenting my product idea”. It should be made clear that Davison is not a law firm. We do not advertise that we provide patent services or any other legal services. The contracts for services that we do offer do not include patent filing services or any other legal services. The contracts explicitly state that Davison is not responsible for applying for or obtaining any intellectual property protections on the Product or Design, including but not limited to patents, trademarks and trade names. To the extent Ms.[redacted] believes our services include patenting of product ideas, she is mistaken, through no fault of Davison.

Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. On 11/13/2012, 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. The disclosure statements set forth, among other details, the following statements;

It is Davison's normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea.

Those contracts are:

Pre-Development and Representation- Davison will: (a) provide information on products and patents relevant to the development of the product idea; and (b) attempt to locate a licensee for the product idea after it is fully developed. Davison charges a fee of seven hundred and ninety five dollars ($795) plus a ten percent commission of all money received by the client on the sale or license of the product.

Types of Second Phase Agreements- Depending upon the degree of client preparation and the difficulty of the concept, Davison typically offers either: (a) New Product Sample Agreement- Davison offers to professionally design and construct a product sample, graphics, packaging and presentation materials; (b) Integrated Product Rendering agreement- Davison offers to prepare design images and graphics suitable for presentation of the idea; or, (c) Custom agreement- Davison offers to perform services in one or more areas of video, design work, graphics or package preparation. While the fees for these services are individually quoted based upon the complexity, type and anticipated design work and materials to be used in designing and constructing the invention, the fees typically range from eight thousand dollars ($8,000) to fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). Turning ideas into products

Repackaging/refurbishment- For three hundred and eighty five dollars ($385) we will create an additional set of graphics/packaging and, if necessary, refurbish/repair a product sample for a presentation to an additional potential licensee.

Representation Agreement- Clients who have quantities of professionally manufactured products and are looking for licensing or distribution channels may be offered this service in lieu of all other services. The service includes targeting potential corporations, presenting the product to potential licensees or distributors, as requested, and attempting to negotiate agreements for the license or distribution of the manufactured product. The fee is typically five thousand, eight hundred and fifty dollars ($5,850) plus a ten percent commission on all money received by the client on the sale or license of the product.

On 11/20/2012, Ms. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services which obligated Davison to compile research data related to her product idea. Davison completed the Pre- Development services and forwarded the compiled research to Ms.[redacted] on or about 04/19/2013. Ms. [redacted] complaint acknowledges her receipt of these materials.

The Pre-Development Agreement states in relevant part (emphasis added);

“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample and relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to a Licensee, at Client's sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further development services, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the sample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain them.”

Further, as Ms. [redacted] is an Illinois resident, her contract provided additional disclosures similar to the ones cited above and the contract provided the following explicit disclosures;

1. “Davison has no obligation hereunder to construct one or more prototypes, models, or devices embodying the Client's invention.”

2. “No portion of the fee charged will be expended for services relating to patent matters.”

3. “We are not qualified or permitted to advise you whether protection of your idea or invention is available under the patent, copyright, or trademark laws of the or any other law.”

Following the completion of the services under the Pre-Development Agreement, on 05/28/2013, Davison provided to Ms.[redacted] a proposed agreement for further development work. This proposal is consistent with our disclosures and the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement. To date, Ms.[redacted] has not engaged these additional services, which is her prerogative.

Davison fully disclosed the scope of our services and fees BEFORE Ms.[redacted] entered into any contract. We having completed the services for which there existed a contract, and she has simply chosen to not further pursue her project. There is no valid basis to warrant a refund for services rendered.

Consumer

Response:

Review: The company representative Mr. [redacted] charged a payment of $500.00 from my account without my prior authorization. After that illegal transaction, I decided I no longer wanted to do business w/ a crooked company like that , and decided to cease all business dealings with this fraudulent company and requested all my current payments refunded to me. I have not received a call back with many attempts and no correspondence from them.I also received a call from [redacted] stating that he wanted to move my product forward because [redacted] departed from the company and he was taking over for him. I explained the deceit from Mr.[redacted] and the company and no longer wanted to move forward and I wanted a total refund and have never received a call from them.Desired Settlement: I would expect a total refund of the monies that I have given this company under their mischievous business practices.

Business

Response:

Mr. [redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania[redacted]

[redacted]March 30, 2014Re: [redacted]Your ID#: [redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted];This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about03/20/2015. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of aninitial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to maintain an openchannel of communication. In her statement, Ms. [redacted] makes inflammatoryallegations of conduct which are simply not supported by the facts. Davison hasperformed its services which were contractually due. Ms. [redacted] has not met herobligation of payment, thus any outstanding services are not yet due to be performed.At the outset, Ms. [redacted]’s allegation that Davison processed a charge withouther authorization is meritless. It is Davison’s policy to secure specific authorization fromits client for each specific charge. A review of her file indicates the last payment on herproject was in January 2013 and Davison was in contact with her on the date of thecharge. As will be detailed below, Davison has continued to be in contact with Ms.[redacted] over the past two years and there has been no prior claim of an unauthorizedcharge. To voice such a claim, more than two years after the charge, and after years ofcontinued contact with Davison, evidences a fabrication on her part.Ms. [redacted] has been a valued client since first contacting Davison in June 2012.She entered into two separate contracts for services. The first, the Pre-DevelopmentAgreement obligated Davison to compile research data relevant to her submitted idea.This service was completed and the research was sent to Ms. [redacted] in August 2012.Following the completion of the first contract, Ms. [redacted] entered into a second contract,the New Product Sample Agreement, for the design and construction of a product sample. This contractprovided a seven day revocation period which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She selected apayment option and has made a series of partial payments toward the fee, the last chargeoccurring on January 22, 2013. The contract provides that no services are due until fullpayment has been received. Davison continued to be in contact with Ms. [redacted] over thenext two years. Most recently, in January 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison via email, requesting a copy of the contract. There was no reference to a claimedunauthorized charge, or a stated termination of the contract. Davison is willing toproceed under the terms of the contract; however there is no basis for a refund if thecontract is cancelled after expiration of the revocation period.Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refbnd, 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 80% 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 me directly in our legal department and thepaper work will be forwarded to her attention.[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Turning

Consumer

Response:

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

Review: I initially paid $695 to have "research" done revolving around my idea. Before I even got that info back I started to receive emails and phone calls from a second individual in the company pointing out that I was going to miss out on a 5% discount. I finally got my 'packet' which turned out to be nothing more than a contract with three investment options and some DVDs and a brochure explaining how things worked etc. After inquiring about the lack of info I was told that the Vice President approved for me to see more info and the 'research' was provided via email attachments. After that it was a hard push to sign and send money, but not 'send' money.. use a debt or credit card right now because 'Mr. Davison doesn't like delays'. I had reservations and expressed some concerns. The VP of something ended up on the phone with my rep and myself and provided some more info. I researched that further and decided to go ahead. On 3/19/2014 I told my rep I was going to move forward. My Cc was charged within an hour or so. On 3/21/2014 the rep called about getting the contracts signed and sent over so they could get started. I got busy and didn't get to send them over until 3/23/201, and one I missed on 3/24/2014. Tried calling 3/28/2014 and got an automated thing saying all circuits are busy. Got busy and let it go until yesterday. Tried calling and got the same thing so I sent an email for a status update. Rep called this morning and I was in a meeting. Tried to call him back and got that auto thing again. I went ahead and sent in my cancellation. There is just no communication other than 'money money money' at this point. Missed his second call but reinforced the cancellation. He called a bit ago and told me despite that I was within the 7 business day cancellation outlined in the contract there will be no refund because my stuff is in production. Tried to get me to hang in. I expressed I really want to cancel and pointed out the contract. He again stated that there is no refund.. sorry.Desired Settlement: I requesting the latest payment of $7845.00 to be refunded per the contract which states either party has 7 business days to provide written cancellation per the signed contract date. My contract was signed exactly 7 business days ago so I am within that time frame, plus the contract was not scanned nor received by Davison until the 23rd for one and the 24th for the other. Still 7 business days. I'm not asking for the previous $695 refunded. I did receive what I felt was sufficient after inquir.

Business

Response:

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

Review: I contacted Davison design when I saw an advertisement for new ideas. I had an idea, and contacted this company and spoke to Mr. [redacted], new products director. I was told that the company was very interested in my idea and said we should go forward with it. I was told that it would cost me $795.00. I told Mr. [redacted] that I was on a fixed income and would not be able to pay any more money than this. I know I made this perfectly clear. I was sent different materials (written/dvd) and was unable to view all of this material. Yet, I never agreed to pay more money at no time. I believed this to be an honest man representing an HONEST company. I received a packet in the mail giving me four options to pay more money.I am absolutely shocked!Desired Settlement: I want all of my money back. I told Mr. [redacted] the truth. I am only willing to have $30.00 deducted from $795.00( that I paid through my husband's debit card:his name is [redacted]. [redacted])to Davison's Design, for the Dvd's and written material that was sent to me. I will return it to Davison as soon as my money is refunded. Simply Said: I want my $795.00 back. I was robbed in March 2014 (home robbery), and robbed by Davison in April 2014.

Business

Response:

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

Review: I have an invention I wanted marketed and paid Davison a $9717 fee do do so. For that fee I have received 2 CADD drawings that anyone could do on a home computer. Going on 2 years, and I have been told by Matt Alwine, in charge of licensing that they expect companys to come to them for a product that they don't know Davison has. They have a working, marketable prototype and presentation cd that they have lost. This whole experience with Davison has been a very expensive mistake and from what I see on the internet they are doing it to many many people. Once they get your money their job is done, they do nothing more. The Federal Trade Commission describes Davision as a "Typical invention scam" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davison_Design_&_DevelopmentDesired Settlement: Refund most or all of my money, they have done absolutely nothing to earn it. I paid for a service I did not receive. I'll even give these simple CADD drawings back to them.

Business

Response:

This letter is response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development Inc (Davison) on or about 01/04/2013 At the outset, Mr [redacted] alleges he hired Davison to have his invention “marketed” Contrary to his statement, he did not retain Davison to market his idea Davison does not market products to the general public we design and develop product samples for presentation to corporations who in turn may manufacture and market the -product. In ? his complaint, Mr. [redacted] makes broad allegations of a failure to provide services. As will be detailed below, Davison has provided its services with Mr [redacted]'s express written approval and authorization and to his documented satisfaction. While It is unfortunate the a corporation has not licensed his product idea, that fact does not invalidate the services provided and does not warrant a refund of monies paid for services rendered to his documented satisfaction 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 08/22/211 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 The disclosure statements set forth, among other details that "It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with a submitted idea", and then details the type of contracts and their related fees. Following the submission of his idea, Mr [redacted] engaged Davison for a number of services. A brief chronology of his project follows 11/17/2011 Mr [redacted] enters into a Pre Development Agreement for the compilation of research relevant to his submitted idea. 11/25/2011 The research, compiled into a Product Portfolio, was created and sent to Mr .[redacted]. 01/16/2012 Mr. [redacted] enters into a New Product Sample Agreement for the construction of a product sample and presentation materials. 05/02/2012 Mr. [redacted] .approves the design of his product sample and completes a questionnaire in which he provides positive feedback. Copies of the approval and questionnaire are attached. Note - the actual approved design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes 06/22/2012 the physical product sample is constructed and presentation materials, in the form of an Executive Briefing, are prepared The Executive Briefing materials contain an actual photograph of the constructed product sample. Mr [redacted] completes a questionnaire providing positive feedback about the Executive Briefing. Mr [redacted] also authorizes the presentation of his product idea to the designated corporation. A copy of the questionnaire and a copy the presentation authorization are attached. 08/13/2012 Mr [redacted]'s product idea is presented to the target corporation. Unfortunately, this corporation chose not to pursue his idea. 12/05/2012: Mr. [redacted] was offered additional services to present his product idea to a second corporation. He declined this service. As th chronology details, BEFORE Mr. [redacted] entered into any contract or paid any fee, he acknowledged that he received and read the disclosure detailing the various services and fees Further, at each step of the process Davison has sought and secured Mr [redacted] a approval and authorization. Finally, at each step he has provided nothing but positive feedback. Nothing in his complaint warrants a refund for services rendered to his satisfaction. Although there is no basis for a refund, in the interest of customer satisfaction Davison will offer to present Mr [redacted]'s product idea to a second corporation at no additional charge. If he wishes to accept this offer, he need only contacts our licensing department, who will proceed accordingly.

Associate Counsel Davison Design and Development, Inc

Review: I was hoping for Davison to help me with my product and eventually get it to market. But instead they only made matters worse. I paid over $700 for just a nondisclosure agreement with them. And that wasn't easy money for me to give up, I worked hard for that money. Okay I thought it was fair enough if they really help you, but after I made my mind that I wasn't going through with it. I denied to agree to give them 20 to 15 percent of initial sales of my product and to pay them over $9000 for stuff like computer renderings, box art with a prototype ready for show. No thank you! Afterwords they wouldn't even answer my e-mails or get back to me to Refund my only $250 I put towards they're massive amount they asked for. if you really have something special you want to get out on there just take it to market yourself don't rely on companies like Davison. You'll be wasting your time and money!Davison is just going to send you DVDs and try to get your hopes up on your dreams. Watch out for these guys. All they want is money not your dream to come to life. Thank you and God bless!Desired Settlement: I would like a refund of $250 that I payed to them.

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 08/08/2013. Mr. [redacted] alleges he paid “over $700 for just a nondisclosure agreement...” and alleges he is entitled to a refund of monies paid on a contract after terminating the contract. On both counts he misstates the facts. Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison in February of 2011. As with all potential clients, he was provided two disclosure forms, in a printable and savable format, and he acknowledged that he received and read the disclosures. These disclosures outline, among other details, all services and related fees offered by Davison. Mr. [redacted] initially entered into the Pre-Development Agreement for custom research services. These services were performed and the research, comprising eleven (11) U.S. Patent documents and information on seven (7) similar products on the market, was sent to him on 05/05/2011. After completion of those services, he entered into the New Product Sample Agreement for the design and construction of a product sample and creation of presentation material. This contract was entered on 05/31/2011 and provided a seven (7) day revocation period. As noted in his complaint, he made a series of small partial payments toward the agreed fee, the last payment was made on 07/20/2011. Over the next two years, Davison incurred significant administrative expenses in maintaining his project file. Mr. [redacted] terminated the contract on or about 06/26/2013, well beyond the applicable revocation period. Mr. [redacted]’s complaint provides no basis for a refund. Before entering into any agreement, he was fully apprised of the services offered and related fees charged by Davison. The contract was not terminated within the applicable period and Davison has incurred significant expenses through the maintenance of his project for over a two year period.

Consumer

Response:

$950 I guess they need it more than I do since they had significant administrative expenses in maintaining a folder or file with a couple hand-drawn pictures and a product description.

I never received or had even talked about 11 US patent documents or documents referring to seven similar products on the market. I would have definitely wanted to discuss it further in detail especially if I spent $700 for it. Their was nothing with a description nor any picture images of similar products because if their was I would've remembered to use that information no matter the outcome of this situation regardless. Its fine by me if I'm not entitled to a refund keep it since you need it so bad but can I at lease get those documents and images if there are any. I did pay in full for those and If I never received or even if I lost them I still should receive a copy of them. Email them to me and we can

settle the matter that way. Thank you and may God bless.

Best regards,

Business

Response:

On behalf of Davison Design and Development, Inc., I request that your

organization reconsider the above-referenced consumer complaint and consider it

resolved.

Mr. [redacted] claims that the company did not provide to him the results of the

research performed on his behalf. The company’s records indicate that the research

results were provided to him on May 5, 2011. However, in response to Mr. [redacted]’s

request that the results of his research be sent to him again, the results were mailed to him

on disk this week.

In his supplemental complaint to you, he indicated that if the company provided

to him the research, he would consider the matter settled. Since the company has

complied with his request, this complaint should be closed as resolved.

Review: gave them my product / plus money to produce my invention, they torn it apart after telling them not to [ having this all on video during a meeting with them] never received or heard from them in over a year or more. they will not return my phone call.Desired Settlement: I want my product back the way they received it plus my money back and not to be able to copy this product in anyway

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 about04/09/2015. At the outset, it should be highlighted that by Mr. [redacted]’s own admission,the events providing the basis of his complaint occurred in March 2001 over fourteen(14) years ago. As will be detailed below, the issues were resolved more than a decadeago. Davison has gone well beyond the scope of its contractual obligations and hasprovided services to Mr. [redacted] at no cost to him. The value of those services exceeds$6,000.00. There is no reasonable basis to justify his complaint or his request for arefund.Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshootthem so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initial contactand throughout our process, we maintain an open channel of communication, disclosingour services and fees upfront and securing our clients’ approval and authorizationthroughout the process. Mr. [redacted], jointly with Ms. [redacted], contactedDavison about a new product idea in August 2000. The initial contracts, approvals andauthorizations were signed by Ms. [redacted], until 07/09/2008, when she instructedDavison to transfer the project to Mr. [redacted]. During the development process, theissue regarding the clients’ prototype and the product sample constructed by Davisonoccurred. The issue was fully discussed, including the fact that the prototype could notbe returned to the clients. The parties agreed to proceed with the development of theproduct sample and pursue the presentation of the product idea to corporations. Over thecourse of the next ten years, Davison made, with the clients’ authorizations, a total ofseventeen (17) presentations — at no additional cost to the client. Enclosed please findthree selected documents covering this timeframe; a Shipping Procedure Agreementdated 03/23/2004 signed by Ms. [redacted], the letter dated 07/12/2008 transferring theproject to Mr. [redacted] and a Shipping Procedure Agreement dated 09 02 2011 signed byMr. [redacted]. On or about 08 09/2013, Mr. [redacted] had a discussion with arepresentative from the licensing department. The result of that discussion was thedetermination to not actively pursue additional corporations.In light of his allegation that Davison has not returned his call, a representativewill reach out to Mr. [redacted]. However, as stated, there is no reasonable basis to supporthis complaint or to warrant a refund.SincerelyAssociate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Enclosures

Review: I offered my idea to Davison, [redacted] contacted me as VP of New Products. He said he had never seen my idea before and that he could see the value in it and that his wife would certainly use such a product, etc, etc. He conned me into thinking that Davison could make this happen for me. I was skeptical but he kept after me until I sent around 8 thousand dollars to pursue my idea. Also, as another insult, had me send for a 1 year patent on my idea, another $125.00 out of my pocket, as though they really were developing it. All this hurt financially,(I had that kind of money from a severance package I received after getting laid off from my job of 21 years, otherwise I wouldn't have had it and wouldn't have been able to be conned out of it)I could chock it up to gullibility if I had received something in return. What I got was years of asking, emailing, calling and waiting for something to happen. One day a contract came to sign saying I should not divulge my idea or market my idea because that would end the contract with the potential developer. Then, after several months, a phone call from [redacted], Managing Senior Director of Licensing, that said this developer has declined the product and if I wanted to pursue another it would be another 3 hundred plus dollars to do so. When I said no and asked for my prototype, I received another contract to sign essentially letting them off the hook, in record breaking time, I must say, compared to the other correspondences I have received. This form also gave options to get my prototype such as receiving it in "whatever shape" it is in in 3 weeks or waiting an indefinite amount of time for Davison to "locate and repair" the prototype. I replied that I did not feel I needed to sign anything to get the prototype they had created since it was mine after all. No response so I sent another email asking for it to be returned to which came a rely of "have you returned the "client return form" with signature? from [redacted]. Essentially, I got nothing.Desired Settlement: I want my money back! I can not believe this company, and I can not believe its owner and its employees can sleep at night knowing they are taking someone dreams and money and returning nothing. Shame on them.

Business

Response:

to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted]

against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 11/11/2013. Please be

advised that her product sample is in the process of being shipped to her attention. That stated, a

review of her file indicates that all services have been performed with her express approval,

authorization and to her documented satisfaction. There is no basis to warrant a refund.

Ms. [redacted] contracted with Davison for the design, construction, and presentation of a

product sample. On or about 11/13/2012, she approved the design and completed a questionnaire

about the Integrated Product Rendering in which she provided positive feedback. In reliance

upon her approval, the physical product sample was constructed and presentation material

prepared. Ms. [redacted] authorize the presentation of her product sample and completed another

questionnaire about the Executive Briefing presentation material in which she again provided

positive feedback. Her product idea was presented and unfortunately the target corporation chose

not to license her idea. Additional presentation services were offered, though she has declined.

Copies of the various approvals, authorizations, and signed questionnaires are attached (note the

actual approved design has been redacted for confidentiality purposes).

Ms. [redacted]’s complaint implies an ulterior motive to the practice of having a client

completed a “client return form” when requesting the shipment of a product sample. There is no

motive other than to document the disposition of a sample. Davison constructs only one product

sample; as such, if it is shipped to a client, it is not available to be sent to a corporation should

there be such a request. Regardless, as stated above, her sample is in the process of being shipped

to her attention.

Sincerely

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

The responses from me could hardly be considered positive and I had to return several forms more than once, the 1st one the company sent, I would comment on and that was ignored for months until I finally asked [redacted] what the hold up was, he said it was because I had written on it and I needed to return another without "conditions". I felt pressured to return these papers so that we could proceed since I had experienced the lack of responsiveness on several occasions from this company. I had to use their Customer Contact Group three times just to get them to respond. Also, the 1st company that Davison was to offer my product to was Bright Ideas Manufacturing but toward the end of this (5/30/13) they changed the company and made me agree before they would go on. I emailed Jeff repeatedly to ask why but he never responded. Another delay before I had asked and was told nothing was happening until I returned the form. He and Davison just ignored me until I returned the paperwork and agreed on may occasions. I paid $8,332.00 on 6/24/11 and what I received in the mail last week was a cheap piece of plastic that does not look like the picture forwarded here in my docs and was much larger then it was meant to be. The product was suppose to be the actual item, I had asked Jeff that specifically, since I wanted to have at least a functioning product for my own use. He assured me that it would be. I am not satisfied that Davison fulfilled their obligation to me and would want my money back.

Regards,

Business

Response:

Dear Mr. [redacted];

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

regarding the above referenced matter. In her additional comments, Ms. [redacted] alleges

dissatisfaction with the level of service provided, as well as concerns over the quality of the

product sample which was sent to her.

Initially, Ms. [redacted] details numerous instances in which she alleges delays in the

performance of services and states “the response from me could hardly be considered positive”.

Ms. [redacted] has been a client since 2011, and it is simply not possible to review and comment

constructively over oral communications. As such, we request that our clients complete the

questionnaires submitted with our initial response. The questionnaires completed by Ms.

[redacted] speak for themselves. Secondly, Ms. [redacted] raises a concern over the change in the

targeted corporation. There is no basis for this concern. An initial corporation was identified and

disclosed to her in 2011. By the time a product sample and presentation material were created

and her product idea was ready for presentation, several yeas had passed. During that time, our

relationship with the initial corporation changed and a new corporation needed to be selected.

This was done with her approval.

Finally, Ms. [redacted] expressed concerns over the quality of her product sample. It is

clear from her comments that she misunderstands the purpose of the product sample. It is not

meant to be of the quality of a final manufactured good that a person may purchase off a store

shelf. The contract explicitly states; “I. B. vi). The sample is for demonstration purposes and may

differ in appearance, performance and other characteristics from the type of final licensed product

built by a corporation in full production.” That stated, if the product sample differs from the

design that she approved, we would ask that she provide specific details of the alleged differences

and return the sample to our attention. Upon receipt the product sample will be reconstructed to

comply with the approved design.

Sincerely,

Associate Counsel

Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

I will never except the mechanical responses from Davison or its lawyer, as far as I am concerned I deserve my money back for services not rendered to my satisfaction.

Regards,

Review: I had submitted an idea for an invention and Davison prepared my material for presentation to possible clients.

I want proof that they did that. They keep coming back for more money without providing proof of the presentation.Desired Settlement: Davison has to not stood up to the contract promises and I would like a refund of my fees paid to them.

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 11/14/2015. Davisonunderstands that customer service is vital in all businesses and is imperative when operating asuccessful business. Customer concerns upset everyone and the staff works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initialcontact, through the research and development of a new product idea, to the presentation of aclient’s idea, an open channel of communication is maintained, disclosing the services and feesupfront and securing the clients’ approval and authorization throughout the process.Unfortunately, despite best efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularly when theirproduct ideas are not licensed. That appears to be the simple truth with Mr. [redacted].With regard to the services that were provided, a brief summary follows. Mr. [redacted]contacted Davison in March 2014. As with all potential clients, he was provided with disclosuresthat set out; the various services offered, and their related fees; the risks of the new productdevelopment process; and Davison’s historical success rates in securing licenses. He contractedfor the initial pre-development research services which were completed. Subsequently, heentered into a contract for the design and construction of a product sample, packaging andpresentation material. Davison submitted a design of the product sample to Mr. [redacted] whichhe approved and about which he completed a questionnaire providing positive feedback. Inreliance upon his approval of the design, Davison constructed the product sample, packaging andcreated presentation materials. An Executive Briefing was created which contained an actualphotograph of the constructed product sample. After receipt of the Executive Briefing, Mr.[redacted] authorized the presentation of his product idea to the targeted corporation. At that time,he also completed a second questionnaire in which he provided positive feedback about theExecutive Briefing. The first corporation chose not to license his product idea. Mr. [redacted]then contracted for, and authorized, a second presentation to a new corporation. Again, thecorporation chose to not license his idea. Mr. [redacted] then decided to take a “reactive”approach, and wait to see if a corporation was to approach Davison with a request for a productsimilar to his. A copy of his signed questionnaires and selection of the reactive approach areenclosed.In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] first requests proof of the presentations. The firstpresentation was made on 04/30/2015 and the second presentation was made on 08/28/2015.Enclosed, please find copies of the documents that confirm these presentation. Note; theinformation for the individual contact for each corporation has been redacted.Next, Mr. [redacted] refers to a continued request for money. His statementmischaracterizes the facts. Davison had offered to provide the additional service of an additionalpresentation. There is a fee for this service. Mr. [redacted] was well aware of this fee as it wasdisclosed to him as part of the initial disclosure in March 2014, it is explicitly referenced in thecontracts which he entered, and most importantly, he had engaged this service, and paid the fee,for the second presentation of his product idea.Finally, Mr. [redacted] alleges that “contract promises” were not met. The implicationbeing that there was some form of guarantee that his product would be successful The simplefact is; the product development process provides no guarantees of financial gain. Davison doesnot, and simply cannot, make such guarantees. The express terms of the contracts are explicitthat Davison make no representation about the likelihood of financial gain. The New ProductSample Agreement which Mr. [redacted] entered contains the following provisions:“Davison has made no representations concerning the likelihood that the Client willreceive any financial gain from the development of the Idea.”“The Client understands that there is no way of knowing at this time if the targetedcorporation will license, buy or pay royalties for the Idea once it has been developed.Client acknowledges that Davison has made no representations concerning the likelihoodof licensing, marketing, royalty payments or profitability.”As stated, the design, construction, and presentations of Mr. [redacted]’s product samplehave been performed with his express written approval and authorization and to his documentedsatisfaction. No additional contracts have been entered and no additional payments have beenreceived. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered. The fact that a particularproject does not bring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that wereprovided. However, in the interest of customer satisfaction, Davison will offer two additionalpresentations at no cost to Mr. [redacted]. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contactthe Licensing Department who will coordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize thepresentations.SincerelyDavid * D[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Consumer

Response:

Dec 2 2015

I have reviewed the response made by Davison in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. They have provided me with the information that I had been seeking and have provided an incentive.

Review: I SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TO HAVE SOMEONE TALK TO ME OVER THE HONE BUSINESS DOES NOT DELIVER NEXT TIME I COME UP WITH AN IDEA I'LL DO IT MYSELFDesired Settlement: WOULD LIKE TO A REFUND

Business

Response:

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. Sonja

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

09 09 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. Unfortunately, Ms. [redacted]’s complaint provides little

detail and merely makes a generalized statement of dissatisfaction and a demand for a

refund. As will be detailed below, Davison has performed its obligations, Ms. [redacted]

has not fulfilled her payment obligations and there is no basis for a refund.

Ms. [redacted] entered two contracts for services; the Pre-Development Agreement

and the New Product Sample Agreement (NPSA). The first was for research services

which were provided to her. Only after completion of the first service did Ms. [redacted]

enter into the second contract. The second contract was for the design and construction

of a physical product sample addressing a problem she had identified. The contract

contained a revocation provision that provided a time period during which written notice

of revocation could be made and a full refund of payments could be received. Ms.

[redacted] did not invoke this provision. There is simply no provision that provides for a

refund for cancellations made outside of the stated period. Ms. [redacted] has not made

full payment of the agreed retainer fee on the second contract, as such there are no

services contractually due to be performed.

Acknowledging that there may be a lengthy time period before a client makes full

payment, Davison begins the design process when 60% of the fee has been paid. Ms.

[redacted] has paid 60% of the fee and the design service has been completed. A proposed

design of her new product sample has been created and has been sent to her for her

approval. It should be noted that there has been a lengthy delay in providing this

proposed design. The delay was necessitated by the fact that Ms. [redacted] has filed no

less than fifteen (15) disputes through her credit card company challenging the validity of

the payments. All disputes have been resolved in Davison’s favor.

With the above in mind, it is Davison’s hope that Ms. [redacted] will approve the

design created by Davison, pay the remaining balance of the fee and the development

process will continue. Alternatively, if she chooses to terminate the relationship, there is

no basis to warrant a refund as services have been performed.

Business

Response:

Please be advised that I have, this date, spoken with Ms. [redacted] about her

project at Davison. Ms. [redacted] has expressed her approval of the design of her product

sample, has acknowledged the outstanding balance on her contract and has expressed a

desire to proceed forward with her project. Accordingly, Davison will be continuing its

work with Ms. [redacted] on her project. Ms. [redacted] has agreed to noti& your office

directly.

In light of the above resolution, I ask that her complaint be closed as “resolved.”