dark light

  • Moggy C

Collectable aircraft memorabilia that isn't all it appears to be. Buyer beware!

Firstly, can I just make it perfectly clear that I am posting this information personally and not on behalf of Key Publishing.

However I feel it is important that I do as it shows the prevalence of provenance forgery when it comes to aviation memorabilia.

It contains a lengthy quote from elsewhere in cyberspace, but I have done some checking around and am wholly convinced that what is contained within it is both accurate and true. Were it not, I would not be posting it.

Moggy

It seems that the Flitter’s have been successfully prosecuted by a chap that spent a significant amount with them.

This was written by AndyB – member of Broadsword forum.

I have decided to put this letter up due to the recent events that happened to me and the continuous fraudulent sales from this dealer , I will also post this on other forums to let other collectors know.

Following a recent out of Court settlement which I received from a well-known Lincolnshire Military Trader I felt it important to warn collectors of military and wartime antiques and memorabilia of how easy it is into being be duped into purchasing items which are not what they are purported to be.

Due to the final agreement made between myself and Military Trader UK , not including a confidentiality clause, I am now at liberty to make other collectors aware of my experience which I feel is important in order to prevent the same thing happening to them.

Military Trader UK is run by Mr Tony Flitter and Nigel Flitter trading from Unit 10 Tattershall Park, Tattershall Way, Fairfield Industrial Estate, Louth, Lincolnshire, LN11 0YZ with their website address of militarytrder.co.uk and Ebay user name of militarytrader-uk, amongst others. In summary in April 2014 I wrote to Military Trader as it had come to my attention that items purchased from them were not what they had made them out to be. Over the previous two years I had purchased from Military Trader (UK), various Dambuster related items which were as follows:

Guy Gibson’s Cap
Buckley’s Cap
Gibson’s Tankard
RAF Strata Scope
Scampton Microphone
Goodale’s Cap
Gibson’s Escape Axe
Gibson’s Mag Glass
RAF 617 Bomb Counter
RAF 617 Signalling Lamp
RAF Scampton Phone
RAF 617 Headphones
Flying Boots Ivan Whittaker
RAF Veteran Tie
Buckley’s Bible
RAF Visibility Meter
RAF Playing Cards
Numerous Pieces of Wreckage & Artifacts
AM Visibility Meter
RAF Flag
H S Hobday’s Tunic
Guy Gibson’s Pilot Book

These items were all attributed by Military Trader to 617 Squadron and their personnel and at a cost of over £13,000

Following the last item purchased I discovered that there was immense doubt that items in question are not what they were described to be.

The Sales of Goods Act 1979 makes it an implied term of the contract that the goods be as described. Items that required expert verification or authentication to determine whether they were authentic or not were dealt with in the appropriate manner and an expert witness was found whose extensive report, had this case gone to Court, would have confirmed that these items had been misdescribed and misrepresented. In relation to these aforementioned items false verbal reassurances were given directly to me by Military Trader, they described the items as something they were not, in many cases this was supported by written evidence in the form of labels, signatures and other writing.

The signatures, writing and labels had all been studied by an independent writing expert ( calligrapher ) whom I engaged to help me confirm that the handwriting and typed labels all came from the same source. It was confirmed that all of the writing is of the same hand. The consistency of this handwriting then led to the fact that the writing and signatures which Military Trader purported to be original were from one source only, that being Military Trader. Therefore these written pieces and signatures which they claim corroborated and verified their items were false and could not be attributed to the persons or establishment as Military Trader claimed. Furthermore the professional examination of handwriting also extended to the Gibson’s Pilots book which had also been confirmed as containing writing by the same hand and therefore could not possibly have belonged to Gibson.

Consequently, with reliance on written evidence, I was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that items sold by Military Trader to me were in fact not what they verbally reassured me they were, certainly did not match their written description and did not have authentic signatures.

I would have also had recourse under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 as Military Trader made false and fraudulent claims. I relied on these statements made by them in deciding whether or not to go ahead with my purchases; I had been persuaded to buy these items from them due to the representations which they made to me. Therefore pursuant to the Misrepresentation Act 1967 I would have had also had a potential claim due to Fraudulent Misrepresentation.

Under the Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 I would be described as a “Targeted Customer” by them. The false information which they gave me verbally and in writing was been deceptive. They had engaged in misleading action under Section 5 and through their deceptive descriptions and presentation of items I had been duped into entering into contracts to purchase the items in question from them.

In summary under the Sales of Goods Act 1979 due to the fact that the items have been “misdescribed” they were in breach of contract and I advised them that I was rejecting the items and requested that they refunded the total sum paid to them.

Prior to me writing to them in April 2014 I had already received a small sum from Military Trader for a refund for other items of forged provenance. During legal correspondence my solicitor pointed out that despite the basis of my claim being that Military Trader knowingly and deliberately faked the provenance of items and manufactured documentation to substantiate that false provenance, their solicitor’s letter was remarkably silent on this point, not even venturing a denial in without prejudice correspondence. This speaks for itself.

I would comment that it was not all of the items in the list above that I could prove had been fraudulently enhanced, it was in particular items supported by handwriting, labels and signatures. The enhancement of the higher priced items obviously in turn caused much doubt as to the authenticity of all of the other items. Tony and Nigel Flitter were aware of my passion in 617 Squadron and specifically the Dambusters and did target me as a customer.

In my opinion the amount of money that they charged me for these enhanced items was “ripping off” at its worst. It has taken me most of this year to be reimbursed for all of the items which I purchased from them, plus being reimbursed for all of my legal costs and the Professional Calligraphers report. This case did not go to court as Military Trader decided to settle and pay all of my costs in return for the items which I gladly returned. I had my evidence prepared and there was not even a murmur of any declaration from them as to the authenticity or genuineness of the items, the authenticity of which the Calligrapher’s report dismissed due to the fake handwriting and other significant issues.

It has been noticed that there have been items for sale on Ebay which are items not relating to 617 Squadron which have also been proven by the Professional Calligrapher to have the same handwriting on the items. This handwriting is done by Military Trader and is not the authentic handwriting which a genuine item would have on it.

Notwithstanding the hundreds of items, which are sold by Military Trade via their website and also via Ebay under militarytrader-uk and other associated accounts, which are genuine it is an utter shame that Tony and Nigel Flitter need to resort to enhancing items in order to purport them to be something that they are certainly not, thereby enabling them to command a much higher price for these said items.

The moral of this story is if you are in any doubt of the authenticity of an item purchased it would be advisable to consult an independent military specialist. If that item is then found to be not what it is purported to be please report it to Lincolnshire Trading Standards or Lincolnshire CID who will add it to their investigation. We have to keep items such as these out of the market place as it is harmful to genuine pieces and is just simply irritating for collectors, whether they be serious collectors, just starting out or have a slight interest.

Please be aware of these items coming back onto the market and if you come across them with the same description or anything which is similarly doubtful report it and help put a stop to fraudulent trading.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

20

Send private message

By: Grumman Tomcat - 21st January 2015 at 20:29

Scumbags. The only reason why they would do such a thing is –Money.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 21st January 2015 at 18:16

Yes indeed. There’s a thread running on that sale already.

Moggy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

9,042

Send private message

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 20th January 2015 at 22:39

Out of interest, the auction of ‘Dambuster’ memorabilia results:

The bomb sight fetched — drum roll — £33,500! Silly money indeed.

The purchaser is anonymous but it is thought that it will be put on public view eventually.

The marbles fetched £17k even with no provenance at all.

Moggy

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,986

Send private message

By: stuart gowans - 10th January 2015 at 08:48

This probably means that they don’t bother to check anything, instead passing on the responsibility of “policing” their business to the individuals that use it; when I report (usually blatant fraud) the narrow list of options available (as to quite how the item breaks ebay rules) usually doesn’t cater for;

” complete scumbag who has set up a bogus account purely for the purpose of stealing money and/or personal details, using a hacked photo and description from a legitimate seller”

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

7,892

Send private message

By: trumper - 10th January 2015 at 08:25

If anyone still wants dambuster stuff http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-30754043

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,578

Send private message

By: DaveF68 - 8th January 2015 at 02:15

I’m glad he mentioned Trading Standards at the end because if he hadn’t I was going to. If that information had been puit to me in my working days, I’d have certainly been interested.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

88

Send private message

By: Tonk - 8th January 2015 at 00:31

Criminal behaviour is just that. However, one has to chuckle at the rank stupidity of some ‘collectors’. What are the chances of large amounts of one special-interest all turining-up in one place at one time…? Obviously pretty slim. Doh…. The issue is really driven by the high prices paid for ‘collectibles’. Now I confess to buying old junk – but I have uses for it 99.5% of the time – and I know for sure what it is. Just occasionally, I’m buy ephemera – if it’s germain, genuine – and cheap. The reality is that collectors are often hoist upon their own petard, as someone alluded to above. Lets face it, most of this stuff is basically just junk, if we ascribe absurd values to it, we are simply encouraging the kinds of fraudulent behaviour described above. Still, one can’t help smiling…

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

505

Send private message

By: Bunsen Honeydew - 7th January 2015 at 23:45

eBay don’t sell anything at all except for advertising space. If ebay weren’t there, there would be something else similar, I am sure.

OK they aren’t selling. But they are facilitating selling and taking commission. If fraud- and that is what it is- is being committed by sellers on a regular basis and ebay choose to continue to permit the sellers to use ebay even though they have been informed that fraud is taking place then the commission becomes a proceed of crime.

When ebay were threatened with legal action by some very heavy lawyers representing major brand names they caved in.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,731

Send private message

By: ian_ - 7th January 2015 at 20:38

Similary dodgy ‘Zeppelin’ items here: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Internal-And-External-Lighting-Parts-Of-The-LZ130-Graf-Zeppelin-/141533892967?pt=UK_Collectables_Militaria_LE&hash=item20f413d167
The seller has a variety of aircraft scrap with fancy labels. My knowledge of Zeppelins is small, but I’m confident they were not using British brass oxygen fittings.
Looking through his recent feeback, someone spent £211 on a Zeppelin gyro compass. It is a drift sight.
I despair of people: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Piece-Zeppelin-Lz127-/141488151584

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

10,735

Send private message

By: J Boyle - 7th January 2015 at 14:12

Being somewhat suspicious by nature, I’d be wary of anything purported to be from a famous flier or unit.

It’s great to have a piece of a historic aircraft type but to really expect it to be a bit of Gibson’s Lanc or Amy Johnson’s Moth seems to be asking for trouble.
Yes, pieces are out there, but most god bits are in museums by now (like the bomb release switch taken from the many missions Lanc as detailed in a recent FlyPast).

If something was authentic would the seller really want to sell it on the internet and not at a high-end memorabilia auction or private sale?

If you still say “yes” then I’ll offer a litter of lab puppies…the offspring of Gibson’s lab (he who shall not be named). 🙂

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

214

Send private message

By: Scramble Bill - 7th January 2015 at 14:12

Reply to post 10.

YES I know they aren’t the only Scum out there, but what they do is so blatant. ( following a certain flying helmet-sold-reappeared WITH A TOTALLY NEW, FALSE HISTORY Straight from the veterans family, etc…etc…..TOTAL COBBLERS)

This information needed high lighting in its own thread EXACTLY as has been done.

I collect RAF flying gear and have been aware of this ‘company’ for a very long time, as have many Dealers I have spoken to. yet they keep going!!?….I felt it was important this got its own thread.

I have been following developments concerning this case, even being contacted by certain persons……trouble is there is so little trust…….no one is exactly sure who they are actually in contact with.

There must be many Collectors out there who have purchased ‘historic’ items in good faith, who will find when they try and sell and mention this ‘company’ the purchaser might have second thoughts to say the least.

I will shut up now……..

The important bit is to spread the word.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

594

Send private message

By: anneorac - 7th January 2015 at 12:14

Not just 617 items…

http://www.network54.com/Forum/180748/thread/1420136909/Treasure+trove%21%21

Anne

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,162

Send private message

By: Mike J - 7th January 2015 at 10:13

There must be tens of thousands of items listed on ebay on a daily basis.

More like tens of millions!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

596

Send private message

By: Runway06 - 7th January 2015 at 10:00

There must be tens of thousands of items listed on ebay on a daily basis. They cannot possibly keep track of everything and rely on observant users to notify them of any potential miselling.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,720

Send private message

By: D1566 - 7th January 2015 at 09:06

Plus they do have a process in place for the reporting of contentious items, which whilst it may not be felt to be too effective, is at least something that they can point to as a safeguard.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

8,370

Send private message

By: Bruce - 7th January 2015 at 08:59

Isn’t it time that ebay were prosecuted under the European Proceeds of Crime legislation? They are knowingly selling items that are being intentionally misdescribed and not taking any action against the sellers.

eBay don’t sell anything at all except for advertising space. If ebay weren’t there, there would be something else similar, I am sure.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

596

Send private message

By: Runway06 - 6th January 2015 at 21:29

Not sure why, this has already been posted and discussed in the ebay thread, so a third time wouldnt make no odds.

Best keep this thread going as it’s had a much better response. An Internet Google search on the company and its owners provides more information.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 6th January 2015 at 21:03

I wasn’t aware it had been posted before. I tend not to monitor the e-bay thread as I know Bruce keeps a close eye on it.

Still, another warning won’t harm.

Moggy

1 2
Sign in to post a reply