Hi All,

Sorry about this but Barrie still seems to be having trouble grasping reality or even understanding the most basic of points so here we are a third time trying to help him understand. Now, given that Barrie was party to the original events one has to wonder why it is taking him so long to hoist this lot on board. Below I shall draw attention to areas where he has simply invented so called "facts" to support his warped version of reality. Utter fabrication.

 

Here we go:

>>>>01.11.07
BARRIE VANDERMOLEN -
AUTOMARINE WEB SITES
AUTOMARINE SHIPPING CO LTD - WEB SITES
ANDREW BARRISKELL AND HIS WEB SITES>>>

I have one web site, it goes by the catchy domain name of Barriskell.com. Try to figure out how I cam up with that one.........

>>>TO DE ADDED TO ALL RESPECTIVE WEB SITES >>>

I only add stuff here Barrie......you can publish wherever you like

>>>THERE ARE ALWAYS TWO SIDES TO ANY DISPUTE,>>>

True, but in order to achieve resolution you need some agreement as to what the dispute is actually about. In this case you are moving the goalposts on a weekly basis. Read on to see where and how......

>>>>>I WAS APPROACHED BY MR BARRASKELL IN MAY 2005 TO SHIP 41 CARS TO HOUSTON USA AND RETURN TO THE UK. WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS WAS FOR A RALLY,
MR BARRISKELL NOW SAYS IT WAS NOT A RALLY BUT A HOLIDAY ?>>>

You were actually originally approached by Steve Blair, I merely stepped in to ease his workload on the overall planning of the tour. We have organised such an event about twice a year for the last nine years (Since 1999), never have they been refered to as rallies.  Our mailing list is called Tour7. We go on holiday together.

>>>>WE QUOTED A VERY KEEN PRICE DUE TO THE NUMBER OF CARS INVOLVED.

THIS WAS NOT THE USUAL ROLL ON-ROLL OFF SHIPPING BUT THE CARS HAD TO BE LOADED AND SECURED IN SEVEN CONTAINERS. SO THAT WE COULD OFFER A KEEN PRICE WE ARRANGED THAT THE CARS BE LOADED ON PATENTED RAMPS BY THE LOADERS H G RENT NEAR TILBURY DOCKS.>>>

I don't see anything substantive to argue with here.

>>>>THE SHIPMENT TO HOUSTON WENT WITHOUT ANY DIFFICULTIES WHATSOEVER AND ARRIVED AT HOUSTON WHERE THEY WERE UNLOADED BY OUR AGENTS WHO DID NOT REPORT ANY DIFFICULTIES ,>>>>>

WRONG: The containers were unloaded by Myself, Mike Biddle, Johnty Lyons, Chris Beardshaw and others.  Your agents, whilst helpful and professional did not have the human resources to unload our cars. We worked in 40 degree heat in metal cans (containers) for about 14 hours straight unloading the cars ourselves. I cannot remember the amount of liquids we bought and consumed but I seem to recall it was in the order of 8 litres each.  We paid to have the cars unloaded, we did it ourselves. This was pointed out to you, by phone at the time.

>>>ALTHOUGH THE CONTAINERS ARRIVED AT HOUSTON WAS APPROXIMATELY 5 DAYS AFTER THE HURRICAN ANNIHILATED NEW ORLEANS WHICH
IS DOWN THE COAST FROM HOUSTON WHICH WAS ALSO HIT .>>>

Barrie writes this as though somehow his good offices saw us through the storm.  Fact is the shipping company steered around the storms (We tracked it in real time over the web) and made landfall on time.

>>>THE CARS WERE TO BE DRIVEN TO LOS ANGELES ON THE WEST COAST OF AMERICA WHERE THEY WERE TO BE RE-LOADED INTO THE CONTAINERS USING THE SAME LOADING AND SECURING SYSTEM AS THE ORIGINAL SYSTEM

WOW, even this is wrong!  Barrie, the cars were to be driven to San Francisco. That's why we were shipping out of Oakland. Check a map, you'll find Los Angeles is about an inch to the south of San Francisco and Oakland.  Your quotes were for Oakland. Los Angeles? Another trivial mistake....

>>>>MR BARRISKELL SAYS HE ALTERED THE RACKING BECAUSED TWO CARS WERE DAMAGED DURING THE SHIPMENT TO HOUSTON , THE CARS WERE FULLY INSURED ( ALL RISKS) AND ACORDINGLY ON RETURN TO THE UK THE OWNERS OF THE CARS MADE CLAIMS AGAINST THE INSURERS (LLOYDS UNDERWRITERS) WHEN THEY ARRIVED BACK IN ENGLAND, WHO PAID FOR THE DAMAGES IN FULL – HAD ANY OTHER CARS BEEN DAMAGED THESE CARS WERE ALSO INSURED, HOWEVER , NO OTHER CLAIMS WERE MADE , I UNDERSTOOD THE CARS WERE DAMAGED IN TRANSIT ON THE JOURNEY BACK FROM THE USA AND NOT TO HOUSTON.>>>>

WRONG: Where did I say I altered the racking? For any reason? Please point me to where you claim I say this. This is an invention, I have never said such a thing.

IMPORTANT POINT: Let me repeat this in simple words. I did not order any change to the racking. When asked to make a change, by the agent in the USA, I refused. I have written statements from YOUR AGENTS that will support my assertion.

>>>>>>WE WERE NOT INFORMED THAT MR BARRASKELL HAD MADE OTHER ARRANGEMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE LOADING AND SECURING OF THE CARS IN THE USA AND CHANGED THE TYPE OF LOADING , INSTEAD OF USING THE PATENTED RAMPS SUPPLIED BY
H G RENT WHICH HE ABANDONED IN THE USA ,WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN RETURNED TO THE UK . HE ARRANGED FOR PLATFORMS MADE OF ALUMINIUM AND WOOD TO BE BUILT IN THE CONTAINERS TO SECURE THE CARS ON. HE DID NOT ASK, OBTAIN OR SUBMIT ESTIMATES TO US FOR ANY EXTRA CHARGES FOR THE SUPPLYING AND BUILDING THE RAMPS FOR OUR APPROVAL. HE SHOULD HAVE HAD THE UNUSED RAMPS PUT IN A CONTAINER RETURNED TO THE UK THESE COST £ 80 EACH I.E £3,280. 00 FOR WHICH WE HAVE NOT YET MADE A CHARGE TO HIM .>>>>

WRONG, WRONG and WRONG!!!

Boy this is hard work.

1. I didn't make any arrangements, you agreed the change to the arrangements and I have documentary evidence of this.

2. There were no extra charges created or approved by me (See point 1)

3. (This one is a real laugh!!!) Barrie, read your invoice. The one we paid IN ADVANCE. The one where it says we have to buy the ramps outright in advance and upon which you also note that H G Rent have no interest in buying them back upon our return but you might be able to sell them elsewhere. So, you say you have not made a charge to me? Ahem, we've already paid the charge! Get a grip Barrie, it is this poor attention to detail that causes your customers concern.

>>>>>>THE RETURN JOURNEY FROM THE USA WAS DELAYED DUE TO BAD WEATHER THE SHIPPING LINE RE-DIRECTED THE SHIP TO AVOID THAMESPORT AND CONTINUE TO
ANTWERP WHERE THE CONTAINERS WERE UNLOADED, THE SHIPPING LINES INTENTION WAS TO LEAVE THE CONTAINERS AT ANTWERP TO BE UNLOADED, HOWEVER AFTER NEGOTIATION IT WAS AGREED TO HAVE THE CONTAINERS SHIPPED ON TO SOUTHAMPTON AND THAT THEY WOULD BE SENT BY ROAD TO EITHER HG RENT OR THAMESPORT FOR UNLOADING AND THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY EXTRA CHARGES .>>>

The ship the containers were eventually loaded on to was delayed for a few days. The containers were several WEEKS late. For a detailed description of how this came to pass see an earlier posting I'm tired of repeating myself.

>>>WE CANNOT CONTROL THE WEATHER AND THE DELAYS IN THE USA AND TRANSIT TO THE UK WERE NOT OUR FAULT AND BEYOND ANYONES CONTROL.>>>

WRONG: Delay in shipping was due to incorrect and missing paperwork. You had all the papers from us. You were responsible for the paperwork. Anything else we need to cover?

>>>>THE CONTAINERS ARRIVED FROM ANTWERP AT SOUTHAMPTON , ARRANGEMENTS WERE MADE WITH THE SHIPPING LINE TO TRANSPORT THE CONTAINERS TO THAMESPORT AND TO H G RENT (THE ORIGINAL LOADERS) FOR DE-VANNING THE CARS FOR THE DRIVERS TO COLLECT .

MR BARRISKELL INFORMED ME THAT HE DID NOT REQUIRE THE CONTAINERS TAKEN TO THAMESPORT AND HE REQUIRED THE CONTAINERS KEPT AT SOUTHAMPTON AND
TO BE UNLOADED AT SOUTHAMPTON – ANOTHER CHANGE IN THE AGREEMENT

WE HAD TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS WITH OTHER AGENCIES TO TAKE OVER THE UNLOADING OF THE CARS FROM THE CONTAINERS -

CONTINUES ……………………..>>>>

This is a peach! Barrie, I have the document here (Received December 6, 2005 at 19.22) in which you set out the reasons why you think it is best for us to accept the cars in Southampton here is an excerpt:

"The cost of transporting the containers from Thamesport  to HG Rent is £330 each container  i.e  £2,310. 00. i.e Thamesport – Barking and back to Thamesport 

As the containers are being sent to Southampton, I think that it would be better to have them unloaded at the Free Trade Zone  in the Western Docks (gate 20)   this will save this charge and the drivers  can collect the cars at Southampton"



>>>>>THE REASON WE HAD TO MAKE EXTRA CHARGES WERE DUE TO MR BARRISKELLS CAUSING US EXTRA COSTS NOT ALLOWED FOR IN THE ORIGINAL ACCEPTED QUOTED CHARGES – AND NOT ASKING FOR PERMISSION OF SUBMITTING QUOTATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE BUILDING OF PLATFORMS AND HAVING THE CONTAINERS UNLOADED AT SOUTHAMPTON , HAD WE KNOWN AT THE TIME THE RAMPS WERE ABANDONED WE WOULD HAVE ADDED THE COSTS TO THE CHARGES WE HAD TO MAKE .>>>>

I think we have dealt with this tripe above, but for the record I have statements from Barrie's own agents or indeed his own hand that debunks all the above and proves categorically that no such changes were agreed by me and that on the contrary I insisted on the contract to be performed as agreed at all times. It was indeed this insistence that caused Barrie to write to me asking for the cars to be unloaded in Southampton at variance with our agreement. He now tries to say that we asked for them to be devanned in Southampton, not so, we agreed to Barrie's written request, of which we have copies.

>>>>>AS FOLLOWS : -

NOT ALLOWED FOR IN THE ORIGIINAL ESTIMATE AND AGREED CHARGES

1 . USA - BUILDING 7 WOODEN AND ALUMINIUM PLATFORMS IN CONTAINERS
2. USA - LOADING AND SECURING CARS ONTO THE WOODEN/ALUMINIUM RAMPS
3. SOUTHAMPTON -MOVING SEVEN CONTAINERS FROM DOCKS TO THE FREE TRADE
ZONE FOR UNLOADING
4. SOUTHAMPTON - DEVANNING 21 CARS OFF RAMPS AND 20 CARS FROM UNDERNEATH
RAMPS IN CONTAINERS
5. DISMANTLING AND REMOVING WOODEN AND ALUMINIUM 7 RAMPS FROM
CONTAINERS AND DISPOSING
6. RE-DELIVERING SEVEN CONTAINERS BACK TO THE SOUTHAMPTON WHARF.
8. INSTEAD OF CLEARING CUSTOMS AT THAMESPORT AS A BULK CONSIGNMENT
HAVING TO CLEAR EACH CAR AS AN INDIVIDUAL SHIPMENT AT SOUTHAMPTON
CUSTOMS CLEARING CHARGES RFOT 41 CARS INSTEAD OF ONE.>>>>>>

See above.

9, THE COSTS OF THE ABANDONED RAMPS £ 3,280. 00 .

Barrie, read your invoice again - you charged us for them, we paid the invoice. H G Rent did not want them back - YOU SAID SO!!!

QUOTE (Document dated August 2, 2005 11.03): "THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THE USED RAMPS."

>>>>>>MR BARRASKELL HAS ALLEGED THAT MANY OF THE CARS WERE DAMAGED AND THIS IS THE REASON HE HAD THE PLATFORMS BUILT , HOWEVER WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OTHER COMPLAINTS OR CLAIMS FROM OWNERS OR FROM HIM ( OTHER THAN THE TWO ) WHICH WAS FOR DAMAGE CAUSED ON THE RETURN JOURNEY WHICH WERE ATTENDED TO BY THE INSURERS , HAD WE RECEIVED ANY MORE DAMAGE COMPLAINTS, WE WOULD HAVE REFERRED ANY CLAIMS TO THE UNDERWRITERS (INSURERS) WE ALSO THE DAMAGE CLAIMED FOR WAS SMALL IN BOTH CASES.>>>

WRONG: I did not approve the change. Thus I have never stated that this was the reason I agreed to the change!

>>>>MR BARRISKELL HAS ALLEGED THIS IS THE REASON THAT HE CHANGED THE RAMPS FOR PLATFORMS ? BUT THIS DAMAGE HAPPENED ON THE RETURN JOURNEY WHEN THE TWO CARS WERE DAMAGED >>>

Get a grip Barrie, two successful insurance claims were made. This was for damage on the outbound leg. However, I never agreed to the change (Apologies for the repetition folks I'm hoping Barrie will hoist this in soon). There was further damage caused on the return leg but the owners, having realised by now how difficult you were making things decided against making a claim.

>>>>>THE EXTRA CHARGES AMOUNTED TO £ 4,571. I THEREFORE HAD TO MAKE EXTRA CHARGES OF £ 4,571 I.E £ 114. 28P EACH CAR WHICH HAD TO BE PAID PRIOR TO THE RELEASING AND CLEARING THE CARS , OTHERWISE IN ALL PROBABILITY WE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID. AS EACH DRIVER HAD ORIGINALLY PAID FOR THE RALLY SEPARATELY . THE EXCESS CHARGES SHOULD HAVE INCLUDING THE ABANDONED RAMPS AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN £7,851. 00 . I.E £191. 00 EACH MEMBER OF THE RALLY (HOLIDAY)>>>

WRONG! Check you facts Barrie.

>>>>>>MR BARASKELL IS DEMANDING THE MONEY BACK WHICH I HAD TO CHARGE HIM DUE FOR THE EXTRAS, BEFORE HE REMOVES HIS LETTERS IN REGARDS TO THE RALLY AND ABOUT ME PERSONALLY , AND MY COMPANY ON THE WEB . IF HE DOES NOT RECEIVE THE MONEY BACK AND HE INTENDS TO KEEP THIS ON THE WEB INDEFINATELY
THIS IS BLACKMAIL >>>>

Ah, I apologise for this interpretation but let me point out a few facts.

1. I published this site two years ago and have never asked for a penny. I merely recounted why I felt we were ripped off for 4500 pounds (See above).

2. You contacted me recently, actually you simply started making threats that I should remove my pages or else horrible legal consequences would follow.

3. I suggested to you that if you repaid the 4500 pounds we feel we were unfairly charged the thrust of our complaint would be removed and thus the pages would be removed.

4. I think you allude to blackmail more succinctly when you state above "WHICH HAD TO BE PAID PRIOR TO THE RELEASING AND CLEARING THE CARS , OTHERWISE IN ALL PROBABILITY WE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID." In other words, you don't get your cars until you pay me 4500 pounds I've just decided I want, in complete disregard of our contract.

>>>>MR BARRASKELL MADE SOME PERSONAL REMARKS IN HIS WEBSITE AGAINST ME, HE HAS REFERRED TO PERSONAL MATTERS AND BUSINESS DIFFICULTIES WHICH HAPPENED SOME 20 YEARS AGO , HE IS PORTRAYING ME AS A VERY BAD AND UNRELIABLE PERSON , THIS IS NOT SO, MY DIFFICULTIES WERE RESOLVED LEGALLY BY ACCOUNTANTSS AND SOLICITORS AND I HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING WHICH IS ILLEGAL AND NOTHING WHATSOEVER AFFECTED ANY OF MY CUSTOMERS .

I HOPE MY REGULAR AND PROSPECTIVE NEW CUSTOMERS WILL UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTIES MR BARRASKELL HAS CAUSED ME, BUT MY SERVICES IN REGARDS TO SHIPPING WILL ALWAYS REMAIN RELIABLE AND PERSONAL,

MR BARRISKELL SAYS IN HIS REPLIES TO ME IN REGARDS TO MY LETTERS COULD BE READ BY 30 MILLION PEOPLE ACROSS THE WORLD - NOW - MY REPLIES TO HIM AND NOT ONLY THE MEMBERS OF THE RALLY (HOLIDAY) WILL ALSO BE READ BY 30 MILLION PEOPLE ? - MR BARRISKELL AND OR HIS MEMBERS STILL OWE ME £3,280 FOR THE ABANDONED RAMPS,

BARRIE VANDERMOLEN
MANAGING DIRECTOR
AUTO- MARINE SHIPPING COMPANY LTD >>>

Poor old Barrie, still reaching out for a meagre grip on reality. For those of you who skim read: Barrie can't count, I told him I was publishing to 1.3 billion people (A rough figure of how many people have access to the web), Barrie thinks 1.3 billion is the same as 30 million, and with that I think we can shed light on his need to have accountants resolve some issues with his previous companies.

And finally, Barrie, once and for all, we paid for the ramps from H G Rent before we ever left England - if we didn't please explain why they are listed on the invoice we paid!