RE: Exploitative Gouging Stand Over Tactics of Randal Glennon of Three Wise Men, Response to Cameron Houston and Chris Vedelago article SMH Sydney Morning Herald

By December 17, 2015Blog, Response to Media

How to Not Pay Your Debts author, Doug Constable, in debt again

 

Response

  • This headline assertion is false and misleading. Doug was not in debt.
  • Randal Glennon and his company Three Wise Men were paid.
  • The title of the book is now “What to do When You Can’t Pay Your Debts”.
  • An invoice issued by Randal Glennon, director at Three Wise Men Communications Pty Ltd, totalled $18,000. See 50% invoice pdf.
  • The Randal Glennon Three Wise Men $18,000 invoice was for a marketing campaign including website and email marketing to generate leads.
  • Randal Glennon’s $18,000 invoice was exploitative and gouging as it failed to deliver on contractual obligations.
  • Randal Glennon’s invoice was extremely overpriced, extremely under-delivered, unreasonable, exploitative, a gouge, unfair and un-Australian.
  • As a result it is Randal Glennon and Three Wise Men Communications Pty Ltd that is in debt for work owed.
  • Randal of Three Wise Men is expected to repay the sum.

June 28, 2015

CAMERON HOUSTON CHRIS VEDELAGO

Response

  • Cameron Houston and Chris Vedelago have written this article in a biased and distasteful way.

Doug Constable, in YouTube interview on insolvency.

Marketing consultant Randal Glennon concedes he should have seen the warning signs when he agreed to work on a campaign for “insolvency expert” Doug Constable, who wrote a book called How to Not Pay Your Debts.

Response

  • This assertion is misleading, Randal Glennon was aware in February 2015 the title of the book.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon’s $18,000 invoice was exploitative and gouging.
  • Randal’s involvement with the author’s, Cameron Houston and Chris Vedelago, to produce this biased and distasteful article appears coercive. To extract money.
  • Randal Glennon hires a Private investigator Peter Hiscock.
  • Peter Hiscock threatened the subject of the article with what sounded like a physical threat, however Peter Hiscock later elaborated on his threat that it was a threat of the production of a defaming news media article.

 

Mr Glennon sent an $18,000 invoice in March, after developing a range of marketing strategies and website content for Mr Constable’s new company, Carlton Ross and Associates.

Response

  • Randal Glennon did produce an $18,000 invoice in March for marketing strategies and website content for Carlton Ross. Not Doug.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon’s $18,000 invoice was exploitative and gouging.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon hired Peter Hiscock, a private investigator, to intimidate.
  • Peter Hiscock, Randal’s PI, tauntingly stated after the articles publication “the article was just a tickle up”
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon initiated this article against the subject to intimidate.

 

Perhaps predictably, Mr Glennon has not been paid and is now considering launching bankruptcy proceedings against his client.

Response

  • This is an untrue and inflammatory statement with the use of the word “predictably” and puts in the mind of the reader “bankruptcy proceedings against his client” with the use of the word “considering”.
  • “Bankruptcy proceedings”, although makes for colourful reading, was not an option and was never undertaken. The notion of “considering launching” is just as plausible as Randal Glennon paying back his exploitative and gouging invoice.

 

“We’re obviously kicking ourselves now, but we just assumed he was an honourable man. And yes, when we were made aware of his book title we became a lot more dubious about his bona fides,” Mr Glennon said.

Response

  • Should Randal Glennon and his company Three Wise Men have performed their agreed services then payment should be forthcoming.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon’s $18,000 invoice was exploitative and gouging.
  • No one should be bullied into paying anyone for unsatisfactory work.

 

But Mr Glennon was unaware that Mr Constable had an extensive history of defaulting on debts dating back almost 40 years.

Response

  • This assertion is wrong and defamatory. There is no history of Doug defaulting on debts dating back almost 40 years.

 

Mr Constable, 65, who has also used the alias Douglas Duckett, had already been declared bankrupt on three occasions since 1988, leaving a string of angry creditors in his wake.

Response

  • Not aware of any angry creditors. This assertion is false and misleading.
  • Two bankruptcies were annulled due to paying back creditors, personal guarantees.

 

He has been linked to almost 50 shelf­ companies since 1985 and was convicted of obtaining financial advantage by deception in 1997. He regularly changes business premises, with at least one landlord claiming to be owed six months’ unpaid rent.

Response

  • This remark reads to mislead the reader. One of the things Doug is involved in is buying and selling companies. A bit less divisive said like that.
  • Furthermore, it is the nature of his work to go into another business and help them with their business, restructuring etc.

 

In 2013, Mr Constable was refused a liquor license for a Geelong cafe by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation due to “convictions for dishonesty and traffic offences, outstanding warrants and failure to disclose full particulars of his prior convictions.”

Response

  • This Cameron Houston and Chris Vedelago article reads like a witch hunt.
  • He entered detail on the form regarding conviction, unfortunately not correctly explained to the forms requirements. Disclosed, not correctly disclosed.
  • One of the companies had a number of parking fines, when Doug became aware of this he completed requirements and all were satisfied.
  • Unfortunately for Cameron Houston and Chris Vedelago not the elaborate story they were going for.
  • Even with Houston and Vedelago’s article convolution, amp up, twisting and turning of information to make it uninformative..an otherwise null story has become a story of words without actual meaning.
  • For entertainment value, advertising revenue, SMH likely made a loss in the production and promotion of this article.

 

Despite his tainted corporate history, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission allowed Mr Constable to establish Carlton Ross and Associates Pty Ltd in 2013, which he now uses to advise those facing financial hardship.

Response

  • This assertion is wrong and defamatory. Doug does not have nor exhibit a tainted corporate history.
  • The mention of ASIC here is inflammatory.

 

“With over 50 years business experience, we’ve assisted clients to see a complete picture of their business and financial circumstances and we provide simple, smart solutions to keep people moving forward,” Mr Constable claims on his LinkedIn account.

 

When contacted by Fairfax Media, Mr Constable insisted he would settle the debt with Mr Glennon and denied having any other significant creditors.

 

“I looked them both in the eye and told them they’d get paid … As a show of good faith I offered $1000 a month until my funds come through,” Mr Constable said.

Response

  • The use by Randal Glennon and Three Wise Men Communications Pty Ltd of two journos, a tabloid, and a PI to extract money did cause them to get paid, within 2 weeks of this article being published.
  • This is the kind of scam Randal Glennon operates.
  • Randal will say he and Three Wise Men are the gurus of getting results.
  • The fact remains that he produced extremely poor work for the requested money, Randal did not listen to requirements, Randal did not listen to direction, Randal did not listen to feedback.  As a reult Randal Glennon and Three Wise Men ill efforts produced “predictably” no leads.
  • As no leads were produced by Randal Glennon, Doug suggested to pay $1000 per month from existing cashflow. No leads means no new money to pay. No leads means Randal Glennon and Three Wise Men Communications Pty Ltd are incompetent.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon’s $18,000 invoice was exploitative and gouging.

 

But he warned Mr Glennon against taking bankruptcy action.

Response

  • This comment is wrong. It did not happen.

 

“This is a company debt, not a Doug Constable debt … If he goes down the legal path, he may get paid or he may not get paid. If he works with me, given the circumstances, he will get paid,” Mr Constable said.

 

But Mr Glennon has a different version of events. In March, he paid $180 for Mr Constable to attend a charity lunch for the Windermere Foundation and organised that he sat next to Carlton legend Stephen Kernahan at the event.

Response

  • That would be the extent of Randal’s work. Doug paid $18000 for a lunch with Kernahan.
  • $180 as a part $18000. 1%
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon’s $18,000 invoice was exploitative and gouging.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon hired a PI to intimidate.
  • The fact remains that Randal Glennon initiated this article against the subject to intimidate.

 

“He [Constable] told me at that lunch that our invoice had been paid, only to be told a few days later that he’d sacked his bookkeeper and that’s why it wasn’t paid. Because he’s like a Walter Mitty character, you simply don’t know what to believe,” Mr Glennon said.

Response

  • At the time there was use of an external book-keeper, nothing out of the ordinary.
  • Glennon; Good with words, but no good at an outcome.
  • As a business consultant, Doug has advice to his clients, do not use Randal Glennon or Three Wise Men Communications for any marketing or services whatsoever howsoever.
  • The experience of how Doug was treated, bullied, cohesion, it is an experience he will pass on and help with his clients.

Leave a Reply