• Report: #786824
Complaint Review:

ROCK STAR GALLERY

  • Submitted: Sun, October 09, 2011
  • Updated: Sat, April 22, 2017

  • Reported By: matt — san diego California United States of America
ROCK STAR GALLERY
15220 N. Scottsdale Rd Suite 160 SCOTTSDALE, Arizona United States of America

ROCK STAR GALLERY MICHAEL DUNN SOLD ME FRAUDULENT/FORGED NIRVAN MEMORABILIA ($17,500 WORTH) SCOTTSDALE, Arizona

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: ROCK STAR gallery did win.. The truth was proven with an apology and statement of admitting false information was posted.

*Consumer Comment: Rock Star Gallery’s attorney Daniel Warner of Kelly/Warner Law under Investigation

*Consumer Comment: Michael Dunn, owner of Rock Star Gallery Owner, Lies About Court “WIN.”

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: Apology From Person Who wrote False Rip Off Report Complaint

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: Matt Parker apologizes to ROCK STAR gallery for false rip off report.

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: Rock Star gallery wins in court

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: Retraction Letter, ROCK STAR gallery wins in court

*Consumer Comment: mike Dunn, rock star gallery

*Consumer Comment: This guy is obviously lying

*Author of original report: Rockstar Gallery makes it impossible to get your "guaranteed" refund

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: ROCK STAR gallery, RESPONSE TO DISHONEST REVIEW

Corporate Advocacy Program
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

Set the record straight:
Arbitration Program

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

My fiance wanted to buy me a wedding gift that would blow me away.  Knowing I'm a huge fan of the band Nirvana, she did a web search and found a dealer selling a display of Nirvana memorabilia.  There's a Fender guitar, several album flats, and a bass drum head all autographed by the band.

While I was immediately concerned with the lack of any provenance of certificate of authenticity (other than the one he prints himself), I didn't want to hurt my fiance's feelings so I kept my mouth shut.

Recently, we decided we wanted to sell the display, and sell it quickly.  We paid $17,500 for the item and I listed it on EBAY for only $10,000.  Before listing the item on ebay, I also contacted the owner to see if he would be interested in buying the display back at a bargain price so that he could re-sell it for even more profit.  WHile I'm waiting for the owner's response, I get an email on ebay asking for documentation on the item.  I told him that while I did have documentation, I expected a lot of tire kickers in an auction like this.  I asked for a $100 refundable deposit to scan in all the relevant documents.  He said he would get back to me.  Instead, what he did was copy my pics from ebay and send them to PSA/DNA for verification.  They deemed the entire piece fraudulent.  Not only did ebay remove my listing, but I am forbidden to relist it. WHere else would one sell an item like this???

I confronted the owner of the gallery.  He has every excuse you can imagine.  He knew he was dealing with a 27 year old girl that knew nothing about buying anything like this and took total advantage of her.  I wonder how he sleeps at night.  I am currently in the process of hiring a forensic document examiner and attorney,

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/09/2011 10:33 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/rock-star-gallery/scottsdale-arizona-85254/rock-star-gallery-michael-dunn-sold-me-fraudulentforged-nirvan-memorabilia-17500-worth-786824. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on ROCK STAR GALLERY

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
1Author 4Consumer 6Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 REBUTTAL Owner of company

ROCK STAR gallery did win.. The truth was proven with an apology and statement of admitting false information was posted.

AUTHOR: Michael - (USA)

I continue to be amazed, that this type of post regarding my company and a completely false accusation of me telling a lie about a documented court case is appalling. In No way did I lie about the outcome of this suit. I am not a legal expert but based on the court documents and the attorney who assisted us, I feel we absolutly won as the client wrote an apology letter and stated that he was NOT truthfuly about this entire situation.  To even have to write this in defense of some persons who has no idea of the facts and took no time to talk with me is truly a waste of time. Fortunately, the truth and the facts are on my side and these days, that is all you have.  I will add that the author of this post, accusing me of lying, should be ashamed for not bothering to get the real truth out. Anyone who would like the truth and details of the facts regarding the orginal post by Mr. Parker, please continue to read.  The Kelly Warner group is not my lawyer and only represented me on this one case alone. I have no knowledge of any misdeads by this company as they came to me as a referral.

 

Let me start off by saying, the information written on the Rip-Off –Report is completely false!  I run a reputable business and have been for 13 years and to place my gallery in the middle of any alleged misdoings by a law firm that I hired is ridiculous and slanderous. I have no knowledge of any wrong doing by this law firm. My brief dealings with them were ordinary as I was looking for legal assistance.

 

Our side of the story is very simple. A person purchased a beautiful display for her boyfriend and they broke up and he wanted to sell. Mr. Parker called me and said his “Ex-Fiancé, gave me this piece of crap and I don’t want it and I want you to buy it back”. I responded that I would need to speak to the purchaser to discuss any information regarding the purchase. He did not want me to speak with her and I was actually unable to get in touch with her.  He went on the internet and stated information regarding the piece which was completely and 100% false. It appeared on the RIP OFF REPORT and even though, we had proof that the item was authentic, Mr. Parker continued to state lies. The lies stayed on the internet for a few years before we discovered the proof we needed to take legal action.   We do not have a business attorney and we only used Kelly Warner as he was referred by our accountant. As you know, information on the internet which is 100% false and negative should be dealt with sternly. The internet has become the very best and worst part of our lives as it seems like anyone can write anything about anybody, regardless of the truth.  As you know, until you have proof that a person has printed lies, it is difficult to refute. We were fortunate enough to find the proof we needed that Mr. Parker’s statements were 100% false, therefore we were able to take legal action and correct this wrong.   After we found Mr. Parker trying to sell the item as genuine on EBay, we knew, he was trying to scam us to get money back that he did not even spend to purchase the item. His girlfriend purchased and if there was a refund of any kind, or store credit, it would have only been entitled to her. All items were genuine and he knew it from the start.  I was told I had no legal recourse regarding Mr. Parkers lies unless we had proof.  When he posted the eBay posting trying to sell the piece, this was the proof that would show a judge that Mr. Parker was not truthful.  If you research the timeline, you will see that this is exactly why it took so long for us to take legal action.  (Also, as far as locating Mr. Parker, Kelly Warner had a difficult time finding him as well and they told us they sent an investigator out to locate him. There should be documented records to show this.

Again, I have all documentation to support this from the attorney).  

 

After we noticed the eBay listing by Mr. Parker, we had evidence that he lied on the RIP OFF REPORT and lied to us per email. (Which I have kept and have all records)

Now, up to this point, there is no story except a customer being deceitful and slandering our good name.  We took the counsel of our accountant who recommended we speak with Kelly Warner. She gave a good reference and there was not any negative facts regarding this firm.  I will say, we were not overly impressed and he was too expensive for doing the work that he did.  He filed the paperwork in court, which I have a full copy of signed by the judge and Mr. Parker agreed and admitted he did not state the truth about the item and that he was very sorry for stating mis-information.  Our goal was accomplished as we only wanted the truth to come out and were not seeking any damages from Mr. Parker. Our attorney did the paperwork; Mr. Parker wrote a letter and signed it (I only have a copy of it which I have placed on our rebuttal). We did not have any additional contact with Mr. Parker after the attorneys communicated with him.  All of this is legally filed with the courts. That is it! Please do not make this a story about anything we did wrong because we wanted to correct the lies that Mr. Parker was spreading to dishonor my small company. I welcome you to visit and discuss, but truly, there is no story here unless you have something on the attorney.   Google DID take off the search posting and I have an email from them stating they were removing it based on the court order. This was after the suit.  However, I noticed about three months ago??, the postings were back on the search (Postings of the rip off report). At that time I called Kelly Warners office several times and they were not helpful at all.  I thought since the judge ruled that the information on google was incorrect, that google had to take it off and that is what we paid him to take care of after getting Mr. Parkers confession.  Kelly Warner’s office was not helpful and basically said it was googles choice and that their policies have changed.  I then took the action to defend myself and posted the letter from Mr. Parker and the court documents as an additional rebuttal regarding this matter.

 

We had never used or heard of Kelly Warner before the accountant referred us and have never called them or used them again. The only contact was made about two months ago when we called to issue a complaint that the court orders were not being executed.  There was no LIE on my part. Based on MR. Parker’s admission of wrong doing and his apology letter, I took this as a win. Perhaps not in the “Win” in legal terms that you are stating but in our minds, our goal was accomplished and the truth of Mr. Parker being dishonest on purpose, misleading statements and lies on the internet and then saying how wonderful the piece was on eBay to try to sell, surely is a character flaw by Mr. Parker.

 

If you have issues with the law firm we used one time that is fine. I would not recommend them nor do I have any affiliation with them.  But, because our company selected a law firm that MAY be shady, should not reflect poorly on my small company. I am very, very surprised with accusations that we would have known that the attorney, Kelly Warner, did not act professionally or in an unscrupulous manner. If you have proof that they,Kelly Warner, mislead us and the court orders and all paperwork are incorrect based on something Kelly Warner did, we will be the first to join you in submitting a formal complaint. We are the innocent in this case as all we did was hiring this law firm to help us legally.  I have an entire log of communication from the law firm and I can tell you, there is nothing that looks out of the ordinary. This includes court orders, stipulations, and injunctions. I am not an attorney or know anything about the legal system, I am a small business owner who hired someone to help get false information off of the internet and that is what I thought Kelly Warner did. They represented themselves to be trusted attorneys who specialize in helping businesses.  I am shocked to hear that our case might have been mis-handled in any way.  The bottom line for our company was that Mr. Parker lied and the proof was in his emails to my company AND his own words on Ebay, which were totally different.  He knew it and our attorney stated that to get this dropped, he would apologize in a letter to be published.  We only published the letter recently when the google search postings re-appeared.  The only victim in this story is my company. Lies were allowed to be kept on a site when proof of Mr. Parker’s story was 100% false and now possibly, we trusted a law firm to represent us fairly and now find out there could be issues, and the negative/false report was put back on the search engines through google!!  The timeline, in which all of this took place, is not even relevant.  I have been in the possession of all of the documents since the case ended, it is only after the google search re-appeared, that I found it necessary to make public, that is it!

 

We should NOT be in your story at all! If you have an issue with the lawfirm, issue a statement based on facts and report on them, not false accusations regarding a client of theirs.   We are just a small company trying to protect our good name and the court agreed with us and asked for any of the postings that were slanderous (based on the apology letter) to be removed.  That’s it.  Anything else printed would be false.   I have no knowledge of complaints issued or of any wrong doing of this attorney; I can only speak to the service level, which was not good.

 

As you can see, I am passionate about the truth and shocked that our name would even be in a story like this.     If any of your facts are true about Kelly Warner, I will be filing a formal complaint myself and I will be happy to assist you in any way.    WE are the victims in this.  If I had known that after Mr. Parker admitted to lying and we finally had proof through the EBay posting to defend our good company and after spending thousands of dollars on legal fees that the dishonest postings would re-appear on google, my actions might have been different.  I use the term” won” because of Mr. Parker’s apology and the courts stipulation document. The legal documents speak for themselves.. I would like to know any factual information regarding Kelly Warner and if they represented us in a way which was unlawful or unethical, I will file a complaint. Based on your written information regarding accussations of me and my company, I am not overly confident that you know anything.

Thank you.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Michael Dunn

ROCK STAR gallery

 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

Rock Star Gallery’s attorney Daniel Warner of Kelly/Warner Law under Investigation

AUTHOR: Legal Sentry - (USA)

Michael Dunn, the owner of the Rock Star Gallery located in Scottsdale, Arizona, posted here in April 2017 that he had “won in court” proving the allegations of fraud and selling a forgery in his memorabilia business were proved false.  Only no such court ruling occurred. In fact, the complete opposite is what happened when the court dismissed the lawsuit filed by Dunn and the Rock Star Gallery.

Upon further research into the details, it was found that the attorney hired by Dunn was Daniel Warner of Kelly/Warner Law firm in Scottsdale, Arizona. It was recently exposed by Professor Eugene Volokh of  the UCLA Law School who authors the legal blog for the Washington Post, the Volokh Conspiracy, that Daniel Warner and the Kelly/Warner Law firm had engaged in a pattern of very suspicious legal practices ( https://www. washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/30/libel-takedown-injunctions-and-fake-notarizations/?utm_term=.20a35ce284b2 ). Specifically they had filed numerous fraudulent lawsuits involving “fake” defendants, plaintiffs and notaries. These activities were further exposed by the USA Herald with evidence that in these “fake” lawsuits had used “forged” notary seals as a means to validate the existence of the imaginary litigants (usaherald.com/arizona-attorney-daniel-warner-investigation-alleged-legal-fraud/ ) .

The seriousness of the allegations being made against Michael Dunn’s attorney is worth consideration, they are being investigated by the State Bar of Arizona after multiple complaints had been filed for the very shady business practices. If that fact of State Bar violations were not enough for concern, it is extremely disconcerting that such activities of filing “fake” lawsuits has now drawn the attention of Federal Law Enforcement after a Federal Court judge took umbrage with such legal shenanigans and called upon the U.S. Attorney General Office to look into possible criminal conduct implications. It can be reported that the involvement of Daniel Warner with his business associate Richart Ruddie has begun a Federal investigation by the FBI being overseen by an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Rhode Island.

The question for the reader to consider is the veracity of the Michael Dunn and Rock Star Gallery denials of any wrong doing in conducting their business of selling expensive memorabilia. Why would they call upon a lawyer such as Daniel Warner that engages in such shady legal filings? Why claim a “court win” when obviously no such court ruling occurred? Why does the alleged “retraction” letter have a signature that appears to be a photo shopped digital signature? If real, why was this letter not presented as evidence to the court in the lawsuit? Why did it such significant evidence take almost four years to appear on this ROR posting? How was the defendant served the lawsuit at the supposed location when he had moved from that residence years prior? The answers to such basic questions are unknown. It is clearly a matter of Buyer Beware when making the commitment to spend thousands of dollars for a personal passion such as purchasing collectible memorability.

The irony to this sordid story is Michael Dunn and the Rock Star Gallery called upon this law firm to defend their Internet reputation, the claim of a “court win” is a lie and the post you are reading is still being disseminated online and actually has now brought on more questions than answers to the truth of what might be the business practices of Rock Star Gallery. 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

Michael Dunn, owner of Rock Star Gallery Owner, Lies About Court “WIN.”

AUTHOR: Legal Sentry - (USA)

It is interesting that Michael Dunn claims in his consumer comment #6 “this guy is obviously lying.” What makes such hypocrisy so telling is that in Michael Dunn’s rebuttal post #2, #3 and #4 that his business and personal reputation were vindicated due to “Rock Star gallery wins in court.” What makes such an assertion telling to the overall arch of the original post about “fraudulent/forged” product is there was NO court victory as Michael Dunn so adamantly declares on this post. The irony of this apparently ongoing continuation of a scam is how easy it was to prove Michael Dunn is OBVIOUSLY LYING.

In the Rebuttal post #2, a Report Attachment is provided as proof of some alleged court victory involving the defamation lawsuit filed in Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa, Michael Dunn and Rock Star Gallery Music Collectables v. Matthew Parker, case no. CV2013-009765. What is provided is a real document filed with the court for a Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction. Michael Dunn claims the defendant, very dissatisfied customer claiming fraud; agreed to the assertion of defamation and a court Ordered Injunction of this post with RipOffReport.com.  However, when you take a look at the attachment provided for the rebuttal, you will see a page where the Judge was required to sign. There is NO signature. That is because the Judge did NOT sign the Injunction. The lawsuit was NOT won by Michael Dunn and the Rock Star Gallery. In fact, what Michael Dunn does NOT provide is the JUDGMENT of DISMISSAL issued on August 4, 2014. Fear not, the court’s dismissal has been attached to confirm the TRUTH. It is hard to imagine what could possibly been misunderstood by Michael Dunn when the document clearly states: “IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, dismissing all unadjudicated of this case without prejudice for lack of prosecution.” Now that years have based, it is beyond the statute of limitation requirement for a defamation claim (1 year), so even if Michael Dunn’s version of this matter was in fact the truth, he no longer pursue any legal remedy.

It should be noted as a point of interest, if the Michael Dunn and Rock Star Gallery “won in court” as proclaimed, which ordered the removal of this ROR post – how are reading this right now. Just asking.

With such a discrepancy of FACTS exposed, it seemed prudent to explore the other claims put forth by Michael Dunn on this ROR posts. He also provided what he claimed was a “retraction letter” provided by Matthew Parker. There are a couple of problems with this so-called evidence. First, the signature of Matthew Parker is not an actual signature; it is a digital signature that appears to have been photo shopped onto a letter. It is worth note that this significant piece of evidence, if legitimate, was NOT ever filed with the court in Arizona. Why not? Also, although this alleged “retraction letter” is dated October 25, 2013, Michael Dunn did not come back to this ROR post and attach it to substantiate his rebuttals for 3 and half years (April 26, 2017). Does that make any sense at all? So continuing on the trail, the court documents provided the “proof of service” of the lawsuit upon Matthew Parker in Carlsbad, California. Upon research, it was determined the name of the owner of the residence this alleged service took place so confirmation could be established. However, although Ms. Frankel would acknowledge that Matthew Parker had lived at the house renting a room, that had been several years prior to the alleged service recorded as having occurred in 2013 (apparently he had moved out in 2011).

What does all this mean? BUYER BEWARE. Maybe everything claimed by Michael Dunn is correct and the guitar sold for $17,500 was perfectly legit. However, it would seem to be a little worrisome when the same party selling such expensive memorabilia based on trust of authenticity would post claims on this website using documentation of supposed evidence that does NOT actually have the Judge’s SIGNATURE, which anyone can see for themselves. Upon additional review, the actual official signed court document is literally the opposite outcome claimed. Thorough due diligence research would appear to be the common sense course of action when dealing with the claims of Michael Dunn. Just saying….

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 REBUTTAL Owner of company

Apology From Person Who wrote False Rip Off Report Complaint

AUTHOR: Michael - (USA)

The apology letter to ROCK STAR gallery from the person (non-customer) who wrote this false complaint is attached. It is also on our www.rockstargallery.net website under testimonials. (3rd attempt to post this rebuttal) Also, requested Rip Off Report to remove this entire post as per court order, it is defamatory. Waiting for response.

http://www.rockstargallery.net/testimonials-and-reviews

Thank you to all our loyal and wonderful clients throughout the years and we hope to see you soon.

 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 REBUTTAL Owner of company

Matt Parker apologizes to ROCK STAR gallery for false rip off report.

AUTHOR: Michael - (USA)

see attached retraction letter from Matt Parker who made this false complaint.

Thank you,

Michael Dunn, Owner   rockstargallery.net

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 REBUTTAL Owner of company

Rock Star gallery wins in court

AUTHOR: Michael - (USA)

It does not pay to write defamatory complaints on this site or any site. ROCK STAR gallery was successful in a legal suit which included gaining a court order and removal of defamatory comments made by Matt Parker. The Retraction letter to the above complaint is attached. The court order is also attached. If customers have any questions, I welcome your email or call. Thank you,

Michael Dunn

Owner, ROCK STAR gallery      www.rockstargallery.net

 

 

 

 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 REBUTTAL Owner of company

Retraction Letter, ROCK STAR gallery wins in court

AUTHOR: Michael - (USA)

As already identified. This entire complaint, now per the person who wrote it and a non-customer, is false. ROCK STAR gallery filed a lawsuit against Matt Parker who wrote this defamatory complaint and won. He has since retracted the entire story and it is posted below and on our website. Thank you.

Michael Dunn

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Consumer Comment

mike Dunn, rock star gallery

AUTHOR: Danny - ()

 MIKE DUNN AND ROCKSTAR GALLERY ARE NOT RIP OFFS. I have been dealing with him for years and all my collectables are real. This dope is pissed off because his wife to be broke up with him. If you want real collectables, that are real go to rockstar gallerys.

Danny

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Consumer Comment

This guy is obviously lying

AUTHOR: Buzz - (United States of America)

This guy is obviously lying since he posted this item on Ebay and said the exact opposite of what he just stated. Now he is selling it and claims it is authentic. All I can say is that he has lied on this report.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Author of original report

Rockstar Gallery makes it impossible to get your "guaranteed" refund

AUTHOR: musicmannsd - (United States of America)

In Mr. Dunn's response, you'll notice that instead of sticking to the facts, he repeatedly hides behind
the company policy of only dealing with the purchaser of the item.  He's THE OWNER.  HE SETS THE POLICY.  Not only that, if he wanted to speak to my fiance so badly he'd pick up the phone and call her, or email her; because of course he has all this information on file from the sale of the item.  Mr. Dunn could deal with me man to man.  But he won't. He wants to deal with the 27 year old girl that knew nothing about his reputation in the industry, nothing about the memorabilia industry in general, and had no business whatsoever spending this kind of money without any sort of provenance or 3rd party verification.  When you ask Mr. Dunn where he got all these amazing"one of a kind" pieces, he gets cagey and mysterious.  "I got some of it from their roadies and some from a person I can't name (of course he can't).

Since my initial complaint a lot has happened.,  I've sent the item to a well respected memorabilia examiner.  Surprise, surprise the report comes back as "not likely to be genuine".  Here's where it gets really interesting.  Mr. Dunn did give us a COA (certificate of authenticity).  One he GENERATED
HIMSELF.  When you deal with a legitimate dealer, there's a provenance of the item and its authenticity is verified by a 3rd party-NOT BY THE SELLER! It's a conflict of interest.  Mr Dunn knows it,  and its common practice in the legitimate memorabilia iondustry.  The COA reassuringly reads that there is a lifetime refund guarantee if the item is deemed not to be authentic "by a court approved forensic document examiner".  Sounds fair, right?  Sure, until you speak to a forensic document esaminer and he tells you that those type of examiners don't authenticate celebrity signatures.  This gentleman told me that well over 90% of memorabilia items for sale are fakes.  I was told that since it is so difficult to find a known example of a celebrity signature, forensic document examiners do not do this type of work.  Mr. Dunn has cleverly worded his guarantee so that it guarantees nothing.  Unbelievable, right?  When I told the forensic guy about the phrasing of the COA he was incredulous.
 



After speaking to several dealers and industry experts, I find out this guy has a terrible reputation in the industry.  So what options do I have left?  We now have to take this guy to court.  And it's far from cheap. To have each signature authenticated costs around a hundred bucks.  There are 18 signatures to be verified.  The piece weighs well over a hundred pounds and costs several hundred dollars to ship each way.  So start with the price of the piece, add in the expert's fees, add in the shipping costs, plus our and his attorney's fees, plus mental anguish......we're talking $50,000 here easy.  Think about it:  If you were a legitimate dealer in this industry and a customer who had spent a substantial amount of money with you came to you with concerns that the item was a fraud, what would you do?  I'd give them their money back immediately if there were even the slightest bit of evidence of fraud, knowing that these are the people with the means to be a customer again.  You'd bend over backwards and treat your customers fairly, right?  Mr. Dunn says, "I only speak to the purchaser" and bad mouths other dealers and experts in the industry by saying "they hate me.  They knew the piece was one of mine and that's why they're saying its a fake, because they dont like me.  Why would they hate you, Mike?  Why do the industry leaders in memorabilia authentication have it out for you??

So now Mr. Dunn has forced our hand and we must sue him.  The reason I posted this report is so that someone who may be considering buying a piece of memorabilia from Mr. Dunn, or any other dealer, may read this and do extensive due dilligence before completing the sale.  Here are a few lessons weve learned the hard way:

1. Never accept a COA generated by the seller.  If you don't have a 3rd party expert verify the piece, it is considered worthless-literally worthless.

2. Ask to speak to the dealers customers to gauge their satisfaction.  A legitimate business will have no issue doing this.

3. ALWAYS insist the item in question be verified by a 3rd party.  Once again, legitimate dealers have no problem with this, IF THEY HAVEN'T DONE IT ALREADY THEMSELVES!

In short, in the memorabilia market the watchword is caveat emptor;  Big time.  Call around and talk to other dealers about the person you're considering doing business with.  I admit it.  We were so stupid and naive.  If we would've done the slightest bit of due dilligence we wouldn't be stuck with a worthless piece.  

So Mr. Dunn leaves us no choice.  We will send the item out to a couple of other experts to have them look the item over-just so that when we get to court there's absolutely no question there was fraud here.  Thank God we're fortunate to have the means to do all this.  If this were the average person, they'd have saved for years and years to buy something like this, only to find out its fake and you're out 20 grand.  Would they have the money to send it to 3 experts for verification (at almost 2k a pop) and hire an attorney to get their money back?  Probably not.  That's why I'm writing this report.  Someone has to teach this guy a lesson and put the word out that you must do your homework before purchasing a piece of memorabilia.  I'm not saying he knew the items were fake.  There's no way we can know that.  But when he first was notified there were issues with authenticity, what do you think he did? Offer to refund our money?  Say maybe he made a mistake?  Nope.  Not even close.  Essentially he told me to pound sand.  And here's the kicker:  he was going to "do me a favor" and put me in touch with a guy who would maybe pay 6k for the guitar...lol.  It would be hilarious if it weren't true.  But this is how this guy operates.  And did I send him a nasty e-mail?  You're damned right I did.  But don't be taken in by his spin. I was threatening him with legal action.  Certainly not physical harm.  We don't live in the same city, he's gotta be in his 60's and I'm in my late 30's-certainly not a recipe for a physical altercation.  He's an old man. So there you have it, folks.  That's what dealing with Michael Dunn from rockstargallery.net.

Remember....CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#11 REBUTTAL Owner of company

ROCK STAR gallery, RESPONSE TO DISHONEST REVIEW

AUTHOR: rockstar - (United States of America)

 I have read the complaint and also received a few emails from Mr. Parker.  During the conversation to even explain and educate Mr. Parker, he became very angry, cursed and hung up on me.


Mr. Parker is not the person on record as purchasing this collectible from us so only general information was being shared with Mr. Parker.  He claims he received as a gift and is in need of funds atThis time. 

He placed it on a site to sell it and supposedly had a company say it was not authentic.  There are several problems with this complaint and I have listed them below.  Ultimately, the piece in
Question is 100% authentic as sold.  I understand these are hard economic times for people, but this dishonesty and threatening behavior exhibited by Mr. Parker is unacceptable.


 


1.       We do not show Mr. Parket as the rightful owner and therefore any return policy regardless of the reason would not be within our written company policy.


2.        He states he received this as a gift from an Ex fiance(listed in his emails) and she has nothing to do with this transaction at this time.  We have no proof or confirmation that Mr.


  Parker is the legal owner of this piece.  There has been no receipt or paperwork shown and we have not confirmed that it is 100% the item that was purchased from our company.


3.        Based on our written authentication and return policy which is written on our website, receipt as well as our Certificate of Authenticity, the only person who would have any recourse


  Is the person of record of purchase.  Any information regarding the person who made the purchase is confidential.  Any information regarding this purchase without the consent of the


  owner of record is also confidential.


4.       Mr. Parker has sent threatening emails in which we take very seriously.  He then sent another email after his obvious threat to say he did not mean bodily injury, however, in these unpredictable


       times, such threats should be taken seriously and we are in the process of notifying his local authorities and perhaps employer. 


5.       ROCK STAR gallery is a reputable in-store as well as online gallery.  Due dilligence to ensure our credibility and honest practices have been taken by many of the celebrity artist, world renown    photographers, gallery high profile guests and informed collectors.  We have an A with the Better Business Bureau and have enjoyed many years of educating and assisting informed collectors


With their artwork, photography and signed collectibles.


6.       Mr. Parker did not have this piece authenticated by a qualified forensic examiner, but a company who only reviewed the hard to read signatures via email.  This is not the acceptable


 authenticity examination process recognized in the industry and supported by the United States Courts.  The person who purchased this piece has the proper documentation of authenticity.


7.       We are also in the process of notifying the purchaser of this piece to inform them of this attempted transaction.


8.       During my conversation with Mr. Parker, I did make an offer to purchase it from him as I have a very good, knowledgeable and informed collector who would appreciate this piece.  My customer


made a below market value offer as many are doing in these times, but Mr. Parker refused and then unprofessionally, hung up the phone on me.  After consideration of re-purchasing it for my


client, I realized this would not be a viable transaction without the purchaser on records authorization to sell the piece and then any proceeds would be given to the person on record.


 


At this time, I would think Mr. Parker should be investigated and  noted for being a potentially harmful person. Hopefully not, as perhaps he is just going through difficult times.


 


Email from Mr. Parker:


 


From: matt]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 2:02 PM
To: Rock Star gallery
Subject: Re: Inquiry


 


I'd watch my back if I were you, mike. I'm not like the average sucker you're used to dealing with. There will be repercussions for you one way or the other. But I'm fair. We'll try court first. And for your sake, I hope it all works out. The person that should make anyone nervous is one with nothing to lose. You haven't heard the last of me.


Sent on the Sprint Now Network from my BlackBerry


My response to the above email:


From: "Rock Star gallery" <info@rockstargallery.net>


Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 20:58:45 -0700


To: <matt


Subject: RE: Inquiry


 


Matt,


I promise, we will not take your threat lightly.  I have offered you my help because I have a good client I wanted to help and the Nirvana collectible would have been great for him.


At this point, per our gallery policy and Certificate of Authenticity, the only person that we work with would be the person who purchased the piece.  We do not have you listed as a client, but


have another client registered with this collectible.  We work with the original purchaser with the original receipt.  If there is a question of authenticity, it needs to be reviewed by a court approved


forensic examiner, not a self-proclaimed expert company.  Again, this only applies to the original owner/person who paid for the item.


 


We stand behind the authenticity of this piece and behind the excellent reputation that we have built. Your assumptions regarding our company are wrong and we deal with very knowledgeable collectors every day.   Any negotiations of purchases of this item back for the basis of resale only, would need to be conducted through the original purchaser.


 


Regards,


 

Michael
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
X