Modelling agency warning (First Step Modelling / Distinctive Model Advice)

jackielim

sheramber wrote: »

How can they respond to your claims without knowing who you are?

How can they refute your claims without being able check your records?

They know exactly who I am and what I said in my reviews.... if they didn't, they would not have been able to directly email me regarding the reviews.

jackielim

FSM has tried to take down my review again on TrustPilot - they have reported my review to TrustPilot for the second time, this time with the reason that I am not a genuine customer.

I have emailed TrustPilot my correspondence with FSM e.g. when they tried to intimidate me to delete my review, when they emailed me about the job, when they emailed me the retouched photos, etc.

I hope all of this is sufficient evidence that I had the (unfortunate) genuine experience of their business.

How many times can FSM try to pull down my review? If they can do this unlimited times with unlimited fabricated reasons, then I think this is truly unfair. In addition, why hasn't TrustPilot taken steps to ensure that the so-called 5 star reviews are genuine?

And seems like I am not the only one whose negative review they are trying to take down now

Also, looking at their web site, it seems that they have made many updates (some have already been described by Cornucopia e.g. the tickbox saying they are not an agency). I think this is at least partially thanks to Clive Hurst whose ASA report against them was upheld (google search first step modelling ASA). I am glad that his report contained their Gumtree ad promising paid modelling jobs, as the one which I had responded to was deleted.

Cornucopia

https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/first-step-modelling-a17-389797.html

jackielim

On top of Clive Hurst's report, Andrew Penman from the Mirror has reported on First Step Modelling, and all the organisations linked to them e.g. Hyde Park Studios, South West Studios and Distinctive Model Advice.

The title of the article is "Gushing compliments, promises of riches, and then the hard sell – what happens at a “no fees” model photo shoot."

I can't post the URL, so google for the article if you are interested - here are some snippets:

The Inspectorate responded by saying it regulates employment agencies, but fake companies that purport to be agencies do not come under its remit.

First Step Modelling is part of an opaque web of outfits. It claims on its website to be operated by SouthWest Studios – “registered in England and Wales” – but there’s no such name to be found at Companies House.

It shares an address near Paddington in north London with another operation, Hyde Park Studios, which claims: “Our team of experts have worked with some of the biggest names in the fashion industry.”

This uses the same phone number as another website, Distinctive Models.

Its website, which is less than a year old, states: “We have more than 13 years of experience in supporting new faces to enter the modelling industry.”

Also, it seems that "Sami Sean" - the domain owners of the websites of the linked organisations - could very well be Sayanthan Sritharan himself, the director of VenusLondon, as the article says that he is known as Sami.

The review of Coran Elliott on her experience of FSM (or Distinctive Models) is extremely similar to mine, it's pretty distressful reading about it.

Computersaysno

jackielim wrote: »

The Inspectorate responded by saying it regulates employment agencies, but fake companies that purport to be agencies do not come under its remit.

And there's the real issue...these scum could be stopped so much easier if the Inspectorate chose to tackle them....but they don't [it's too much effort I guess]

Cornucopia

jackielim wrote: »

The title of the article is "Gushing compliments, promises of riches, and then the hard sell – what happens at a “no fees” model photo shoot."

I can't post the URL, so google for the article if you are interested - here are some snippets:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gushing-compliments-promises-riches-hard-11325815

Computersaysno wrote: »

And there's the real issue...these scum could be stopped so much easier if the Inspectorate chose to tackle them....but they don't [it's too much effort I guess]

There really needs to be a regulator for those businesses that fall between the cracks of other regulators. It's far too easy {text removed by MSE Investigator} to come up with "creative" ideas for bypassing the intent of legal regulations that are there to protect consumers and ensure fair play between rival companies.

Action Fraud seems to me to be overwhelmed by the vast amount of fraud that afflicts the UK, and it really needs to be split into two organisations: one to tackle criminal fraud, and the other to tackle corporate fraud against consumers (which is where I would place FSM, subject to confirmation of the claims made against them).

The ASA judgment is well-intentioned, and undoubtedly fair, but they lack any powers outside of a self-regulatory ability to influence advertising material. Having said that, it should be easy to pick up the wording from the complaint and re-purpose it based on the content from their website.

jackielim

Hi all,

Here is an update - after finding out about the Mirror article, I sent an email to FSM saying the following:

"I am emailing regarding the job advert (see the Iconoclast advert I posted a while back) - you mentioned that I would need to do the photoshoot and retouched photos in order to apply for the job, which was I did.

I would like you to please provide evidence that the job is an authentic job advertisement, and also evidence that you had applied for the job.

If this is not the case, please refund my £290 (photoshoot) and £350 (retouched services) asap, or I will have to contact the Financial Conduct Authority."

FSM then responded saying that the advert was from the Casting Collective web site, and that the Director had a chat with Angelina (the person who promised me the job, and also the FSM rep mentioned in the Mirror article) and will refund me. Initially they said to come to their office for the refund and to return the photos. However, I said to them that I have had a negative experience of FSM and suggested a bank transfer and an online transfer of the photos.

They agreed and I am pleased to say that they have refunded me the £640.

Guess which bank account it came from? Yep, VenusLondon. I guess Mr Director is "Sammy" himself.

They wrote an email saying this:
It was very big mistake what the previous manager made.

You have to help us out to remove all the bad reviews. It will effect director’s personal life and the business.

I would like to hear from you.

Unfortunately I won't be taking off my negative reviews because this refund did not negate the experience I had. I won't be helping them delete any other negative reviews because what they are doing now does not erase the past. However, I am updating this thread with this good news to at least say that I have the money bank.

{Text removed by MSE Investigator} perhaps this is time to get back in touch with them for your refund.

hollydays

jackielim wrote: »

Hi all,

Here is an update - after finding out about the Mirror article, I sent an email to FSM saying the following:

"I am emailing regarding the job advert (see the Iconoclast advert I posted a while back) - you mentioned that I would need to do the photoshoot and retouched photos in order to apply for the job, which was I did.

I would like you to please provide evidence that the job is an authentic job advertisement, and also evidence that you had applied for the job.

If this is not the case, please refund my £290 (photoshoot) and £350 (retouched services) asap, or I will have to contact the Financial Conduct Authority."

FSM then responded saying that the advert was from the Casting Collective web site, and that the Director had a chat with Angelina (the person who promised me the job, and also the FSM rep mentioned in the Mirror article) and will refund me. Initially they said to come to their office for the refund and to return the photos. However, I said to them that I have had a negative experience of FSM and suggested a bank transfer and an online transfer of the photos.

They agreed and I am pleased to say that they have refunded me the £640.

Guess which bank account it came from? Yep, VenusLondon. I guess Mr Director is "Sammy" himself.

They wrote an email saying this:
It was very big mistake what the previous manager made.

You have to help us out to remove all the bad reviews. It will effect director’s personal life and the business.

I would like to hear from you.

Unfortunately I won't be taking off my negative reviews because this refund did not negate the experience I had. I won't be helping them delete any other negative reviews because what they are doing now does not erase the past. However, I am updating this thread with this good news to at least say that I have the money bank.

{Text removed by MSE Investigator}

Well done.
Casting collective has a Facebook page.
Perhaps you should inform them about this “ company’s” activities.

Where does ‘ iconoclast’ come into it; who or what are they?
Particularly bad grammar and spelling in their reply. Not unlike jeff9ruls eg post#24
Actually I’ve spent some time browsing distinctive models website-I can’t believe how BAD it is :rotfl:

hollydays

https://www.distinctivemodels.co.uk
omg the photos.....woman there in a Basque looks about 80..

Looks like it’s been written by a confused google translate for example
“Child modeling agencies like to see a portfolio of the child, because it allows them to assess how photogenic without the need for a specific test photo shoot, but keep in mind that your child should have the right time for this crane”

Many buttons marked
“ Regsiter now”

Then there’s :”Profit
Printed portfolio allows the administrator or agent threw in an interview visit his picture book that the operation or campaign looking models speak. This gives the impression that you are serious about modeling and show that you have experience as a professional model.”

I can only say- very badly educated people with a “ twisted”understanding of what the United Kingdom culture finds acceptable. That's me being subtle..

jackielim

hollydays wrote: »

Well done.
Casting collective has a Facebook page.
Perhaps you should inform them about this “ company’s” activities.

Where does ‘ iconoclast’ come into it; who or what are they?

Thanks - please see below a quote from one of my older posts regarding the job ad.

The job ad was purportedly for Iconoclast shooting summer catalogue photos for FREEMANS, JACAMO, LOOK AGAIN, PREMIER MAN. Seems like they keep reusing the same wording for job ads, as the Mirror investigator was shown a job ad for Jacamo paying £1,200.

jackielim wrote: »

//Job Advertisement via First Step Modelling//

Summer Catalogue

Company: Iconoclast
Catalogue : FREEMANS, JACAMO, LOOK AGAIN, PREMIER MAN
Production Type: Online
Location: Central London
Salary: £1200
Duration: 9th - 11th June
Closing Date: 05/06/17
Restrictions: Aged from 18 to 45
Production Details: We are shooting a series of films for the Spring/Summer Catalogues. These will be used on their websites, as well as in-store to promote their seasonal clothing.
Casting will take place beginning of June, with the shoot taking place on the 9th and 11th June, all in central London.

The rate of £1200 will cover three days shooting, and include usage for 18 months in-store and online worldwide.

The films will be comical and whimsical, with a very refined sense of style, and display the occasion wear and gifting offered during the summer season. Two will be produced, each 30 seconds in length.

Select a character
Fashion Models to represent clothing brands
Description: Male and Female, 18-45
Gender: Both
Min Age: 18
Max Age: 45

//End of Job Advert//